Government Of UK Puts Infrastructure On The FLOSS/Open Standards Table

This is from a document linked from a document describing infrastructure including desktops as one of four areas of Government IT that need to be provided as an open structure upon which all government services are to be built…
“Rather than simply limiting the size or power of an entrenched player, can government insistence on openness and interoperability be used to cause a “market reset,” through which innovation can once again flourish? Antitrust actions against Microsoft were focused on existing business models, yet the real competition for Microsoft came not from other businesses selling software, but from an entirely new class of advertising-based business models that were invented in the initially noncommercial, wide-open spaces of the World Wide Web.”
see Government As a Platform – Government As a Platform – OFPS – O'Reilly Media.

There is is, a whole government planning how to escape M$ and “partners” bloat. They are going to do IT the right way, considering what will give the desired outcome efficiently instead of just throwing money away to get the desired outcome any way possible. If we all did that would anyone pay ~$100 extra for a PC with M$’s OS on it, $150 extra for M$’s office suite, $thousands to run a server on a network? How about enduring endless malware aimed at the leaking hulk of that other OS and endless re-re-reboots?

“These changes will be introduced over the next 5 years as deals for existing services come to their natural end. As these expire, departments and users will be transitioned to common services. The Cabinet Office will support departments in ensuring that it can be successfully delivered. The outcomes will be worth it: early adoption of this approach has already made significant savings.”

Cool. I can wait five years for it to happen. How long can you and your organization wait?

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 and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Government Of UK Puts Infrastructure On The FLOSS/Open Standards Table

  1. Maou Sadao wrote, “I think Mr. Pogson misread another article. Shocking. Canadian education must have been at a low when he went to school.”

    Au contraire, I was a top student in grades 7-12 after I got my glasses… How did I misread this?
    “Our guiding principles for this change are simple:

    • focusing on user needs, ensuring that technology becomes so good that our colleagues, citizens and businesses want to use it
    • putting outcomes first; such as reductions in cost per transaction
    • using ‘openness’ to our advantage – open data,

    open standards, open source, open markets

    Combined with the graphic that shows desktops are included in the infrastructure under consideration, how did I misread that? Closed whatever is clearly at the back of the bus in the way the UK is thinking, which pretty well cuts M$ out, something I have recommended for many years.

  2. matchrocket says:

    Maou Sadao who cannot read wrote this: “No, matchrocket, bw wrote this:”

    I know asshat, I quoted that very sentence.

  3. Maou Sadao says:

    bw writes that Dell sells Linux computers at $20 more than Windows computers. And so he wants the readers of this blog to assume that all Linux computers are more expensive than Windows computers.

    The master of FUD strikes. No, matchrocket, bw wrote this:

    You are confused, I think. PCs with Windows are generally the same price or even less expensive than computers that have Linux pre-installed.

    And that’s true. As almost all big mainstream vendors don’t do Linux on their PCs, you have to get your Linux PCs (not: PCs without operating system) at niche outfits like System76 or ZaReason or the likes.

    There’s then an additional problem which disingenuous Linux supporters like on this site like to brush away: if a company puts Linux on their computers then they have to support it. Let something break in their Linux distribution of choice which affects their hardware, but is not necessarily a general problem — are these companies equipped to deal with that? By all means, they will have to fix the problem. And that will cost money. Providing a support infrastructure costs money. Many things related to Linux cost money — just as if you’d have to support Windows.

    But the disingenuous people on this site always try to paint the picture that Linux costs $0 because the vendors simply have to slap an image onto their computers’ hard disks. Any problems with Linux can be dealt with by the users themselves, thanks to the ubiquitous Linux “support” forums all over the net.

    Buy cheap (“for free”), pay the price later. That’s Linux. Microsoft is laughing all the way to the bank. (And, if I were to believe the people here, I am too. I’m a paid Microsoft shill after all.)

  4. bw says:

    “You are a loser bw. You and the rest of your Microsoft troll buddies. Keep towing the Microsoft line. Keep losing.”

    Well, what would you expect us to do? We are losers, after all, and know no other way!

    The only solace that we get is from walking into the local stores and seeing all those new Windows 8 machines lined up for public view.

    I’d say more, but I have to run to the bank to cash my Microsoft troll check. They close at 1:00P on Saturdays. Bummer.

  5. matchrocket says:

    bw writes that Dell sells Linux computers at $20 more than Windows computers. And so he wants the readers of this blog to assume that all Linux computers are more expensive than Windows computers.

