Munich, Germany's government to use Windows again after failure with Linux

[Michael Goff]

http://www.wpcentral.com/munich-germanys-government-using-windows-again-after-failure-linux

Shouldn't they have done the research before they moved over? It seems kind of a waste of about 10 years and likely a bunch of cash.

Other sources:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Muni...-Plans-to-Switch-Back-to-Windows-455405.shtml
http://www.geek.com/microsoft/10-years-later-munich-may-dump-linux-for-windows-1602234/

And the wiki for their Linux distro:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux

 

[CrickettGrrrl]

More likely that it's party politics, with one of the discreditors having been involved with the deal to move Microsoft's German headquarters to Munich. He denies it influenced him, of course.

 

[Michael Goff]

More likely that it's party politics, with one of the discreditors having been involved with the deal to move Microsoft's German headquarters to Munich. He denies it influenced him, of course.

And so we can only go by what actually has evidence.

 

[BasedUbuntu]

I've been told that the original article in German paints a very different picture and that the seemingly imminent switch to Windows is in all actuality quite unlikely, with the idea of it happening having been extrapolated from the complaints of a small handful of higher-ups. Much of the administration in Munich seems very interested in keeping Linux around, despite the distribution being a trainwreck.

 

[maflynn]

Its not quite that they're re-embracing windows as much as posturing for a change.

It looks like some of the folks like it, but mostly the cost of customizations and compatibility are the major driving forces

I can't say that I'm surprised, while on paper this appeared to be a good idea, implementation highlighted the feature disparity of many of the open source products being used.

 

[Michael Goff]

I've been told that the original article in German paints a very different picture and that the seemingly imminent switch to Windows is in all actuality quite unlikely, with the idea of it happening having been extrapolated from the complaints of a small handful of higher-ups. Much of the administration in Munich seems very interested in keeping Linux around, despite the distribution being a trainwreck.

It seems weird, by the way, that anyone would want to use an inferior product just because it costs less.

Its not quite that they're re-embracing windows as much as posturing for a change.

It looks like some of the folks like it, but mostly the cost of customizations and compatibility are the major driving forces

I can't say that I'm surprised, while on paper this appeared to be a good idea, implementation highlighted the feature disparity of many of the open source products being used.

That's the problem, isn't it? Feature parity, that is. And compatibility isn't something small when it comes to Gov't things, I would think.

 

[maflynn]

That's the problem, isn't it? Feature parity, that is. And compatibility isn't something small when it comes to Gov't things, I would think.

The job of an operating system is run apps, if there is a dearth of apps or what is available isn't a feature rich as a different platform, then people are not going to use it.

Linux has a reputation that prevent wholesale adoption on the desktop.
The first hurdle is the perception that you need to make a lot of configuration changes. You just can't install and go but need to dive into the inner workings of Linux via the terminal. To an extent this is true, some distros shielded the consumer from this but its still there, especially when it comes to upgrades - at least that's been my experience.

Secondly is Lack of apps, and apps that do the same thing as consumers want. I tried running on Linux a while back as my main desktop, but I could not over come the short comings of the apps. I had to boot into OS X to run Lightoom to manage my images for example. Perhaps things have changed but when I was using Ubuntu and then Fedora, not all the apps like a non destructive DAM application were available. What was available simply did not have the same level of features.

Why suffer with a platform that did less and required more work. Simply put consumers aren't willing to put up with that, nor was I.

 

[boast]

snip

My company uses linux for everyone in engineering to run our programs. And almost every company in the semiconductor industry uses linux as well.

Are you saying our industry should switch over to windows? If they are unable to use the terminal, they need to either learn or they are unqualified to complete their work.

 

[Michael Goff]

My company uses linux for everyone in engineering to run our programs. And almost every company in the semiconductor industry uses linux as well.

Are you saying our industry should switch over to windows? If they are unable to use the terminal, they need to either learn or they are unqualified to complete their work.

No?

Seriously, what in my post made you think I was saying that?

Also, it's fairly obvious you know little about the complaints some people in Munich have about their Linux distribution.

 

[boast]

Also, it's fairly obvious you know little about the complaints some people in Munich have about their Linux distribution.

That they need to replace their Windows computers to better work in their Linux environment? That way they dont waste lots of efforts creating custom apps to get Windows to work with Linux.

 

[Michael Goff]

That they need to replace their Windows computers to better work in their Linux environment? That way they dont waste lots of efforts creating custom apps to get Windows to work with Linux.

So they should put forth more effort than they should simply because Linux isn't working for them right now? There are, according to everything I've read, more Windows machines than Linux machines.

 

[Renzatic]

If they're switching back to Windows, it's quite plain and simply due to Office being too good and too entrenched to get rid of. It does everything you need it to do and then some, everyone is trained on it, and everyone in the world uses it. There isn't anything else out there that has close to 100% feature parity.

I've read about this already, and a lot of Linux fans are saying if they used Libre Office instead of Open Office, they would've been happier. Which is true...to a point. While better, even Libre Office doesn't directly compare. It's really quite literally that these people will have to make due with sacrifices that could make their jobs harder, or "settle" with Office.

As great as it'd be to see people mix it up a little bit, and break some of MS' hegemony, it's just not gonna happen until a platform can provide for everyone's software needs the same way Windows can. To kinda paraphrase Mayflynn, having a more stable, secure OS doesn't mean squat if you can't do what you want to do with it.

 

[satcomer]

If they are dropping Linux servers is going to cost them big money in Microsoft licensing they now use . This will cost themselves HUGE yearly fees!

 

[Renzatic]

If they are dropping Linux servers is going to cost them big money in Microsoft licensing they now use . This will cost themselves HUGE yearly fees!

Naw, they're not gonna do that. This is more end user stuff.

 

[maflynn]

My company uses linux for everyone in engineering to run our programs. And almost every company in the semiconductor industry uses linux as well.

Are you saying our industry should switch over to windows? If they are unable to use the terminal, they need to either learn or they are unqualified to complete their work.

No, what I'm saying is that there are serious obstacles that Linux faces with consumers that it will be hard pressed to overcome.

The city of Munich high lights some of these, i.e., compatibility and apps that lack the same level of features.

If your company is successfully using Linux for the desktop, great. I'm involved right now in buying 6 database servers that will be running Linux. I'm not advocating one platform over another but rather pointing out the hurdles Linux faces.

 

[roadbloc]

I know the two words that have probably dictated this switch back to Windows.

Microsoft Office.

Nothing comes close.

 

[maflynn]

Microsoft Office.

That I think has been one of the major points. Compatibility with an industry application like Word and Excel. As feature rich as Open Office (or LibraOffice) is, there are still compatibility/rendering differences that make cross compatibility an issue.

People using iWork are dealing with the same thing, I've long dropped iWork and went back to Office due to compatibility, and also features that Office offers that are nonexistent in iWork

 

[deluxeshredder]

I know the two words that have probably dictated this switch back to Windows.

Microsoft Office.

Nothing comes close.

And also a working boot splash, good hardware support and stability and loads of other commercial software.