More Lies from M$

M$ had the ear of the US government back in 2006. Cablegate reveals that “According to Microsoft, no government in the world has successfully used Linux for large operations (Brazil and Cuba reportedly attempted this, but then abandoned the effort).”

That’s what the USA wrote in a memo about proposed legislation in Venezuela to prefer FLOSS in government. The memo was dated June 2006 when

So, M$ was losing in the market and tried to get Uncle Sam to twist arms for M$. Sad that they relied on taxpayers money to sell products. Sad that one of the richest corporations in the world did not have the confidence to compete on price/performance.

I recommend Debian GNU/Linux. It works for you, not against you.

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.

72 Responses to More Lies from M$

  1. oiaohm says:

    Contrarian in place upgrade. Change the repositories and tell rpm to upgrade so removing the incompatible packages and you can do a in place upgrade back the other way when account is paid.

    I was presuming the reason for not being able to pay the subscription is that you are out of money because you stuffed budget up. Of course you could always to a in place upgrade to Oracle Linux as well from Oracle if you really able to be paying.

    Simple fact all of them are very close blood relations to each other. Scientific Linux(SL), Fedora, Redhat Enterprise and Oracle Linux. You have options.

    http://www.redhat.com/rhel/renew/faqs/#6 Also the Redhat contract is a little bit more warped.

    If you cancel all support contracts with Redhat you can keep on using Redhat Enterprise as long as you want just you will not get any updates. Prity much like a end of life copy of a Microsoft product. The condition of removal only comes into effect if you want to keep some redhat paid and some not. Meeting the condition is not hard.

    Thinking that Scientific Linux still does Redhat support registration tracking. Yes they are that close.

    Microsoft subscription model you must stop using and remove. There is no switch options at all not like the switch option is exactly poor quality.

    Scientific Linux is no more of a risk than a Copy of windows without a support contract. no-cost yes, self-supported alternative not exactly scientific Linux are cern and Fermilab. So secuirty updates like Microsoft do come in a highly timely pattern with high dependability. Same with good quality documentation since all Redhat documentation and training does apply.

    Over all better quality than MS buy out products that MS expects you to buy in 5 years time again and at the end of 10 years be dead if MS gets to follow there wished for time table.

    Fedora yes is risky but some do go that path when they break budget.

    Most cases people complaining about Redhat subscriptions have not priced MS support subscriptions and read the terms. Result is Redhat and Oracle is not bad cost wise or risk wise. At least if stuff goes wrong you are not going to be destroyed.

  2. Contrarian says:

    “Now of course a in place upgrade to SL or Fedora meets the requirements for discontinue usage of the redhat product.”

    It is hard to tell exactly what that sentence was intended to say, #oiaohm, but I think that you are saying that you “only” have to switch from whatever version of RHEL you want to stop paying the subscription price for to a no-cost, self-supported alternative. It is somewhat revealing of your ignornance of the real world to suggest that this is any answer to the issue!

    I periodically wonder if Microsoft is paying a staff to make posts such as yours to taint the image of those who use Linux in commerce by painting them as extremists and buffoons.

  3. oiaohm says:

    Ivan In-fact Microsoft does a shakedown for ontime updates when Microsoft products go into extended support.

    Non-security hotfix support “Requires extended hotfix agreement, purchased within 90 days of mainstream support ending.”
    Remember its not a secuirty hotfix in extended until there is a virus or something to exploit it. So yes secuirty holes without a virus are just a non-secuirty hotfix.

    Apple shakes down on OS updates as well.

    So basically what world have been living in Ivan not the real one. Microsoft basically makes you pay a big block of the support contract up front.

    Contrarian
    “tiny print on the Red Hat contract that says you must discontinue using the product if/when you discontinue the support.” Why. Number one when you don’t pay redhat support contract you get locked out of redhat update servers for enterprise so the software could become a secuirty risk. Now of course a in place upgrade to SL or Fedora meets the requirements for discontinue usage of the redhat product.

    Basically its a clause against human stupidity.

    Also miss that redhat agreement is like the Microsoft OS subscription model where you can choose to pay for your OS yearly with the same termination clause but with no migration options. Yep Microsoft subscription model makes redhats look like an angel.

    I really prefer Redhats subscription model to Microsoft at least if I cannot pay it I am not stuffed. Of course I prefer not to be locked to subscription and just use what cern uses.

    So basically what worlds are you 2 living in. Its not the real enterprise world. Since you knowledge of how Microsoft and Apple charges people is badly lacking about time you learn that so you can at least make some what of an informed argument instead of tripe like both of you just did.

  4. Contrarian says:

    “Mention the yearly fee for security updates for Linux and crickets…”

    Well, they say you can just ignore the tiny print on the Red Hat contract that says you must discontinue using the product if/when you discontinue the support. That is not what they want to believe. Linux is FREE, don’t you know? And that doesn’t just mean FREE as in free beer, but most importantly, FREE as in FREEdom. You are free to fix any problems that you find and sent the fixes back to whoever might give a hoot. You are free to stare at the clumsy code with the cutesy names and try to figure out what the maniac who created it had in mind so that you can improve upon it. The only thing that you are not free to do is to keep the knowledge of how you fixed or improved something to yourself and charge others for the privilege of using the fix or improvement.

