• someguy3@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    the government has given the go-ahead for the first step towards complete digital sovereignty in the state, with further steps to follow.

    The term digital sovereignty is very important here. If a public administration uses proprietary, closed software that can’t be studied or modified, it is very difficult to know what happens to users’ data:

    We have no influence on the operating processes of such [proprietary] solutions and the handling of data, including a possible outflow of data to third countries. As a state, we have a great responsibility towards our citizens and companies to ensure that their data is kept safe with us and we must ensure that we are always in control of the IT solutions we use and that we can act independently as a state.

    Digital sovereignty seems to be the primary impetus, so this might go far. Saving money is secondary.

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      There were also previous notes about public tax dollars should not feed private corporations, but stay within a public system

      • Goku@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Lol. Geez in America this would be radical ideas haha.

        Seems nice not to have tax dollars going to private companies at a glance. However, I do not trust the government to get the job done right by themselves either in many cases.

        • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago
          1. Wouldn’t be government anyway.
          2. I’ve worked on both public and private sectors, and they’re both run by people with the same potential for good and bad decisions and performance. I’ve seen great things coming from public organizations and terrible things coming from successful private organizations. Don’t buy into the narrative that government = bad.
    • fuego@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Saving money is secondary.

      Weird how that’s always the case in a capitalist society.

  • ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    This is unironically a good move for them. As Office gets more and more interconnected you have to wonder if there’s a danger of using sensitive data as training for their AI. Not only will it save them money it’ll also keep their data secure.

  • The Hobbyist@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I hope they do not try to save that money but rather take the opportunity to invest some of it into the open source ecosystem that are now relying on.

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        And having a government as a significant backer for an open source project is a great recipe for conflicts of interest and general trust erosion.

        • bort@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          who else should be a significant backer for an open source project? google? microsoft?

          • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Things get weird as corporations increasingly have power comparable to nation states.

            But, generally, I would rather a megacorporation than a government. Because megacorps are at least “smart enough” to pretend they aren’t trying to take over the world. Whereas governments have a tendency to justify a lot of horrible shit for righteous reasons.

            But, in a perfect world? I would rather a wide range of different donors and backers but mostly clustering around maybe fortune 500 companies instead of fortune 10?

            • bort@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Because megacorps are at least “smart enough” to pretend they aren’t trying to take over the world.

              there are enough examples for corps doing evil things. You hear about them less often, because they cover their tracks and the outcry is generally smaller than when governments do similar things.

              Whereas governments have a tendency to justify a lot of horrible shit for righteous reasons.

              corps justify a lot of horribble shit for financial reasons. Is that better?

            • sudneo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Corporations can also act on behalf, or on the orders of nation states. So you don’t solve anything, if a state wants to get involved, it will. You have the additional cons that corporations tend to cater to their financial interests anyway, while a public institution might not always have ulterior motives.

      • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Why not both?

        Let’s say MS charges $5M a year.

        Their support contract, assuming they get one, for libre office might be $1M.

        They could still invest another $1M in OSS and still save $3M

        A $1M net gain for OSS and a $3M savings for the govt.

        • bort@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          That’s still not how governments work

          It would be nice if it worked like that, but we both know it doesn’t

        • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          In reality it’s gonna be something like:

          M$ charges 5M €. Libreoffice might be 1M € so they will give 1M € to OSS and waste the remaining 3M € on some overly expensive one-time crap like car infrastructure. Later they will realize that they had understaffed their IT department and will need extra 5M € paid by more state debt.

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      The agreement was finalized Sunday and the parties will be in power until 2026. “We will adhere to the principle of ‘public money, public code’. That means that as long as there is no confidential or personal data involved, the source code of the city’s software will also be made public,” the agreement states.

      poggers

  • RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    The last time I tried it, which is now a few years ago, LibreOffice Calc was substantially slower than Excell for larger spreadsheets. Like a difference between night and day, it was no acceptable substitute if productivity was a concern, which it usually is.

