Phillip Chandler wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 14:06 +0000, Simon Capstick wrote:
>> Does anyone believe the government will actually follow through
>> with this one?
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7910110.stm
>>
>> Simon
>
> You must have missed this bit :
>
> "Open source software will be adopted "when it delivers best value
> for money", the government said.".
Have you read the actual document this refers to?
http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/open_source/090224opensource.pdf
I particularly like this part:
<quote>
The Government will, wherever possible, avoid becoming locked in to
proprietary software. In particular it will take exit, rebid and rebuild
costs into account in procurement decisions and will require those
proposing proprietary software to specify how exit would be achieved.
</quote>
...that sounds remarkably like a commitment to open standards to me, or
at least taking the cost of migration into consideration when deploying
non-O/S software. That may well affect the 'value for money' criterion.
If this opens the door for more open standards, then marvellous.
Game On.
oh and this bit:
<quote>
Where there is no significant overall cost difference between open and
non-open source products, open source will be selected on the basis of
its additional inherent flexibility.
</quote>
just one more, I can't help myself :)
<quote>
[...] Where appropriate, general purpose software developed for
government will be released on an open source basis.
</quote>
> Thats a cop-out clause.
No, it's not. It's paraphrased/quoted at best. I am not a government
apologist, but this is a remarkable step forward and very positive.
All that's really required is that they assess open source solutions
in the same context as closed source and that they justify how they
eventually spend our money. This can only be a good thing. They are not
promising to change all their desktops to Linux (or any other open
source O/S). In fact I would be absolutely gobsmacked if they ever did.
> Ive used Linux for quite a while, and thankfully picked up a lot of
> stuff.
>
> But what support do you have for Linux ?
> 1) - Forums.
Not at a professional level, for anything beyond the simplest things.
Besides, google first :)
In large organisations, it's 'call the helpdesk'.
> 2) - Canonical Paid-for support.
*ahem*. Linux does not only mean *buntu.
Canonical provide just one of the many options.
Red Hat support services are in general excellent
Admittedly I'm biased, I work for the company, but I do speak to a lot
of customers. :).
Then there's Novell (and of course, even Oracle these days).
Plus anyone else who wants in, but those are the main players.
Any proper Enterprise-level roll-out provides some form of paid support,
SLAs and so on, if only to cover somebody's a***. It mitigates the risks.
With Open Source, that's usually most of what you pay for (that and ISV
/ OEM certifications etc etc).
> 3) - Your IT department if they are savvy enough about Linux.
They are in many public sector organisations above a certain size.
Perhaps not at the school IT technician level (although in some cases,
perhaps even there).
Once again, this is why we have support agreements and escalation
procedures.
Just my 2p worth. I could go on. In fact I have.
Flame-retardant suit at the ready. :)
Stuart
--
Stuart Sears RHCA etc.
"It's today!" said Piglet.
"My favourite day," said Pooh.