    If you use the MIT or Apache or BSD license forms, though, you are also free to keep your knowledge to yourself and to charge what the traffic is willing to pay. What can you call this FREE-er stuff? If the almost free stuff is FLOSS, where the L stands for free, then maybe it is FLerOSS or FLOSS++. We need a good name!

  5. Ivan says:

    He also missed the fact that it is a yearly shakedown, but meh. If Apple or Microsoft made their users pay for security updates Cupertino and Redmond would have been torched in the late ’90’s.

    Mention the yearly fee for security updates for Linux and crickets…

  6. JairJy says:

    “Munich is not using RedHat nor Novell…”

    Wait wait wait… you missunderstood what Ivan said. He said: “A private company changing a brand of paper clips doesn’t cost the tax payers money like the yearly shakedown from Red Hat or Novell.”

    The key word is “like”. So it was a sarcasm.

  7. oiaohm says:

    The Other Linus
    “Except that after they got through all that they still claimed that they were going to have 80% of their machines migrated by 2008 yet only did 9%. Keep flailing around but it won’t work.”

    You need to go read the german. when they revised at end of trial 80 percent by 2008 with OpenOffice, Thunderbird and so on open source applications. Not Linux OS. That was achieved and exceeded. Yes they should be skinned for keeping the website about there project english side in such poor condition. So giving you guys false ideas you have points when you have nothing.

    Yes on the english page it got translated to 80 percent open source software that a lot like you took to mean Linux OS as well. Instead of 80 percent open source applications. Not exactly sure if that is lack of updating or bad translation.

    I will be kind an go by first timeline was already void by 2008. Since that is what you might have read from the english site as well.
    “How could the migration of MS Office to OpenOffice cause a run over?”
    Simple you cannot swap systems heavy macro based systems to generate docs don’t work must be made work or replaced before migration off MS Office can be completed.

    Lot of there systems were heavily bound to backend using MS Office. 1 year had been allocated to deal with this. When in fact it took from start of 2007 to the end of 2009. It sucked up all spare resources. So yes 3 years instead of projected 1. Also the trial was also only projected to go for 1 year. Basically if everything had gone to time table.

    This is how the time table was ment to look like before the revised plan.
    2005 trial. 2006 MS Office to Open office.
    2007 start force Migrate to Linux 2008 be 80 percent by end of 2008 and 2009 complete with 1 year spare in case something goes wrong. Note the 9 percent is the trial system.

    What happened.

    2005-2006 trial due to political interference stuffing up the start of trial. 2007-2009 MS Office to OpenOffice migration and a few extra ideas added to the project. Yes a few goals of the project got expanded so the goal post got moved on the project not good for coming in on time. So a year is the project exceeding what was planned in the first project goals. No more Linux desktop migrations allowed until this works just in case they decide to change mind. Indecisive move not good for timelines since this blocks parallel work so making Linux migration slip.
    2010 start forced Linux roll out starts. Remember this point in the project was ment to be start of 2007.

    12000 machines in 12 months is kinda impossible for 50 staff unless they work insane hours and neglect other duties.

    Exactly how is the Linux Desktop the Deployment the issue. What for that timeframe that nothing on that was being done so that is why 80 percent Linux by 2008 did not happen. And we are on time frame to hit 80 percent number back then in 2 years.

    So everything would have been fine if 2 things had not gone south.

    Linux Desktop deployment side is going like clockwork. Nothing in the project has it might be the only thing to come in matching is first timeline amount of time todo it.

    If you had read the timelines the lesson is not watch out for Linux.

    A migration from MS Office to OpenOffice on Windows was the killer basically. Don’t stupidly allocate that only 12 months. 2 years would be wise mostly 3 to 4 would be sane. First they don’t know this in advance.

    Most places had either started clean with OpenOffice and slowly just archived the MS Office documents away. Munich was the first to attempt converting advanced usages of MS Office to OpenOffice in large volumes. Hickups in other successful migrations had been noticed before them. Cause of issue was not 100 percent clear. Yep Munich was the first to stub toe completely on the MS Office to OpenOffice issue. Stayed standing somehow. Now we know don’t take this into account it might cause your complete project to go south.

    Hindsight now we would never have done time table that way. Never should again. Yes Munich should be a lesson to anyone doing Linux migrations don’t do this method. So Munich is a badly implemented migration should by all right be more costly than a Microsoft solution. But when you do the TCO it still cheaper. Basically what the heck. Munich was quoted more in Microsoft charges than what they are going to spend total on the Migration.

    If you goof a migration you should be in a hole of over costs. Not where Munich is. They goofed it but its cheaper still.

    Yes you can good a Windows to Windows migration as well and blow costs out. Due to the fact Munich is goofed up is the reason why its such a good example. It basically says you can goof it up and still come out ok.

