On 7/18/06, Charles Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:25 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> It doesn't make sense to lower the count of Windows based machines in
> government because if it works for them, why do we need to change it?
[snipped]
>Because Windows is a very insecure OS?
>Why should our government pay to safeguard Microsoft's market share?
If it works for them and they see no reason to change it, why should they
change from Windows? If the Open sopurce community wants more to convert to
Linux, they must add value to the software. The government must see some
value in changing its OS from Windows to Linux, if they cant find any value
in it they will not. This is the same for everyone. Whether it is lower TCO,
security etc. value must be there. Microsoft may have a lot of problems with
security, but its still number one, companies like IBM, Novell and Redhat
may complain all they want, but what have they done to topple that monopoly?
IBM screwed up OS/2, Novell and RedHat's market share isnt something to
scream about either. Microsoft does make products which we may hate, which
is insecure, which has a lot of problems, but the fact is people use it
because it simply works. Which should what OSS software should be, I have
not had a system from Linux work out of the box, I ve tried redhat, suse and
Ubuntu (which we use). They all needed some tweakingone way or another. I
could juct buy an Apple machine or a Lenovo or Dell PC and it will work with
out network. The government is not paying to safeguard Microsofts market
share, it uses microsoft because it is the only thing the government knows
how to use, and it works with minimum fuss especially on the desktop.
where did you get info? are you sure about this? i work for the government and the only thing microsoft have a monopoly on us is in the desktops, all our servers are using foss. microsoft is not the only os the government knows, and as i've said before it all boils down to the people implementing the IT infrastructure. the thing i noticed though why open source have not made a great dent on microsoft's dominance especially in the government sector is that most government agencies hands are tied down to the donations made by big bad bill.
[snipped]
> And if we do put Linux on every government machine, where does the
> government get the support for it? Canonical, RedHat, Novell, IBM,
> Sun? How is that in line with the government's agenda to help out the
> constituency and the local economy?
>Sticking with Windows doesn't exactly help.
Your right sticking with windows does not help, but you have to show them
that there is an alternative.
_________________________________________________
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
--
RoundCube Rocks!!!
The best WebMail client to date!
_________________________________________________ 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
