UK Gov tells 600,000 staff to dump windopws and do Linux
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: School budgets cut, but what about making genuine savings with open source?
Next: Dual-boot of Ubuntu 10.4 and Fedora 13
From: grinch on 11 Jul 2010 06:49 Hadron wrote: > > You are aware that most of the best OSS for the office runs on Windows too > right? > > Listen kid, when you've been out there and worked in real companies for > an appreciable time after your "degree" that you keep flaunting then you > can comment.... I can only assume you're recently graduated as most of > us with degrees stopped being proud of it about a week after Uni. > > The cost of OS licensing is minuscule compared to salaries, > infrastructure etc etc etc. > > The sad fact is that its not easy to migrate to Linux for huge > businesses. > > Its ok for you to play bubble bobble or whatever that junky game is at > home when you come back from your Windows job. But its not trivial to > port all existing apps and data from Windows to Linux unless they go to > the additional pain of running Windows in VMWare or somethin - more cost > and effort. French police (Gendarmerie national) manged it and saved money .The amount varies from 7 to 11 million euro's per year dependant on which article you read. However given the relation's between the Élysée Palace and the white house at the time it is more likely to be politically motivated. Quote from article about the above ( they say they have 70 000 desktops) Since 2004, he says that the Gendarmerie has saved up to €50 million on licensing and maintenance costs as a result of the migration strategy. He believes that the move from Windows to Ubuntu posed fewer challenges than the organization would have faced if it had updated to Windows Vista. Full article here http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/03/french-police-saves- millions-of-euros-by-adopting-ubuntu.ars However given the proven incompetence of Whitehall when it comes to IT they I am sure could make it cost more. Also the IT departments are windows based ,since when do turkeys vote for Christmas. Output certified Micrsoft free Checked with OpenSuse 11.2
From: jasee on 11 Jul 2010 15:37 spike1(a)freenet.co.uk wrote: > And so it was that in the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy, > jasee <jasee(a)btinternet.com> uttered the following pearls of wisdom: >>> Also, they will no longer be on the hardware upgrade treadmill in >>> order to be ABLE to use the latest microsoft pap. >> >> But will their new hardware work with Linux? > > 1: most likely, yes. If they did their homework first, definitely yes. > 2: why would they need new hardware? (1) For a server role, 'most likely' won't do, you need just to know. (2) For users (for instance) even if M$ is sidelined, hardware manufacturers need to continue to sell products, so hardware will inevitably change. Also, more data is being sent at ever higher rates, hardware needs to support this. The treadmill doesn't change, it's just a different one.
From: spike1 on 11 Jul 2010 21:16 And so it was that in the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy, jasee <jasee(a)btinternet.com> uttered the following pearls of wisdom: > spike1(a)freenet.co.uk wrote: >> And so it was that in the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy, >> jasee <jasee(a)btinternet.com> uttered the following pearls of wisdom: >>>> Also, they will no longer be on the hardware upgrade treadmill in >>>> order to be ABLE to use the latest microsoft pap. >>> >>> But will their new hardware work with Linux? >> >> 1: most likely, yes. If they did their homework first, definitely yes. >> 2: why would they need new hardware? > > (1) For a server role, 'most likely' won't do, you need just to know. As I said, and you chose to ignore, if they did their homework first, which should be part of the whole migration strategy anyway, definitely yes. > (2) For users (for instance) even if M$ is sidelined, hardware manufacturers > need to continue to sell products, so hardware will inevitably change. Also, > more data is being sent at ever higher rates, hardware needs to support > this. The treadmill doesn't change, it's just a different one. Linux has support for 10gig ethernet. Whole machines don't need to be replaced, hard disks and network cards can be upgraded in existing boxes unless they're REALLY old and slow. And even if they are, for many uses they're still more than adequate. IF they're capable of running windows 7 they're more than capable of running linux much more efficiently. -- | |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack| | spike1(a)freenet.co.uk |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you| | |can't move, with no hope of rescue. | | Andrew Halliwell BSc |Consider how lucky you are that life has been | | in |good to you so far... | | Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|
From: The Hooded Plumber on 11 Jul 2010 21:48 On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 02:16:33 +0100, spike1(a)freenet.co.uk wrote: >And so it was that in the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy, jasee <jasee(a)btinternet.com> uttered the following pearls of wisdom: >> spike1(a)freenet.co.uk wrote: >>> And so it was that in the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy, >>> jasee <jasee(a)btinternet.com> uttered the following pearls of wisdom: >>>>> Also, they will no longer be on the hardware upgrade treadmill in >>>>> order to be ABLE to use the latest microsoft pap. >>>> >>>> But will their new hardware work with Linux? >>> >>> 1: most likely, yes. If they did their homework first, definitely yes. >>> 2: why would they need new hardware? >> >> (1) For a server role, 'most likely' won't do, you need just to know. > >As I said, and you chose to ignore, if they did their homework first, which >should be part of the whole migration strategy anyway, definitely yes. > >> (2) For users (for instance) even if M$ is sidelined, hardware manufacturers >> need to continue to sell products, so hardware will inevitably change. Also, >> more data is being sent at ever higher rates, hardware needs to support >> this. The treadmill doesn't change, it's just a different one. > >Linux has support for 10gig ethernet. >Whole machines don't need to be replaced, hard disks and network cards can >be upgraded in existing boxes unless they're REALLY old and slow. > >And even if they are, for many uses they're still more than adequate. >IF they're capable of running windows 7 they're more than capable of running >linux much more efficiently. If you actually worked in Information Technology, you would realize that hardware is a small portion of the cost. Can you say tax deduction? Migration costs are huge. Training costs are huge. The potential for Linux programs not interfacing well is there. Can you say"switch to Linux and you will be fucked". Ask Munich. You sound like a cocksucking amateur.
From: Duncan Hawthorne on 11 Jul 2010 21:51
The Hooded Plumber wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 02:16:33 +0100, spike1(a)freenet.co.uk wrote: > >>And so it was that in the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy, jasee > > You sound like a cocksucking amateur. In this single example Andrew is an expert. |