    All the pointing to the Goof makes me when I do the TCO compare on it going what the hell. Linux does not look to bad to deploy at all.

    Vague warning were not exactly vague it had a statement be careful of MS Office macros and other platform dependent software might disrupt the process. Vague from the point of view not stating how bad it could be. The 2003 warning in the White paper was very targeted. Particularly that migrations of documents across might take years. Don’t take lightly. Of course I suspect Munich never had the white paper warning.

    Of course “The Other Linus” I better you never drew up a timeline of what was going on at Munich so you could see what had gone wrong.

    I am very might an after disaster investigator.

    Munich is very much like a aircraft who flight control fail mid flight because they were not tested properly before take off and the route took them into bad weather that was known before take off yet its magically going to be able to land ok bringing in a profit with everyone happy just a little late.

    So I can understand the what the. Because I was what the the first time I did the numbers. I did the numbers 4 times before I would believe them.

    The reason you are not seeing the what the is you are not looking at the two TCO’s, the one for the Migration to Windows optimistic that everything goes right and the current spend on the Linux migration.

    To get to the same spend as the optimistic Microsoft migration they could go to 2016. Yes this is really really wrong. Says clearly Microsoft needs to drop there prices. Even worse that is without renewing to a new version of windows that you should have in that time.

  8. Munich is not using RedHat nor Novell…

    Add the costs for RedHat and that other OS and its server and you can seen RedHat costs much less:

    RedHat – Self-support subscription $349

    M$ – server 2008 – $1208 but you can only connect 10 clients!

    If we are to compare oranges to oranges, we should increase they years of coverage for Redhat to 5 years, say, the life of the server and increase the CALs to the number of clients RedHat can serve, say, 500.

    RedHat=$349X 5 = $1745

    M$= $1208 + $40 X 490 = $20808

    Then there is support… RedHat wins again with huge uptime between re-re-reboots and malware incidents.

    There’s a reason only a few people use that other OS on servers. Cost is probably high on the list.

  9. Ivan says:

    “When you copy or change data you are doing information processing.”

    What good does that do if the data you just copied or changed is no longer useful because the applications used to access it aren’t there?

  10. Ivan says:

    “Look at it this way. If Ford Motor Co. migrated from brand X to brand Y in paper-clips, would there be a “harsh public criticism”? What’s with that? That’s not about the failure of GNU/Linux to do the job but the failure of the leaders of the organization to do their jobs.”

    A private company changing a brand of paper clips doesn’t cost the tax payers money like the yearly shakedown from Red Hat or Novell.

  11. When you migrate from that other OS to GNU/Linux you are going cross-platform.

    When you copy or change data you are doing information processing.

    e.g. LAC x ; loads the accumulator with a copy of what’s stored at x
    INC; increment the accumulator, changing the data by adding 1
    DAC y; storing the result somewhere, also making a copy

    In the old days such things took microseconds. Now they take less than a nanosecond but they are still processing information like this in the latest processors using any instruction set, operating system, programming language or application.

  12. No. Triumph of bureaucracy.

    Look at it this way. If Ford Motor Co. migrated from brand X to brand Y in paper-clips, would there be a “harsh public criticism”? What’s with that? That’s not about the failure of GNU/Linux to do the job but the failure of the leaders of the organization to do their jobs.

  13. Use up to date numbers and you get a much different picture. The migration did not start in 2004. It was approved then. They have a lot more than 2500 machines converted today.

  14. Ivan says:

    “It’s just copying or changing data.”

    Sure it is, when the applications you currently use are cross platform. How often is that the case?

  15. ScrabbleMyBapple says:

    From this post pointing the reality of what they’ve accomplished:

    http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_thread/thread/973245fcf24fe379

    So, assuming Munich still runs the same number of workstations they did six years ago, they have now converted 17.8% of theirworkstations (2,500 machines out of 14,000 total) to Linux.

    For the entire project, which is now ending it’s 79th month, therate is of conversion has been 31 per month, or about one per daysince May 28, 2003.

    Assuming they can continue to convert 85 machines per month, theproject will be completed in another 11.2 years, in the year 2020.

    FAIL TRAIN

  16. ScrabbleMyBapple says:

    Ooops:

    http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/09/18/0239243/Swiss-Canton-Abandons-Linux-Migration

    “The Swiss canton Solothurn has put a stop to their ongoing migration to Linux. The project started in 2001, and has been under harsh public criticism ever since. The responsible CIO resigned this summer. Solothurn plans to convert all desktop computers to Windows 7 in 2011.”

    Oh dear, Linux FAILURE

  17. The Other Linus says:

    “The Other Linus. The IBM white papers leading up to that book existed in 2003 with the same warnings as the 2006 book. There is a version 1 of that book by the way published in the year 2000. The warning were vague but there were still there reason for the follow up whitepapers to that book.”

    Hahaha, you’re joking right? A book with a bunch of “vague warnings” was supposed to be their guide?

    “Of course due to Munich not dealing with IBM a lot I understand them not seeing those white papers and the 2000 book was not free. So I understand them not having it.”