    Imo a big swoop change like this, which is done for ideological reasons, but without practical considerations, is doomed to fail and leave a lasting bad impression in peoples’ minds. Imo it would have been far better to only drop windows 10/11 for a familiar looking Linux distro, while continuing to use Microsoft Office.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s a question of both expenses and dependency on a monopolist.

      There simply won’t ever be an opportunity to move from MS solutions to FOSS solutions which won’t have these problems.

      Being dependent is possibly more expensive in the long term too.

      • olutukko@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        If you throw even half the money that would go to ms license for the foss community instead you can get some pretty huge improvements for that foss program. Blender for example, got actually nice looking and seriously good program while being foss because they got decent funding

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Well, people blamed old (archaic, what it had when it was an Amiga program) UI for being hard to use, but the new one is even harder, so dunno.

          I touched Blender with the old UI somewhere in late 00s on Windows, managed to sculpt and render a few clumsy objects. I don’t remember how long it took, but it feels as if the new one took twice that for the same.

          EDIT: On the actual subject - yes, that too. I sometimes think that (moderate) positive inflation is not always better than deflation. It encourages a narrow way of thinking where we always stop at first local optimum. Say, MSO is cheaper right now than LO - then we choose MSO, period. Nobody thinks about finding a bigger optimum, because constant inflation psychologically encourages you to think that way. That’s just clumsy philosophy.

    • YIj54yALOJxEsY20eU@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think reducing their reasons to ideological is not fair. They stand to save a lot of money, reduce the risk of leaking data (to MS or hackers), and will have the ability to fork/add their own features.

      While I am not familiar enough with Calc or Excel to comment on the speed, I imagine having an entire government using it could get the ball rolling on optimizations.

      • RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        The money that will be saved is peanuts compared to the cost of the workers. Loss of productivity through the implementation of bad tools can be very costly. The various Microsoft Office programs also offer the possibility to add bespoke features. Microsoft Office does not leak data unless you chose to let it do so, at least in the eu.

        Optimizations that might happen once a program with unacceptable performance is in a production environment, are generally optimizations that never happen. I’ve never seen a program make such a turnaround, it’s wishful thinking without a basis in reality.

        This thing really is set up for failure. I’m not against organisations moving away from products from large monopolistic companies, rather the opposite, I’m very much in favor. But if the move is done in such a way that it’s bound to fail and then cement itself into people’s mind as a bad thing, then it has accomplished the opposite of what it has set out to do. Right now Linux is ready for widespread adoption in environments where productivity matters, but in my experience libre office is not.

        • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          the possibility of bespoke features Such a shame you can’t do this with open source software.

          Every time I see someone say ‘I’m actually really a fan of open source’ it reads like ‘I’m not racist but’.

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        They stand to save a lot of money

        Do they? They’ll now have to start training people to use Linux.

        These people aren’t going to be enthusiasts like us. They need to be shown where everything is.

    • tabular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Software freedom is about being in control of your computing. We can’t verify what proprietary software from a foreign company is doing on a government computer.

      Public money public code is about citizens getting back the code we paid for. When a proprietary company improves software to get paid then they keep that advantage to themselves. LibreOffice is a collaborative project, everyone gains from it being improved by our money.

      These aught to be valid concerns as much as productivity: to the degree it affects people. It cannot be dissmssed as being idelogical.

      • RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Those are ideological reasons though and me calling them idealogical does not mean that I dismiss them as valid reasons. Idealogy in itself is not a bad thing and it should certainly have a part in decision making.

        Where we differ in opinion is in which should take priority: I’m of the opinion that practicality should trump ideology (in this case), while you find the idealogical reasons more important.

        • tabular@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          I think we should aim for what is ideal and then take into consideration the constraints of what we can do. If it’s not plausible enough to go for what is ideal then aim to make that more likely while doing whatever is the next best thing. We risk being stuck on a peak of possible good if we refuse to go down to eventually go up higher.

