I am pointing out an exception...
I work for a local government unit. My boss (a mayor) believes in open source and that's why we are migrating our desktops to Ubuntu Linux and giving away computers to schools with Ubuntu Linux installed on it.
This works because Gerona, Tarlac is a small (2nd or 3rd class) municipality. Even at a highly discounted rate, the likes of Microsoft (well over there their poster boy would be Wilson Chua) could not offer anything. The mayor loves open source because it allows him to do something positive/good at a near-zero budget.
The "government is corrupt and will choose the most expensive solution" generalization works if there is money. If there is no money, then by all means use the zero-cost solution. But the minute there is money to be spoken about, the politicos will try to find a way to steal most of it. And solutions which cost a lot and can be padded are the way to go.
Alternative: I am IBM. I bill monstrous consulting fees. I push Linux. Now that has a chance of making it into the government.
I am not saying that government functionaries are anti-Linux. I am saying that most government officials will seize every chance to steal money. Whether that's with closed or open source, is irrelevant, but because most open source advocates keep saying that FOSS is zero-cost, they generally get turned off to FOSS (unless they have no money, in which case, have at it).
_________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