    So basically you admit your entire aside was pointless?

    “Big cause of run over in Munich is process error. Next cause is MS Office to OpenOffice.”

    How could the migration of MS Office to OpenOffice cause a run over?

    “At no point has its overruns been anything exactly Linux.”

    So then why did they not hit 80% migration by 2008? Why would the migration to openoffice have prevented this?

  18. The Other Linus says:

    “Munich was made more complicated by deliberate sabotage (shut down while “intellectual property” issues were studied), normal political debate getting involved in micro-management, and just too many studies all of which took too much time. I think there were two studies early on, one in the middle somewhere and one later going over everything in exhaustive detail. I suspect the time spent studying was longer than the actual work of migrating.”

    Except that after they got through all that they still claimed that they were going to have 80% of their machines migrated by 2008 yet only did 9%. Keep flailing around but it won’t work.

  19. oiaohm says:

    The Other Linus. The IBM white papers leading up to that book existed in 2003 with the same warnings as the 2006 book. There is a version 1 of that book by the way published in the year 2000. The warning were vague but there were still there reason for the follow up whitepapers to that book.

    Yes there are follow up white papers to the 2006 book as well.

    Of course due to Munich not dealing with IBM a lot I understand them not seeing those white papers and the 2000 book was not free. So I understand them not having it.

    Big cause of run over in Munich is process error. Next cause is MS Office to OpenOffice. At no point has its overruns been anything exactly Linux.

    Basically these are not excuses.

  20. The Other Linus says:

    Even the link I posted above that was this one predates that publication date. Basically Ohio Ham is grasping at straws to make excuses for why the gigantic LiMux failure is anything but.

  21. Munich was made more complicated by deliberate sabotage (shut down while “intellectual property” issues were studied), normal political debate getting involved in micro-management, and just too many studies all of which took too much time. I think there were two studies early on, one in the middle somewhere and one later going over everything in exhaustive detail. I suspect the time spent studying was longer than the actual work of migrating.

    Planning is OK but for migrating to GNU/Linux desktops, I have two rules that always apply:

    1. Divide the task up into manageable pieces, and
    2. All problems are soluble.

    After all, it’s just information processing, not rocket science. Computer Science 101 is probably enough to solve all the problems that arise in text and numeric processing in the real world. Change is good. Go ahead and change things. You might make things better at the same time. Instead of studying application 238, migrate it, find an equivalent in GNU/Linux or create your own. I am a pretty good problem solver. I have only once been stopped by a problem migrating GNU/Linux. I encountered a NIC that would not permit PXE booting and I did not have a substitute. Of course I could have written a boot loader onto the hard drive and carried on but I hate exceptions. People who start a migration feeling they cannot solve all the problems do not understand IT. It’s just copying or changing data. You don’t need a particular application to do that. You need a particular algorithm. Translate it to code and compile. Move on to the next problem.

  22. The Other Linus says:

    Seriously, it’s laughable that his excuse for the LiMux failure is their inability to read a document that wasn’t even published for more than 3 years after they started their project.

  23. The Other Linus says:

    He doesn’t know. Ohio Ham doesn’t have a damn clue what he is talking about.

  24. Ivan says:

    So the problem is Munich is just doing it wrong, ok. How would you have done it?

  25. The Other Linus says:

    BTW poggy, if you need some real men to please your wife I know a couple of dark skinned fellas that will love to show your wife a good time while you tinker with your Loonix boxen.

  26. The Other Linus says:

    “Robert Pogson they don’t like the idea that Linux Migration is affordable and does not run over budget badly if it done right. Seams to be when ever that comes up spam from hell happens.”

    Except it’s not done right and has run over budget by more than 10 million. A figure that is far larger than the costs of volume licenses for Windows. That and the fact that they were supposed to have 80% of their machines migrated 3 years ago yet only had 9%. TOTAL. FUCKING. FAIL.

  27. The Other Linus says:

    “Gone! Sheesh! I go out on a few errands and the trolls invade.”

    Did you run out of dried potato mash?

    So I heard your wife has to masturbate with 2 horse cock dildos just to feel anything up her blown out vag. Is that true Poggy? Is it true that your micropeen no longer satisfies her now that she can do triple vaginal with no effort?

  28. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson they don’t like the idea that Linux Migration is affordable and does not run over budget badly if it done right. Seams to be when ever that comes up spam from hell happens.

  29. The Other Linus says:

    “Items Munich and “Swiss region of Solothurn” did breach the redbook. Munich lived because latter on in the process they corrected to close to the redbook method.”

    How could they follow something that was written years after their migration projects started? Are you an idiot?

    “If you are going to fail you better fail cheap basically. Munich method was if you going to fail you will fail expensive. Never a good idea.”

    Gotta love more of these hilarious excuses

  30. Gone! Sheesh! I go out on a few errands and the trolls invade.

  31. oiaohm says:

    Really these shills for M$ give there stupid self away. Insulting. And if you read their english they are the same person. Few language stunts to attempt to hide the fact.

    http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg246380.html This redbook by IBM. Is the one that explains how todo a Linux desktop migration and not blow you feet off.

