Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Lower Saxony Moves 12,000 Computers to Linux

On 2006-06-02, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted something concerning:
> __/ [ Sinister Midget ] on Friday 02 June 2006 02:02 \__
>
>> On 2006-06-01, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted
>> something concerning:
>>> On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 18:42:10 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tax authorities in Lower Saxony switch to Linux
>>>> 
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>| According to a press release, 12,000 computers are affected. Since the
>>>>| end of April, all tax authorities have been involved in migration. By
>>>>| the end of September 2006, the desktop systems are all to be running on
>>>>| Linux except for telecommuters and servers.
>>>> `----
>>>> 
>>>>                         http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/73772
>>>
>>> I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
>>>
>>> We keep hearing about all these *PLANS* to migrate to linux, and *in
>>> process* moves to linux.  We almost never (with very few exceptions) hear
>>> about them once complete.  One would think that pulling off such a feat
>>> would be bragging rights, and you would want to publish your metrics about
>>> how much money you've saved.... but no.  Silence.
>> 
>> I've said this before and I'll say it again.
>> 
>> They're done. They're working. What's to talk about?
>> 
>> We heard about a mass migration for Godaddy's parked sites not long
>> ago. Why don't we hear more? What happened? Are those domains sitting
>> there, doing nothing, any better off than they were?
>
>
> Financially, yes. Microsoft *paid* for the migration, which subverted
> Netscraft figures, making them deceiving. I call it bribery.

But are the domains that are just sitting around any more stable? Are
they more productive? Are they more secure, or faster, or do they
provide easier access? Are they serving customers better?

That's the type of thing Erik expects everybody who switches to linux
to send to the press.

>> What happens to all of theose companies that switch over from something
>> to Windwoes? How come they aren't broadcasting the status every day*
>> thereafter?
>> 
>> If they're /staying/ with it, what's the point of
>> 
>> * Some, in part, because they learn their lessons quickly and dump
>> Winders. But that's not always the case.
>
>
> Always remember:
>
> "Business X, which we previously reported was moving to Linux, completes
> migration successfully" does not make a good headline in a newspaper or even
> a Web site. Who gives a fsck? Sure. They migrated, it works. Done deal. No
> press release is needed.

That's my point. That they're /going/ to switch is what usually
generates the coverage. The argument from Erik should be with the press
that doesn't follow up, not with the company that did the switching.

In the case of Microsoft, they're a company and they have an interest
in making things appear their empire isn't crumbling. So they'll go out
of their way to buy the switchover of a bunch of domains that aren't
even doing anything more providing surfers an alternate means to access
a site. Or to buy out an advertising agency (recalling the "I Switched"
cmapaign) that has an account with them as part of the deal for them
handling the account.

-- 
The computer can't tell you the emotional story. It can give
you the exact mathematical design, but what's missing is the
eyebrows.
  -- Frank Zappa, on synthesized music

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index