Mais Oui! FLOSS in France

While we knew for a few years that GNU/Linux and other FLOSS was making inroads in the French government, we now have a quantitative measure. 15% of the current budget for IT is going to FLOSS. The annual rate of increase of spending on FLOSS is increasing 30% per annum. Let’s extrapolate. It’s fun. ;-)

Year Share of IT
2012 15.0%
2013 19.5%
2014 25.3%
2015 33.0%
2016 42.8%
2017 55.7%
2018 72.4%

Well. Where will it end? Servers? Desktops? Everything? Along the way, they may actually reduce their IT budget if there’s less to spend on licences, anti-malware, etc.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Mais Oui! FLOSS in France

  1. kozmcrae says:

    Still trying to push that TCO is the same BS, Phenom? Of course you are. No thought, no creativity, just puke up the party line. Nothing new there.

    It’s worth repeating. And just copy and paste. If you’re not going to bother to be creative Phenom, why should I?

  2. Phenom says:

    It would be wrong if 15% of bugget is going into FOSS yet like 60 percent of there systems are FOSS. To have light on that FOSS expense we are missing a key figure what percentage of there operations is FOSS.

    Pay heed, Komz! Ohio has a bright thought every first or second new moon. You must try very hard to acquire this particular achievement of his!

  3. kozmcrae says:

    Still trying to push that TCO is the same BS, Phenom? Of course you are. No thought, no creativity, just puke up the party line. Nothing new there.

  4. oiaohm says:

    Phenom
    “Aha. Then, what is wrong to pay for software if that would give me a better level of support, and the TCO are more or less the same?”
    That is what people do with Redhat and Commercial Linux Distrobutions.

    TCO is effected by closed source forced end of live very badly at times. Having control of the source code does allow more control over migrations.

    Closed source does have downsides for TCO.

    Over all open source has lower TCO because the software maker does not try taking huge chunks out of you.

    Remember license counting and tracking of closed source is a major issue. If you don’t do it right you end up where the Australian NSW police are right now in court fighting off a copyright infringement case.

    FOSS you don’t have license counting. So a few extra deployed here or there is not a problem. TCO issues also come from that as well. A machine is short a bit of software you are out of license of that software and it will take time to place order to get more.

    Lot of Closed source is bad for you TCO in many ways not just the up front price.

    Phenom remember when I pay for software I expect support to be included as a FOSS user. Windows annoys me because I pay so much for it then they want so much more for them to provide me with support. Its seams greedy. No version of Redhat comes without so much support services included.

    “FOSS is not free of needing support and training.”
    Also note closed source is not free of needing support and training either. So there is a universal expense using closed or open source.

    So I was reminding you there is a universal expense.

    Problem here in the Universal expense was split into Closed and FOSS.

    It would be wrong if 15% of bugget is going into FOSS yet like 60 percent of there systems are FOSS. To have light on that FOSS expense we are missing a key figure what percentage of there operations is FOSS.

  5. I found in my work that support of FLOSS is very easy compared to non-FREE software. I never had to make a long distance phone call to support FLOSS. I never had to run an anti-virus package. I rarely had to fix a machine that would not boot. I never had to fix a machine that slowed down. In my work, the cost of support of FLOSS was 1/10 of that other stuff. I did not need full-time support for 100 machines. Some organizations need full-time support just for 30 machines with that other OS.

    French national police, Munich, Ernie Ball Guitar Strings report saving $millions using FLOSS. That is real money.

  6. Phenom says:

    FOSS is not free of needing support and training.

    Aha. Then, what is wrong to pay for software if that would give me a better level of support, and the TCO are more or less the same?

  7. oiaohm says:

    Phenom
    “I don’t get it. Wasn’t floss supposed to be, hm, free? Why then spend money on it?”

    Common error. Floss does not equal everyone meaning of free.

    Free in FOSS and FLOSS comes with the following disclaimer. “Free as in Free Speech, not as in Free Beer”

    FOSS is free to deploy as many copies as you need.
    FOSS is free to alter as you need but the developers to do these alterations are going to need paying.
    FOSS is not free of needing support and training.

    Phenom basically you want Free Beer you don’t get that from the FOSS world. We might give you a Free Beer recipe http://freebeer.org/blog/recipe .

    But the time and ingredients to make it something drinkable are going to cost of course.

    You could say the recipe is the software and the ingredients and your are the hardware to process it.

  8. Phenom says:

    I don’t get it. Wasn’t floss supposed to be, hm, free? Why then spend money on it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>