          I only use LibreOffice but don’t need it much. I can’t comment on how practical it is, or isn’t, for use in a government. If there’s another free software option then we aught to consider that. Else spend money to maje in good enough in the most important use cases.

        • geoma@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Are you working on ods formats? Anyways… We need more people using LO so we’ll have more developers and rhen comes a point in which LO surpasses everything else. Meanwhile, if we stick to proprietary software,we would be stuck in a vicious loop. We need to break trough and sometimes inthat transition there are some concessions to make. If we manage to make it aa a big collective of people,the transition process will be shorter.

          • RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            I’m not using it anymore, I just tested it to see if I could propose it as a substitute. In my testing I tried both open and ms formats: I started with old excel files which didn’t work well, so then I tried open format files that were build up from a clean slate state, with the data imported from CSV files. After that didn’t perform satisfactory either, I turned to the internet. After searching for the major issue that I encountered (slow in a large sheet), I came to the conclusion that calc could not be a full substitute for excell, so I never proposed it and we’re still using ms office to this day.

            I’m just going to copypaste some other people’s thoughts with which I agree, saving me a bit of time:

            *"If you work at a large company for a while you’ll encounter a class of user that Calc doesn’t really address. They’re like super-specialists. They often have a deep knowledge of Excel, but are otherwise completely computer illiterate. They also work with large datasets and specific models. Calc isn’t a replacement for them. Not just on a feature level, but on an accessibility level.

            Look for Excel resources. Classes, books, articles, howtos, everywhere. Do the same for Calc and you’ll struggle a lot more. There is stuff there, but it just isn’t nearly as professional and rich. There is no great way to transition Excel users to Calc users and have them still be as productive.

            In the Linux world, when we get those style of work-loads we generally put aside Calc / Excel as a tool and begin looking at programming languages (e.g., Python, Matlab). I feel like this somewhat handicaps our ability to reach those users.

            for basic use though, it’s perfectly acceptable. I just wouldn’t consider it a poweruser tool, and those power users are what make Office a multibillion dollar product for MS."*

            *"Sadly, it’s just not there in book.

            The only time I try to use LOCALC is when I have a few hundreds/thousands of rows of formatted values to sort into a simple graph and performance is just abysmal.

            I just tried again earlier this day and though most daily features are there for your regular user, all my “casual” uses of it ended up underlining the severe performance problems.

            Maybe my uses are far more corner case than I believe…"*

            https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/9yjwyf/is_libreoffice_calc_truly_a_worthy_replacement/

            • geoma@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Wow. i dont know. Ive never used calc nor excel for things that big. For that Ive used python or php/mysql. I use spreadsheets a lot, even complex ones, and calc always work for me. Anyways, you are right in regarda to the lack of support/books. Of course. Same happens with a lot of things. They are not mainstream (yet) because they are projects that havent had the money or power corporations like microsoft has had for lobbies and marketing. So we can struggle a little on the transition (some very brave pioneers have already paved the way for us, so its not that hard anymore) and hope we are contributing to a libre/free future in which digital technology helps build a better and fairer society for all. And then, they’ll become mainstream and we’ll have more books, support and communities than we ever dreamed of before.

    • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Lol, has sheets the size where performance matters and talks about productivity. And then chalks LO up to failure because of this. Maybe converting your .xlsx to .odf would save more money then, LO is faster there.

    • runeko@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      If an Excel sheet is that big, it should be replaced with a proper database, which most likely would run on Linux. I think you’re right, though, about the lack of planning around the practicalities.

      • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Using the right tool in an office setting isn’t something that’s typically done. Unless that tool is a spreadsheet of course. A spreadsheet is always the right tool.

        • force@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          you can probably just use python (pandas or something) or an equivalent in other languages

      • AlpacaChariot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        In structural engineering (bridge design etc), we use quite complicated spreadsheets for calculations; a database wouldn’t be the right tool for that job. We use excel because everyone knows how to use it and it’s easy to print to PDF and see the inputs and outputs and any graphical summaries you have added. Using a spreadsheet makes it easy to check and easy to adapt/change when you want to do a slightly different calculation next time.