    Items Munich and “Swiss region of Solothurn” did breach the redbook. Munich lived because latter on in the process they corrected to close to the redbook method.

    If redbook method had been followed at Munich they would only be 1 year behind. Completing this year. Not redbook method 2 extra years so 3 years over. 1 year over is no worse than a normal Windows migration at times.

    Problem I cannot hold Munich to account for this they had made there mistake costing them 2 years before this book was published. Running a trial before migrating applications is mistake. Since if applications cannot be migrated every hour you spend on a trial is wasted money. Munich run a very high risk of costing them a huge bill for no good reason by the method they used.

    If you are going to fail you better fail cheap basically. Munich method was if you going to fail you will fail expensive. Never a good idea.

    Novell did claim that IBM redbook on Linux migrations was incorrect due to its idea you cannot always migrate it all so don’t aim for that yet the failures to migrate kinda prove Novell wrong. Redhat believes the book is right and followed it so since end 2006 redhat has not had a single failure to migrate something. Might not have been all the way to Linux but its never been wasted money.

  32. The Other Linus says:

    Since when has M$ done anything but lie about things? That’s how they built their illegal monopoly.

  33. Ken Ham says:

    That’s handy, I didn’t want to form an opinion on this anyway.

  34. Joe Monco says:

    I am not going to get involved in this Ken.

    This is Robert’s blog and it’s his right to believe what he wants.

  35. Ken Ham says:

    Damn right, they were definitely shills for M$. By the way, has JoeMonco weighed in on this? I can’t form an opinion without help from JoeMonco.

  36. Jack says:

    Thank god. They were most likely paid shills by M$. It’s good to know that you are still doing well and fighting the good fight Mr. Pogson.

  37. Trucker Joe and glome are GONE!

  38. Trucker Joe says:

    This is a great one:

    “After years of rumor and vacillation over fear of patents, the city of Munich has decided to trickle in its first 100 linux terminals. The floodgates are scheduled to fling open by 2008, when 80% of government PCs should be running Linux.”

    Wow 3 years to get 100 terminals moved to Linux! Oh and that 80% figure? Yeah, it was more like 9%.

  39. Trucker Joe says:

    BTW if you search for “Munich” on Slashdot it’s hilarious to see at least one article a year on why Munich is still behind schedule and failing in their plans. It’s quite hilarious.

  40. glome says:

    “Munich did implement FLOSS in preparation to migrate to GNU/Linux. They started nothing until they had made a plan, revised it and had it approved at the highest levels. Twit.”

    But wasn’t your point that it was successful and that it saved money instead of going over budget and over schedule?

    More shifting of goal posts?

  41. Trucker Joe says:

    Oh sorry, his link wasn’t the one I was expecting.

    “Last year the Russian government decided to migrate all schools to GNU/Linux by 2009.”

    Hahahaha. Yeah and did that happen by 2009? Oh right, it didn’t. Poggy, do you even read the links you post?

  42. Trucker Joe says:

    That should be “why LiMux isn’t still a huge failure”.

  43. glome says:

    Published on May 28, 2008, would be interesting to see if those same schools are still using Linux or if they switched over to a less expensive solution like, oh say, Windows?

  44. Trucker Joe says:

    “Russia has ordered all schools for 50 million students to use GNU/Linux.”

    Yeah, by 2015. I’m sure by then you guys will be making excuses for why it’s still not complete and is running over budget.

    “Brazil has done the same. Then there’s India…”

    Great, now get back to us when they actually do it and within the time and budget set out. No running over in time and budget like LiMux.

    “Munich did implement FLOSS in preparation to migrate to GNU/Linux.”

    I so love these after the fact excuses for why LiMux is still a huge failure. The original plan was to switch all the desktops to Linux. Now the goalposts are shifted and you guys are now cheering on how they had to take the better part of a decade just to move to LibreOffice and have still only transitioned 7% of their desktops.

    “They started nothing until they had made a plan, revised it and had it approved at the highest levels. Twit.”

    Bullshit. They only “revised” the plans after years of stagnation and failure to actually accomplish anything. There original plans were to have switched all the desktops to Linux in only a couple of years. Once they realized that wasn’t going to happen the spin doctoring and goalpost shifting started happening in full force by the FOSSies.

  45. Russia has ordered all schools for 50 million students to use GNU/Linux. Brazil has done the same. Then there’s India… So, “None” is quite wrong. I have set up whole schools to use GNU/Linux. That has happened all over the world. Last time I checked education was a major role of government around the globe. So, I have listed many significant commitments which you deny out of hand with no evidence to the contrary. Munich did implement FLOSS in preparation to migrate to GNU/Linux. They started nothing until they had made a plan, revised it and had it approved at the highest levels. Twit.

  46. glome says:

    I think it was right before the train ran over half of his head and squished his brain.

  47. Trucker Joe says:

    Wait, so there was a point in time when Ohio Ham actually had some level of coherence?

