6 ms·

Not true. Microsoft built a huge local branch there and as a result they've moved back into the dark abyss that is proprietary, non-free software.

macspoofing 7y ago
That is the conspiracy theory that some are telling themselves: that this is THE reason why Munich moved away. AS IF! Here's something more likely: Munich was ready to move back because the project was expensive to maintain, cumbersome in practice, killed productivity and was generally unpopular with the end-users, and Microsoft's new branch was just a cherry on top.
- commoner 7y ago
  Microsoft made major political moves after LiMux adoption began. They relocated their German headquarters to Munich, and a new mayor (Dieter Reiter) was elected after the Microsoft employees moved to Munich. Reiter initiated the reversal from LiMux to Windows, while the previous mayor (Christian Ude) refused to do so despite in-person appeals from Steve Ballmer. You might not like this line of argument, but it's not a "conspiracy theory" since it's well-supported. It's disingenuous to completely dismiss the role of political influence on a government decision. https://www.techrepublic.com/article/linux-in-munich-no-compelling-technical-reason-to-return-to-windows-says-citys-it-chief/ https://www.techrepublic.com/article/linux-in-munich-no-comp...
  - klingonopera 7y ago
    "There is the allegation that you as former head of the department of economy have made a deal with Microsoft to move its headquarter to Munich and in exchange you now deliver the return to their products. Does this connection exist?" - "No, definitely not." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBRh2G29NNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBRh2G29NNE
    - commoner 7y ago
      I did not allege that Reiter "made a deal with Microsoft". My point was that Microsoft gained political clout as a result of moving its headquarters to Munich, which influenced the city's decision to switch back from LiMux to Windows.
  - macspoofing 7y ago
    >You might not like this line of argument, but it's not a "conspiracy theory" since it's well-supported. But it isn't. You just asserted it. I don't dispute the facts at hand, but you can't just link those together and assert causality when there is no evidence for it . >It's disingenuous to completely dismiss the role of political influence on a government decision. I don't know what to do with that. There is no evidence and everyone disputes the corrupt link you assert. Not only that, there is an alternative explanation: the Linux deployment wasn't popular, killed productivity, and wasn't cheap to maintain. What you're doing is the definition of FUD.
    - commoner 7y ago
      Government decisions are often the result of more than one factor. I did not assert that Microsoft's move to Munich was the only reason for the city's change from LiMux to Windows. But, Microsoft did gain political influence in Munich by moving their headquarters there. Politics played a role in the city's decision, and there is sufficient press coverage to support this. See the TechRepublic article in my parent comment. You're arguing that the deployment of LiMux itself was the one and only reason for Munich's return to Windows, and dismissing the role of politics in Munich's decision as a "conspiracy theory". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
      - macspoofing 7y ago
        How is what you're doing not FUD? You have no evidence for anything you're stating. Zero. >Microsoft did gain political influence in Munich by moving their headquarters there. And did it actually influence the decision of Munich to change their infrastructure? And how much? 10% or 90%? Let's say it was a minor consideration, on the order of 1%, and the rest was the result of the failure of the LiMux deployment itself - see what I mean about needing evidence. You can't just say things because of your FEELS. Again, one thing we know, it wasn't a great deployment.
        commoner 7y ago
        Read the TechTarget article from my first comment, which you've overlooked the last two times I mentioned it: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/linux-in-munich-no-compelling-technical-reason-to-return-to-windows-says-citys-it-chief/ https://www.techrepublic.com/article/linux-in-munich-no-comp... There are additional sources describing politics as a significant factor in the city's decision: https://www.networkworld.com/article/3170104/munichs-great-linux-desktop-initiative-may-end.html https://www.networkworld.com/article/3170104/munichs-great-l... https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=https://www.computerbase.de/2017-02/limux-muenchen-abgeschafft https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=https:/... https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2FMuenchner-IT-Leiter-zu-LiMux-Es-gibt-keine-groesseren-technischen-Probleme-3644868.html https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https... Reiter based the decision to switch back from LiMux to Windows on a report commissioned from Accenture, "the leading Microsoft services provider for the ninth consecutive year" with an obvious conflict of interest: https://newsroom.accenture.com/news/accenture-and-avanade-named-microsoft-2016-alliance-partner-of-the-year.htm https://newsroom.accenture.com/news/accenture-and-avanade-na... https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-partner-claims-munich-should-switch-from-linux-to-windows-10/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-partner-claims-munic... I invite you to provide evidence for your assertion that the role of politics in Munich's decision is a "conspiracy theory" and "FUD".
oblio 7y ago
You may dislike it, but calling it a "dark abyss" is pushing it. Probably 95% of people in tech get a paycheck due to non-free software. And yes, Googlers & co., that includes you, even if the small lib you released is Open Source, the magic sauce powering Page Rank, Analytics, AdWords and such isn't.