        I’ve tried building spreadsheets of similar complexity in libreoffice and it’s true they are very slow in comparison and more prone to crashing.

        Libreoffice works well for some tasks and I enjoy using it at home but honestly if I tried to use it at work it would cut my productivity significantly. I’m probably using it more intensively than most people though.

        • runeko@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          I agree that spreadsheet use in engineering is one of the most complicated use cases, but I submit for your consideration another very complicated use case: laboratory software ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laboratory_information_management_system ) LIMS do what Excel can but with the added benefits of being more controlled, secure, user friendly and faster because they’re built upon the back of a modern database. In my experience with engineer built worksheets, the engineer that built them is typically the only one who knows how to use them. This is job security for that engineer, but isn’t scaleable for others’ use. In the lab software, a scientist builds the methods, and lab technicians use those methods over and over again daily. Each step of each use of the method is recorded with the inputs, the results, who performed it and exactly when. The workflows are built-in and the calculations are comparable to those used in engineering.

          • AlpacaChariot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Interesting, I think it’s different for structural engineering because you’re doing calculations in accordance with a code of practice and the spreadsheet needs to be adapted to tweak the inputs and outputs of a standard formula and apply it slightly differently for different bridges / structural arrangements. I’ve written loads of spreadsheets that have been used and adapted by other people in my company, I honestly don’t think they are that difficult to understand (or people wouldn’t have been able to build on them and adapt them).

            I can see that lab software is quite different, especially if you have very well defined procedures and you are repeating exactly the same test again and again with the same inputs and outputs.

  • feinstruktur@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Well, guy who actually lives there (Schleswig-Holstein) here. Be precise in what’s written in tfa. What it laments about is that one (single) work place is about to be installed and that subsequent steps are about to follow.

    I don’t want to sound too pessimistic here. The fact, that this topic is on the high level agenda shows that it has strong supporters - for the moment.

    But weighing in past decades’ province goverment’s spendings in large scale software projects and peoples’ fear of everything even marginally IT, I’m very reluctant to see the big move here. Opposition against changes to my windows is simply unfathomable strong.

    Nevertheless - and I mean that - it’s a good development.

    • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Do they seem like they are paying for a integrator like SUSE (they are THE German commercial FOSS/Linux company in my head) or is it more enthusiasts trying to push changes and providing support?

      • feinstruktur@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I guess it will be even worse. Instead of taking good money for hiring good people (I know this strategy is over simplified, as there are mandatory regulations for gv not being allowed to compete with the private sector. But if there would be the political will to find a way, there would be a way), gv will take even more money and found a consortium of ‘experts’ who will spend most of the funding to invent an exceptionally complex new wheel that none has ever seen before and take years in development… And the next gv will roll back. And that’s that. Thinking about it I notice how desillusionated I became over the years…

        Hopefully I will be wrong. This time. At least once.

  • ivanafterall@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    This makes me want to try LibreOffice again. Is it really close-enough to on-par? I tried OpenOffice and LibreOffice a few times through the years and always found weird hiccups, like filetype issues, files looking different between programs, weird UI choices, etc…

    • Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I use Word at work and OnlyOffice and it works perfectly fine for my needs.

      I don’t see any reason to go back to any proprietary software at home 😇

    • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      If you need MS office compatibility, don’t use Libreoffice. If you just want to use the software for your own documents, Libreoffice is (imo) better* once you get used to it. If you need Basic Excel macros, Libreoffice won’t work unfortunately.

      (*) the thing I hate about excel is that everything works “like magic” which is fine as long as it works. When something doesn’t work, you are screwed because you cannot explicitly tell Excel what to do. It wants to do its own magic instead of obeying your will.