  48. glome says:

    I think Ohio Ham held his breath one too many times when he was growing up … 2 years ago.

  49. Trucker Joe says:

    It would be far too tempting to think he’s stupid. He’s probably just brain damaged. His brain used its OOM killer to destroy the section of his brain that controls building coherent thoughts.

  50. glome says:

    Can you post it in English this time?

    LOL!

  51. glome says:

    Funny you lose you means to read english when ever you lose and a partner who has never posted here before turns up. To support you. Sorry Troll I know you now.

    Funny, lose, read, partner, post, support, troll – are you high or just stupid Ohio Ham?

    LOL

  52. Trucker Joe says:

    “Trucker Joe. Funny you lose you means to read english when ever you lose and a partner who has never posted here before turns up. To support you. Sorry Troll I know you now.”

    I’m sorry, I don’t speak Ohio Ham. Can you post it in English this time?

  53. Trucker Joe says:

    “Trucker Joe “Swiss region of Solothurn” choose the wrong company to guide them through the migration.”

    Yeah, yeah it’s always everyone else’s fault, right?

    “Munich grew common sence after there trial run. Solothurn did not. Solothurm still retains some Foss so a migration done proper might be possible in future.”

    So that’s why the LiMux migration is still years late and millions over budget? Sorry, Ohio Ham but Munich is a complete failure.

  54. oiaohm says:

    Trucker Joe. Funny you lose you means to read english when ever you lose and a partner who has never posted here before turns up. To support you. Sorry Troll I know you now.

  55. oiaohm says:

    Trucker Joe “Swiss region of Solothurn” choose the wrong company to guide them through the migration.

    Again this is pre the 2006 turning point document. Novell failure rates are way higher than IBM or Redhats at doing Linux migrations. Mostly method related.

    There is a two stage rule. Sort out client apps. Then try to migrate desktop OS. Solothurn was Novell done that does stupid things like trying to run Windows applications inside wine instead of replacing the applications. This is also something the IBM migration guide tells you clearly not to attempt. Better to have a few windows machines than a misbehaving program. Never try to convert 100 percent basically. If 100 percent convert happens it was good luck.

    Munich grew common sence after there trial run. Solothurn did not. Solothurm still retains some Foss so a migration done proper might be possible in future.

  56. glome says:

    So far none have bee able to figure out what his babblings are. I think Pogson just pretends to understand Ohio Ham.

  57. Trucker Joe says:

    Can someone translate Ohio Ham’s incoherence into something that actually make sense? His massive run-on sentences and poor grammar make it nearly impossible to parse anything intelligible from his post.

  58. glome says:

    Uh oh, Poggy’s gone bye bye again. You’ve exposed reality – he can’t handle it!

  59. oiaohm says:

    Trucker Joe last 6 it switched from threatening to change to Linux to get price cut to really changing to Linux.

    French National Police have never looked back. Many third world countries that have done it in the same time have not looked back.

    India large sections of the government systems there have switched in the last 6. With plans to switch more. http://egovstandards.gov.in/ Yes this on going project to standardize there complete system is part of it.

    The trial that goes nowhere basically stopped about 6 years ago. When Munich and the French National Police dared to crack the ICE. Following those was India starting there standards in government push.

    Both Munich and French National Police are not the most successful in the time frame. In fact if you were trying to select the least successful using a possibly viable method from 2005 you would choose them.

    UK there is attempts to go FOSS. Most of the road blocks are turning out to have nothing todo with the FOSS solutions but with the staff they have running their solutions. Scary enough some turned out not even to believe FOSS existed or that FOSS could not really exist. How could something be maintained and given away for free. Not seeing that everyone using it was chipping in for the maintenance at times.

    Main reason why the UK push is not dieing like it use to is that case studies of Munich and others show there is a cost saving to be obtained if you can convince the staff todo it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_adopters Really there is quite a list since 2005.

    Malaysia in 2010 is quite a huge one.703 of 724 state agency only run Linux. We are talking more PC’s than Munich has. And Malaysia kept silent about it. Out of the remaining 21 they are all running some Linux. This is well under the 10 to 20 percent left windows.

    There are a lot of hidden ones Trucker Joe. There are also a lot of projects to hit complete over the next few years. This is why most of the arguments against it are becoming foolish. Since the method is now repeatable.

    French National Police is really one of the largest 90 000 machines to migrate. Even so by 2010 they were reporting 70 percent savings in maintenance and downtime costs. Currently this one is still on time table to finish a head of predicted time of 2015. The deployment rate is kinda scary over 15000 machines a year now they are in full swig of migrating. Basically they are doing a Munich every 12 months.

    Basically all the projects you are seeing them stop there foot to the floor on the accelerator and go for it now since 2010.

    Issue is also IBM whitepaper how to migrate was not published until 2006. Most project planned without that white paper or following that white paper methods have failed. Some followed the methods without knowing they were so were fine.

