Liam Maxwell: “Opensource software is not three guys in a shed anymore”

Amen! Who is Liam Maxwell? He’s the IT guy who’s redoing IT for the government of the UK.

The complete quote: “Opensource software is not three guys in a shed anymore. There are a lot of misconceptions about open source but open source is the future model for delivering IT.”

He’s got that right. Millions of developers say so. Thousands of FLOSS projects say so. Hundreds of millions of user say so.

see The Register – We really are going to start buying open-source from SMEs

The UK government is starting a consultation period to establish a list of SMBs who will supply FLOSS. The idea is to support local industry while providing better IT for government and better government. How long do you think it will take consumers, retailers and distributors to catch on that there’s money to be made buying and selling FLOSS? Not long, considering the publicity this thing is getting.

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.

10 Responses to Liam Maxwell: “Opensource software is not three guys in a shed anymore”

  1. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson the wall is interop with parties not already on Linux.

    Less than 20 percent of seats in a business normally deal with the outside world. 80 percent is achievable. Somewhere between 80 to 99 percent for sure achievable. 100 percent shows outside forces had be defeated completely.

  2. oiaohm wrote, “Really if Munich make it to 100 percent then there would be trouble.”

    There’s trouble already, for some. Does anyone believe any ISV will ever mess with Munich again? After Munich completes the present plan it would not take much to motivate them to replace the next application with a web app or some FLOSS. Licence fee X seats X forever still exceeds what they can do with FLOSS for less. They also can generate collaboration with other governments to share the load.

  3. oiaohm says:

    Clarence Moon you are missing it.

    Lot of governments are now looking at FOSS. Mostly because even after all the bagging Munich is making it.

    Over half Munich desktops are done. Yes 9000 out of 15000. Munich has seen lower support costs. Lot lower software budget.

    Simple fact is when Munich hits 12 000. If they never convert the remaining 3000 to Linux it will never matter that much. Really if Munich make it to 100 percent then there would be trouble.

    Remember google and most big companies are not pure one OS. Most have fairly large Linux and OS X mixed in with Windows. The pure side only starts when you enter small to medium business. This is getting rare.

    Lot of big companies can look at Munich and see they can cut there software by 80+ percent.

    Stock Exchange find the linux software in cluster runs faster than windows .net based solution.

    Most important thing is Government drive the software businesses use. Reason businesses must interface with Governments.

    What government users also effects schools.

  4. Kozmcrae says:

    “Are you suggesting that the London Stock Exchange is a small business? Otherwise, what has it to do with this thread? ”

    It has everything to do with this thread. At least that’s the way it works for the Cult of Microsoft.

  5. Clarence Moon says:

    “Sure, I understand that…”

    Apparently not, if that is your explanation. Microsoft and Intel, as core suppliers, are only the tip of the iceberg, so to speak, regarding the overall industry. The OEMs, ISVs, distributors, and retailers of the hardware and software represent several times the financial mass of MSFT and INTC. That vast system is needed to move the hundreds of millions of units sold annually and is necessarily dependent on that product flow for its own survival. That network has grown over decades of development in both hardware and software in terms of technology as well as in terms of product expectations. It affects billions of people.

    A better mousetrap may eventually replace all of that, but it will take a correspondingly long time to do so. That’s an immutable law of product marketing gravity that I am sure you have little regard for, but that exists nonetheless.

    A new product that is essentially a new implementation of an old, established product is going to be absorbed into the existing matrix, Mr. Pogson. There is nothing very revolutionary about ARM and it will simply become just another mystery under the hood of a PC, if it even has much of chance considering its dodgy performance vis-a-vis x86 devices.

    You will find many reasons to reject the analogy, I suspect, but a good example is the fate of the net book a few years back that was introduced as some new, cost attractive, highly useful and desirable alternative to traditional computers. It was absorbed into the system and became the bottom end of the overall Wintel product line. Same fate is in store for an ARM PC, if it ever comes to the light of day.

  6. Clarence Moon wrote, “the kind of inertia that exists in mass markets such as personal computing devices.”

    You mean like smart phones where shipments are accelerating at 100%+ per annum? Sure, I understand that. People buy on the basis of what their friends have and on price/performance. Everyone loves small cheap computers.

  7. Clarence Moon says:

    “but the robust health of IT was not M$’s doing.”

    I agree with Mr. Pogson’s agreement except for the “but” inserted at the start of the phrase. It implies that I suggested that the business is healthy because of Microsoft and what I had plainly said was that it was the work of a number of big players in the technology and I named Oracle, Apple, and Google, that contributed to that health. There are a lot of others, of course, but I felt 3 was enough to paint the picture.

    Microsoft’s business tactics, whether you want to paint them as malicious, monopolistic acts or as enlightened, efficient promotions, contributed to Microsoft’s success, of course, and that success itself contributed to a much larger overall business area.

    I do not think that Mr. Pogson has a useful understanding of the kind of inertia that exists in mass markets such as personal computing devices. He sees a pond drying up and postulates that the oceans will soon follow, ignoring where all the water vapor might go.

    Hint: it isn’t going to disappear.

  8. Clarence Moon wrote, “one can only applaud the robust health of the IT ecology.

    That is good for everyone, including Microsoft”.

    In fact, I agree with CM on that statement but the robust health of IT was not M$’s doing. They did everything they could to stifle initiative to preserve their monopoly as long as possible to maximize their profits while the world of IT suffered through waves of re-re-reboots and malware. In the long run M$ will be punished as IT flees from them so M$ has exchanged short-term gain for long-term health. Only history will tell whether that gamble paid off. M$ could become extinct in a few years, in which case the gamble did not pay or they could be just an ordinary player in which case the gamble paid. If the courts in the USA had done their job we would already know that crime doesn’t pay but now we have to wait for the markets to rule. Since, in 2011, more units shipped with a variety of OS on ARM than Wintel, I think the writing is on the wall. Since, in 2012, M$ will release a crippled platform for ARM, I am certain M$ will be punished in the market. All that remains to be seen is by how much M$ will be punished. Two or three years should tell us whether or not Wintel will go down in flames or just fly at a lower altitude.

  9. Clarence Moon says:

    Yo-ho, Mr. Koz!

    Are you suggesting that the London Stock Exchange is a small business? Otherwise, what has it to do with this thread?

    There is no need for Microsoft to have all the world’s business. It is quite enough for their businesses to increase overall from year to year, which they have managed to do quite well. As the economy improves and other technology players such as Apple, Oracle, and Google thrive as well, one can only applaud the robust health of the IT ecology.

    That is good for everyone, including Microsoft, you might note.

  10. Kozmcrae says:

    I wonder if the London Stock Exchange experience had any influence on this change in direction.

    According to The Cult of Microsoft this isn’t really happening. You see, as they understand it, most of the software will remain proprietary. There will only be some minor changes. All of the important departments will still be using basically what they are using now. All this is based upon their well informed opinions and notions of how a business should be operated.

    It looks like they’re too chicken to post on this story. No doubt someone will show up eventually with some twisted logic and opinion-based facts. Must be tough to continually fabricate good news for Microsoft.

Leave a Reply