    • Cobrachicken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      No issues here. Have to use (mainly) excel at work, but use libre office calc at home, for years. Hate excel with all my heart. Mainly autocomplete and UI issues, but also issues when using more than one instance with excel. No problems with file exchange, p.e. with my tax person. Imho excel was THE leader but they enshittyfied it to the max.

    • simple@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      OnlyOffice is good. Better compatibility with MS office and nicer UI than libreoffice.

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      No issues as long as you switch the toolbar to use tabs or contextual groups instead of the insane button overload which is still the default for some reason.

    • nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I’ve been using libreoffice for several years, and when I have to cowork with someone, compatibility issues always happen. However, since last year, I’ve been experimenting transitioning to onlyoffice for a few academic works, and it has been so smooth. So far, I opened all documents people sent me without issues, and published some works, and no one involved in the process complained about anything. If you need compatibility with ms office, I suggest using onlyoffice. It’s also foss and can be used at most OSes, even on android.

      Edit: I see that other people already suggested onlyoffice. I didn’t mean to sound like those pushy comments that appear on our inbox from people saying the same thing again and again.

    • ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Libreoffice is strongest when you’re using ODT format because it’s an open standard. It’s not at all their fault for docx incompatibilities because they change the format CONSTANTLY and of course their only documentation is internal.

      Personally I haven’t had those issues though, only slight formatting differences when opening docx files, and half the time it’s because I didn’t have the font installed. You can change to the ribbon style if you really want but personally I prefer the older style, I find it’s easier to find what I want.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I’m not sure it’ll even save them money, at least initially. They’re likely paying consultants to work out the best approach, they need to retrain staff, and they’d probably go with a distro like RedHat that has vendor support (plus have paid support for LibreOffice too)

  • t0mri@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Haaa! It feels good to hear. I hope that theyll support free software financially.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    i could swear they did this before… like 10+ years ago when ODF was being pushed hardcore, but then i read they switched back to microsoft for some reason.

    • Jumuta@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      it’d be funny if municipalities all over the eu started switching to Linux because they want a Microsoft campus

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      That’s only half the story if you look into it. I think they also had issues with the transition.

      • onlinepersona@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I think they also had issues with the transition.

        They were blown out of proportion. Every single problem was magnified as if Windows had none at all. IIRC the sysadmins actually said they had less support tickets to deal with than before.

        Anti Commercial AI thingy

        CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

  • TCB13@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    So the Germany has been moving back and forth between Microsoft and Linux / open-source.

    When Munich decided to ditch many of its Windows installations in favor of Linux in 2003, it was considered a groundbreaking moment for open source software – it was proof that Linux could be used for large-scale government work. However, it looks like that dream didn’t quite pan out as expected. The German city has cleared a plan to put Windows 10 on roughly 29,000 city council PCs starting in 2020. There will also be a pilot where Munich runs Office 2016 in virtual machines. The plan was prompted by gripes about both the complexity of the current setup and compatibility headaches.

    Do you know what this smells like? Corruption and consulting companies with friends in the govt looking for ways to profit.

    What else can be more profitable for a consulting company than shifting the entire IT of a city or a country between two largely incompatible solutions? :)

    • Scrof@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      There’s a lot of high level corruption in Germany these days, so I wouldn’t be surprised.

    • fuego@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s possible, but in the past I think Germany stuck with Windows after Microsoft gave them a better deal or something.

      Heck, they may have even paid Germany to keep using Windows.

      • BCsven@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        That is how big companies operate. There was that huge lawsuit / fine of

        1.4 billion corruption

        A large corporation gave cash to companies and Govt officials to migrate to their software products.

    • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Do you know what this smells like? Corruption and consulting companies with friends in the govt looking for ways to profit.

      No it doesn’t. It smells like Microsoft has a monopoly on office software, and city employees are not tech enthusiasts. Anyone who used Office at home or in another job is going to complain when they have to learn a new software (regardless of which is “better” - for the average person, different is bad)

      Plus, every document they receive from outside is almost certainly formatted in Office, so if there isn’t 100% compatibility, people will again complain.