    Basically time to pull head out sand Trucker Joe the migrations to Linux are under way. Most first wave ones to attempted it died the ones that did contained information how you should attempt it. 2005 is the start of like a second wave based off information from the first wave. The second wave is having no issues or minor issues reaching completion all appear they will make it or have made it.

    I am expecting sometime around 2012-2013 a third wave start of issue less migration because the method is now fully worked out. Particularly thinking IBM is planning to revises the howto document in 2011 with all the different mistakes. That should be about perfect.

    Basically for the failures you get the ibm white paper how to migrate to Linux read how the failures were attempting todo it and it kinda straight up that they were doomed.

    Yes Linux said they would go after the desktop in the year 2000 did not have enough skill doing it then. Time has changed this fact.

    For the most insane project plan ever award goes to the “German foreign ministry” migration attempt.
    In the IBM document don’t duel boot because uses will resist change so will not use the Linux but stick using the windows they know. Every machine was deployed duel boot. Run uniform software yep failure each embency is running its own software mix. Then add in distance. Final nail was not checking in advance if spares would be source-able Presuming Linux and Windows have the same requirements for printers and the like. Would not have mattered if you were deploying a new apple computers or Linux it was doomed. Same issues would have effected both. At least those insane plans stopped after 2006. We learn from all the different ways to screw it up.

    Think of Linux methods as a weeds. They try tones of different things the one that live make the next lot of methods used stronger. Until you have weeds you cannot kill.

  60. Trucker Joe says:

    Hey Poggy why didn’t you post stories such as these to round out your list?

    German Foreign Office Going Back To Windows

    “The Foreign Office started migrating its servers to Linux in 2001 and since 2005 has also used open source software such as Firefox, Thunderbird and OpenOffice on its desktop systems. The government’s response to the SPD’s question states that, although open source has demonstrated its worth, particularly on servers, the cost of adapting and extending it, for example in writing printer and scanner drivers, and of training, have proved greater than anticipated. The extent to which the potential savings trumpeted in 2007 have proved realizable has, according to the government, been limited – though it declines to give any actual figures. Users have, it claims, also complained of missing functionality, a lack of usability and poor interoperability.”

    Hahaha at the quoted part.

    Or this one: Swiss canton drops Linux for Windows 7:

    “The government in the Swiss region of Solothurn has reportedly confirmed that it will turn to Windows 7 after hitting problems in a long-running desktop Linux migration project.”

    Megalol.

  61. “The lack of open standards for interoperability and the domination of lock-in interfaces was awful,” bemoans the Linux advocate. He notes that this only becomes apparent when you try to make yourself independent of a single vendor, and stop being a “happy slave”.”

    Yep. They were naive not to realize the depth of the hole they had dug for M$. Still the cost of migration grows the deeper the hole is dug so it was better they started than wait another decade.

  62. Trucker Joe says:

    “uhhh…
    From Top500.org”

    Stop being intentionally ridiculous. You know he was talking about regular users not supercomputers.

    “See, training in GNU/Linux is in demand in China.”

    Your link doesn’t work.

    “The largest GNU/Linux provider in China was considered large enough to bother by M$.”

    Which again does not translate into people using Linux on their home computers. Is this really the best you have? Nonsense about supercomputers and some agreement Microsoft made with a cloud service provider?

  63. I have used Scribus a few times. I have no use for those products you mentioned. Never seen ’em. Don’t know anyone who has used ’em.

    D-G wrote,“There is no Linux in China.”

    uhhh…
    From Top500.org
    NUDT TH MPP, X5670 2.93Ghz 6C, NVIDIA GPU, FT-1000 8C China Linux
    Dawning TC3600 Blade, Intel X5650, NVidia Tesla C2050 GPU China Linux
    Mole-8.5 Cluster Xeon L5520 2.26 Ghz, nVidia Tesla, Infiniband China Linux
    Dawning 5000A, QC Opteron 1.9 Ghz, Infiniband, Windows HPC 2008 China Windows HPC 2008
    DeepComp 7000, HS21/x3950 Cluster, Xeon QC HT 3 GHz/2.93 GHz, Infiniband China Linux
    Inspur TS10000 HPC Server, Xeon X56xx 2.93 Ghz, QDR Infiniband China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC E5xx 2.53 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    Cluster Platform 3000 BL460c G7, Xeon E5620 2.4 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.93 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.93 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.93 GHz, GigE China Linux
    Cluster Platform 4000 BL685c G7, Opteron 12C 2.1 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.93 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.93 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.93 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M3, Xeon X56xx 2.93 GHz, GigE China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC GT 2.66 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC GT 2.66 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    Cluster Platform 3000 BL460c G6, Xeon E5530 2.4 GHz, GigE China Linux
    Cluster Platform 3000 BL460c G7, Xeon X5650 2.66 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    Cluster Platform 4000 BL685c G7, Opteron 12C 2.1 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC E5xx 2.53 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC E5xx 2.53 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC E5xx 2.53 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    xSeries x3550M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3550M3, Xeon X56xx 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC GT 2.53 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC GT 2.53 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    Cluster Platform 4000 BL685c G7, Opteron 8C 2.4 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    Cluster Platform 3000 BL460c G6, Xeon E5540 2.53 GHz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC GT 2.53 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC GT 2.53 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC GT 2.53 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    xSeries x3650M2 Cluster, Xeon QC E55xx 2.53 Ghz, GigE China Linux
    BladeCenter HS22 Cluster, Xeon QC GT 2.66 GHz, GigEthernet China Linux

    That looks like a Hell of a lot of GNU/Linux in China and only one of that other OS.

