Munich Update on Migration to GNU/Linux

There’s a new report/presentation on the current status. Some things have not changed. Some things have. Here’s an outline of the current status:

  • 10500 PCs have migrated to GNU/Linux,
  • 33000 employees,
  • 1000 IT workers,
  • 15000 PCs total,
  • 51 locations,
  • 22 independent IT departments,
  • all PCs running FLOSS apps:, Thunderbird, and FireFox,
  • training amounts to 1-2 days per employee split between the OS and and
  • 95% of business applications have been dealt with.

Interestingly, they break down their new regime of business applications this way:

  • 25% open (I guess able to run on the server and accessible by any OS),
  • 30% Native GNU/Linux applications,
  • 15% virtual (desktop or terminal server),
  • 10% PCs running that other OS,
  • 15% eliminated, and
  • 5% unchanged, presumable still running on that other OS.

So, they see no show-stoppers, no reasons to keep that other OS on every PC in the place, and no fears of running “second-class” stuff. Clearly, going forward, the amount they will pay M$ for licensing is cut by a large factor, perhaps 80%.

Without regards to the details, it seems to me they could still reduce expenditures if they wanted. They do state that 150 million Euros is the total expense of IT. If they mean annually, that’s huge. If they mean for the migration, that’s huge. It’s not clear what time-frame that amount covers or what it covers. It’s consistent with cost-cutting not being their highest priority. I disagree with that. Economical IT is the best IT as long as it gets the job done. Clearly, GNU/Linux can do the job for them. The few remaining non-FLOSS applications they use could be replaced with a finite effort. They just have not made that effort yet.

It seems the Munich still has some reorganising to do since they call the IT departments “independent”. A while ago they stated they were going to centrally control things… Oh well. They are well within striking distance of having 12K PCs migrated to GNU/Linux by 2013 and they have not closed off any options for future changes. They have a robust and reliable system that works for them. Any system can still be improved but they have come a long way and should be congratulated for obtaining a lot of independence from M$ and its “partners”.
see Status of Limux as of June, 2012

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.

5 Responses to Munich Update on Migration to GNU/Linux

  1. I doubt cost is actually that large a factor in many migrations. FLOSS is just a better way to do IT but it usually takes a leader to change course. Many organizations in Europe seem not to be welded to M$ and have sufficient leadership or cooperation to accept new ways of doing things. Actually FLOSS is not that new but it is very different than Wintel’s plan.

  2. Mats Hagglund says:

    Germans have always been famous of their economical thinking, which is virtue indeed. When there’s short of money and lack of security even Anglo-Saxon folk start to think about is life in Windows reality best choice at all.

  3. Viktor wrote, “Very impressive. Tax payer’s money gone to waste. Reliable, independent data about cost savings? Not available. Because the cost savings are purely of the imaginary sort.”

    Viktor assumes the electors and their elected representatives don’t have access to audited statements of financial condition and budgets. The mayor is not shy to discuss the cost of using GNU/Linux as he would have been if it were over-budget.

  4. oiaohm says:

    The costs have been no higher than there normal operation costs. Also Victor cost saving figures have been released. You were around the last time this topic came up and were pointed to it. So do you have a memory problem?? Victor.

  5. Viktor says:

    Very impressive. Tax payer’s money gone to waste. Reliable, independent data about cost savings? Not available. Because the cost savings are purely of the imaginary sort.

Leave a Reply