      Migrating an entire enterprise to FOSS software is not easy, and in government where leadership changes can be more regular, it’s not shocking to see the pendulum swing back and forth.

        • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Definitely could be both, but I’d posit that it would still happen regardless of corruption, just because they’re taking on the ambitious task of trying something new.

      • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Plus, every document they receive from outside is almost certainly formatted in Office, so if there isn’t 100% compatibility, people will again complain.

        That’s not like that with governments. Governments are huge clients, they can and should dictate file formats to suppliers.

        If the state of Santa Catarina in Brazil, with a GDP of 2/3 of that of Munich, could transition to Open Document Format almost 20 years ago, Munich can.

        • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          They definitely can dictate requirements, however that means that you’re now making your staff play document format police.

          I’m not saying it’s impossible, just that it’s an additional headache. If I were working in that office, I’d die a little inside each time I have to go back to a consultant/contractor/community member and say “can you please resubmit this, the formatting is broken when I open it in Libre Office”

          Yes, again, they have the authority to do this, and it is technically feasible, but it’s going to be a bad user experience for a long time until everyone is properly “retrained”. Especially if you’re working with partners outside of Germany who have their own document standards.

          I’m not saying this is a bad move, just that I understand why they might be inclined to jump back and forth.

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      IIRC the last time this made big headlines they tried to roll their own distro and it went very poorly longterm. The TL;DR version was they so thoroughly took the hardest route and made questionable choices that it was almost sure to fail, and then MS swooped in with some great offers and that was that. (This is entirely my dusty recollection of articles I read about it at the time, FWIW.)

      I don’t know whether it was malicious compliance because the folks doing the change didn’t actually want to do it or what, but that effort was as doomed as Firefly was when Fox aired it out of order and with a constantly shifting schedule.

      Hopefully they make some sensible choices this time around (at a minimum not trying to create a custom distro) and it goes better. It would be great to see this become a cascade effect.

      • TCB13@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        they so thoroughly took the hardest route and made questionable choices that it was almost sure to fail

        Typical government move going full malicious compliance while allowing “a few selected friends” from consulting companies to make a ton of money. They could’ve just picked Debian and rolled with it. Let’s face it, nobody develops desktop applications anymore most of the govt work is already done on custom built web platforms, any OS that can run a browser is good enough to address around 90% of the govt daily work.

        Meanwhile China is creating their own distro that will be successful for sure because they’ve plans to move the public sector and whatever private they influence to the thing.

    • BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      No.

      Things were very different “back then.” Linux was less friendly at the time. And non-Microsoft products still had noticeable gaps. Web browser office suites didn’t exist.

      The parts I remember reading were just that it took a long time for workers to get used to the system. Back then, home computers were uncommon for the average person. And what computer experience the average person did have was noticeably different from Linux.

      I did not see articles about tech issues such as viruses or data leaks or configuration issues. Please show any if you have them.

    • summerof69@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Because there’s no “Germany” in this movement. Different lands, different governments, different offices, etc.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      What else can be more profitable for a consulting company than shifting the entire IT of a city or a country between two largely incompatible solutions? :)

      See that’s the neat thing SH has (together with HH, HB and ST) its own IT consultancy. Public enterprise, not some public-private partnership, and 5300 staff a quite a bit more than what Munich’s IT department has.

      And yes of course Munich is corrupt what do you expect it’s Bavaria.

      • TCB13@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        So… it’s exactly what I said but with extra steps.

        A way to provide money to the friends and have underplayed govt workers without the benefits and the stability 😂

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Nah dataport doesn’t make profit, or at least it’s not paying out any to the states. It’s about as close to a ministry as you can get without being required to pay government wages and there’s not many in the industry who’d work for that. They don’t pay as much as FAANG or even SAP but among the wider industry it’s definitely competitive, especially if you don’t plan on job-hopping and dodging lay-offs.