    “Some Chinese schools believe that Linux education has helped students gain employment. According to ZJTIE, 90% of the students in its Economic Information Department received the LUPA certificates in 2006; as a result, employment rose to the highest the school has seen. This may be a result of the booming open source market in China. According to CCID Consulting, the sale of Chinese open source software increased 17.1%, while sales of Linux increased 20.2% in 2007.

    As Linux accounts for 66.5% of China’s open source market (according to a 2007 survey from CCID Consulting), open source education has been focused mostly on Linux. However, its success has encouraged ZJTIE to expand its teaching and certification. In March 2008, ZJTIE worked with LUPA to expand its education system from Linux to the whole open source industry.”

    See, training in GNU/Linux is in demand in China.

    The largest GNU/Linux provider in China was considered large enough to bother by M$.

  64. Trucker Joe says:

    So that’s a no?

  65. Organized crime gangs would be out of business pretty quickly if people did not have their vices. M$ behaves more like the mafia than a legitimate business. They have enforcers (BSA), musclemen (salesmen), all kinds of allegiances unnecessary for a legitimate business (“partners”), and they have a long rap-sheet. If what the fans of M$ say was true, that other OS is the one true way to do IT, all M$ would need to do would be to offer the product for sale on their website, but no, they have an ecosystem in the shadows as complex as their OS.

  66. Trucker Joe says:

    So if these were such great successes do you have any stories from this decade about any of these initiatives? Or are the only things you have are 6 year old stories about how they are planning to switch?

  67. oiaohm says:

    D-G There is a issue. In large business only 10 to 20 percent of personal need the stuff you talk about. Like QuarkXpress or Adobe InDesign. These are in the 10 to 20 percent of staff. Of course you pull a small user case.

    Basically FOSS is good for Large business.

    Contrarian and D-G there was a reason why before I said the larger the numbers get the worse MS looks.

    With the way economic are at the moment companies need to run more effective. One way is getting rid of MS products from every machine that does not need it.

    D-G not really 20 years either. Linux desktop has only been winning the standard requirements in the last 5 to make it vial-able. Mostly since droping BSD and other Unix relations have been accepted as a requirement. If they don’t keep up stiff.

    Basically Microsoft Windows need to go the way of Apple against MS Dos.

  68. D-G says:

    “I recommend Debian GNU/Linux. It works for you, not against you.”

    I recommend Windows 7. It does everything *I* need an operating system to do for *me*. Which is: being an application platform that has the applications available that *I* need. I get most major (read: good) open source applications pre-packaged as installers without dependency hell plus a myriad of open source, free and commercial Windows-only software for which Linux can at most offer *me* poor substitutes.

    It’s really a win-win scenario.

    “Sad that one of the richest corporations in the world did not have the confidence to compete on price/performance.”

    Sad that a FREE (as in beer) operating system that has been around for 20 years now has failed to grasp a considerable share of the desktop user market. Did I mention that it’s free? From a purely economic standpoint Microsoft should have collapsed by now.

  69. D-G says:

    Regarding Linux in China:

    “I would truly enjoy strangling the next motherfucker who suggests that Scribus is a replacement for QuarkXpress or Adobe InDesign. The people who say this are simply parroting the words of Linux zealots—they are generally the same people that believe Linux is succeeding in China all because of several baseless Slashdot reports. There is no Linux in China. Red Flag Linux went nowhere. Loongson uses Debian. Every government office in the country works on Windows-powered machines. The Chinese Linux userbase is identical to the US Linux userbase: the geek crowd.”

    http://web.archive.org/web/20101121012710/http://cinnamonpirate.com/2008/10/lessons-from-2-years-without-windows/

  70. NT JERKFACE says:

    Uncle Sam forces Germany to adopt Linux, threatens to stop importing beer and sausages.
    http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/LiMux-project-management-We-were-naive-958824.html

  71. JairJy says:

    You really don’t understand what means “successfully used Linux for large operations”.

  72. Contrarian says:

    This post seems over the top for even an avid Microsoft hater like yourself, #pogson! Really. How you can construe the information in this cable to mean that Microsoft “tried to get Uncle Sam to twist arms” and “they relied on taxpayers money to sell products” is beyond understanding. You need to get some better sense of balance.

    As to your “evidence”, it is, of course, nonsense. You try to disprove the idea that “no government in the world has successfully used Linux for large operations” by saying that Munich had installed a few thousand copies of Open Office (not Linux) and that other nations had experimented with Linux. None have made a total or even significant committment to it.

Leave a Reply