macspoofing 7y ago

That is the conspiracy theory that some are telling themselves: that this is THE reason why Munich moved away. AS IF! Here's something more likely: Munich was ready to move back because the project was expensive to maintain, cumbersome in practice, killed productivity and was generally unpopular with the end-users, and Microsoft's new branch was just a cherry on top.

commoner 7y ago
Microsoft made major political moves after LiMux adoption began. They relocated their German headquarters to Munich, and a new mayor (Dieter Reiter) was elected after the Microsoft employees moved to Munich. Reiter initiated the reversal from LiMux to Windows, while the previous mayor (Christian Ude) refused to do so despite in-person appeals from Steve Ballmer. You might not like this line of argument, but it's not a "conspiracy theory" since it's well-supported. It's disingenuous to completely dismiss the role of political influence on a government decision. https://www.techrepublic.com/article/linux-in-munich-no-compelling-technical-reason-to-return-to-windows-says-citys-it-chief/ https://www.techrepublic.com/article/linux-in-munich-no-comp...
- klingonopera 7y ago
  "There is the allegation that you as former head of the department of economy have made a deal with Microsoft to move its headquarter to Munich and in exchange you now deliver the return to their products. Does this connection exist?" - "No, definitely not." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBRh2G29NNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBRh2G29NNE
  - commoner 7y ago
    I did not allege that Reiter "made a deal with Microsoft". My point was that Microsoft gained political clout as a result of moving its headquarters to Munich, which influenced the city's decision to switch back from LiMux to Windows.
- macspoofing 7y ago
  >You might not like this line of argument, but it's not a "conspiracy theory" since it's well-supported. But it isn't. You just asserted it. I don't dispute the facts at hand, but you can't just link those together and assert causality when there is no evidence for it . >It's disingenuous to completely dismiss the role of political influence on a government decision. I don't know what to do with that. There is no evidence and everyone disputes the corrupt link you assert. Not only that, there is an alternative explanation: the Linux deployment wasn't popular, killed productivity, and wasn't cheap to maintain. What you're doing is the definition of FUD.
  - commoner 7y ago
    Government decisions are often the result of more than one factor. I did not assert that Microsoft's move to Munich was the only reason for the city's change from LiMux to Windows. But, Microsoft did gain political influence in Munich by moving their headquarters there. Politics played a role in the city's decision, and there is sufficient press coverage to support this. See the TechRepublic article in my parent comment. You're arguing that the deployment of LiMux itself was the one and only reason for Munich's return to Windows, and dismissing the role of politics in Munich's decision as a "conspiracy theory". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
    - macspoofing 7y ago
      How is what you're doing not FUD? You have no evidence for anything you're stating. Zero. >Microsoft did gain political influence in Munich by moving their headquarters there. And did it actually influence the decision of Munich to change their infrastructure? And how much? 10% or 90%? Let's say it was a minor consideration, on the order of 1%, and the rest was the result of the failure of the LiMux deployment itself - see what I mean about needing evidence. You can't just say things because of your FEELS. Again, one thing we know, it wasn't a great deployment.
      - commoner 7y ago
        Read the TechTarget article from my first comment, which you've overlooked the last two times I mentioned it: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/linux-in-munich-no-compelling-technical-reason-to-return-to-windows-says-citys-it-chief/ https://www.techrepublic.com/article/linux-in-munich-no-comp... There are additional sources describing politics as a significant factor in the city's decision: https://www.networkworld.com/article/3170104/munichs-great-linux-desktop-initiative-may-end.html https://www.networkworld.com/article/3170104/munichs-great-l... https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=https://www.computerbase.de/2017-02/limux-muenchen-abgeschafft https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=https:/... https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2FMuenchner-IT-Leiter-zu-LiMux-Es-gibt-keine-groesseren-technischen-Probleme-3644868.html https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https... Reiter based the decision to switch back from LiMux to Windows on a report commissioned from Accenture, "the leading Microsoft services provider for the ninth consecutive year" with an obvious conflict of interest: https://newsroom.accenture.com/news/accenture-and-avanade-named-microsoft-2016-alliance-partner-of-the-year.htm https://newsroom.accenture.com/news/accenture-and-avanade-na... https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-partner-claims-munich-should-switch-from-linux-to-windows-10/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-partner-claims-munic... I invite you to provide evidence for your assertion that the role of politics in Munich's decision is a "conspiracy theory" and "FUD".

oblio 7y ago

You may dislike it, but calling it a "dark abyss" is pushing it. Probably 95% of people in tech get a paycheck due to non-free software. And yes, Googlers & co., that includes you, even if the small lib you released is Open Source, the magic sauce powering Page Rank, Analytics, AdWords and such isn't.