The IT department of Helsinki made a deal with Gartner to study the cost of migration to FLOSS. Lo, and Behold! The IT department says the costs are too high but cannot reveal the details… Isn’t that suspicious that a “partner” of M$ is involved in hiding the costs? I smell something…
“Last week, the city denied the request, saying that the calculations are part of the trade secrets from Gartner, an IT consultancy.”
Isn’t Gartner the one who found GNU/Linux costs more everywhere yet many report much lower costs? Why did Helsinki hire those jokers?
Weren’t they wrong on all counts when they predicted “7″ would be the most popular OS on the planet by the end of 2011? Even NetApplications, another “partner”, have stated that has not happened yet (June 2012).
Gartner is very confused about how well GNU/Linux is doing on the desktop depending on who’s paying them. In 2005 they said GNU/Linux and OpenOffice.org were quite reasonable for “greenfield” adoption and even reasonable for a segment of staff of a business. So, why doesn’t that reasoning apply to Helsinki? If Helsinki could save a bundle running OpenOffice.org on 80% of PCs, shouldn’t they do it? The problem is M$’s not following open standards. Shouldn’t that problem be solved once and for all time?