    He writes: “PCs with Windows are generally the same price or even less expensive than computers that have Linux pre-installed.”

    This is a constant theme with the Microsoft trolls. They think if they say it often enough people will start to believe them. If that were the case then more people would be sighing up to use Microsoft’s products. That is not the case. Just the opposite is happening. In the news everyday we see municipalities, enterprises and organizations leaving Microsoft and embracing FLOSS.

    You are a loser bw. You and the rest of your Microsoft troll buddies. Keep towing the Microsoft line. Keep losing.

  6. Maou Sadao wrote, “your students had even much less difficulty uninstalling Linux: they just let the Windows installer do its job!”

    Nonsense. I looked high and low and could find no legitimate installation media. That left backups of questionable quality of possibly infected systems. There’s no going back without a lot of pain. Many of the schools where I worked received donated PCs with donated software (legally so from Computers for Schools), but there was no installation medium kept around to do re-installation except in a few cases of new machines purchased. All there was in most schools was the backup of a kind-of-working unit restored to ones that didn’t work. In the North, I found only one school that had made a solid attempt to document licensing and to secure re-installation media. That’s one of the burdens of that other OS that schools cannot afford in many cases. It’s not that schools in the North are short of cash but that they need to spend it on expensive electrical power, heat, transportation and freight out of an inadequate budget. The spending per capita was much more than down south. Even schools in the south have difficulty funding M$. Should they cut teachers to hire IT-people? Should they use an OS that can’t run without IT-people?

  7. Maou Sadao says:

    FUD! I and my students have no difficulty installing GNU/Linux.

    And your students had even much less difficulty uninstalling Linux: they just let the Windows installer do its job!

  8. bw wrote of Dell charging more for GNU/Linux on identical hardware, “It is probably due to the difficulty of installing it”.

    FUD! I and my students have no difficulty installing GNU/Linux. No, it’s more likely that Dell told M$ they were going to start shipping GNU/Linux more widely and M$ paid them to install that other OS. They have $70+ billion in the bank after all. M$ will do anything to prop up the Wintel monopoly even paying OEMs to install it. That keeps the revenue flowing for server, office suites, clouds etc.

  9. Maou Sadao says:

    I think Mr. Pogson misread another article. Shocking. Canadian education must have been at a low when he went to school.

  10. bw says:

    “now he writes that PCs with M$’s OS cost the same as PCs ”

    A Dell Vostro, according to your cite, is $20 less than one with Ubuntu. Whatever the Microsoft “tax” the expense of using Linux must be higher, eh? It is probably due to the difficulty of installing it or else the Linux product line product manager is a doofuss who is asleep at the switch and letting his train run off the rails.

    Maybe they think that anyone fanatical enough to buy a Linux box will not notice that they are paying more. A fool and his money…

  11. bw wrote, “PCs with Windows are generally the same price or even less expensive than computers that have Linux pre-installed.”

    So, on the one hand bw claims M$ is rolling in money because they tax tens of millions of PCs each quarter and now he writes that PCs with M$’s OS cost the same as PCs with a $0 GNU/Linux licence pushing Canonical to the verge of bankruptcy … Mind boggling, isn’t it?

  12. bw says:

    “If we all did that would anyone pay ~$100 extra for a PC with M$’s OS on it, $150 extra for M$’s office suite, $thousands to run a server on a network? How about enduring endless malware aimed at the leaking hulk of that other OS and endless re-re-reboots?”

    You are confused, I think. PCs with Windows are generally the same price or even less expensive than computers that have Linux pre-installed. You yourself cited an example of that for a Dell Vostro recently. It is only your wild theory that Linux computers are less expensive and your estimate of how much varies considerably from day to day.

    If you do not see the value proposition in selecting Microsoft Office products to maintain your organization’s continuity and compatibility, you are free to choose Open Office or Libre Office as you have suggested on many occasions. It is likely that 99% or more of the users of those open source products use the product with Windows than with Linux. It works very well and I have tried them myself. No problems at all.

    When is the last time you saw a Windows computer? You go on and on about “endless reboots” and malware as if the problem were at the forefront of importance, but these things have receded from public concern and attention long ago. Today’s threats are identity theft and phishing and web site hacking that affect all PCs, Windows, Linux, or Mac, alike.

  13. oiaohm says:

    This is what is going on.

    FOSS taking over Governments long-term is going to have major effects.

Leave a Reply