4 ms·

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-mun

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".

detaro 7y ago
To note is that accenture didn't even go as far as to recommend the complete switch back to Windows the city decided to do. EDIT: > role of politics Role of politics is a somewhat different claim than just "pressure/influence by Microsoft" (which for sure happened, but it's hard to gauge how large the influence was), and includes lots of other factors that are likely to have also played a role. The entire thing is quite murky and I think "it happened because X" is too easy whatever the X is.
macspoofing 7y ago
Unbelievable. You keep spreading FUD. Literal definition of FUD. Now it's Accenture who is secretly killing the project because they are in pocket of Microsoft. And why is Accenture involved? Because Munich commissioned their opinion. And why did Munich commission their opinion? Because they are in the pocket of Microsoft of course. And why is Munich in the pocket of Microsoft? Why, because Microsoft moved their German headquarters Munich - not for any business reasons - but for secret nefarious reasons. And where did the move it from? Why, from Unterschleißheim a city (suburb) approximately 16KM away!!!!!! Surely no corporation would ever want to move downtown to a major metropolis from a suburb into a bigger office complex. Let me repeat that: this nefarious move you keep using as an example, was a grand total of 16 km, from a suburb of Munich to Munich. AGAIN, the BIG picture - this deployment didn't turn out to be the success Munich had hoped it was going to be. They could limp along, sure, and I'm sure there are plenty of people who like it, especially the guy who runs the entire project, and the people who are ideological inclined against Microsoft, and the Green party... I mean Jesus, the only way they could get this LiMux thing to work was by maintaining Windows licenses for legacy software and interoperability, virtualizing Office because OpenOffice/LibreOffice sucks (and it does), and moving to Exchange for Calendar and Email. This is a chimera. It sucks. There were good reason to ditch Windows in the first place, and now there are good reasons to ditch this Linux experiment as well. That's the big picture. >I invite you to provide evidence for your assertion that the role of politics in Munich's decision is a "conspiracy theory" and "FUD". I invite you to provide evidence that your bias has not coloured your interpretation of events. Have fun proving a negative. (I read all the things you cited - it's the same kind of stuff - high on speculation, light on evidence).
- commoner 7y ago
  > Why, because Microsoft moved their German headquarters Munich - not for any business reasons - but for secret nefarious reasons. Here is where you are misinterpreting all of the above. I did not say there were any "secret nefarious reasons". All involved parties made the decision that would be most beneficial to them ("business reasons" in the case of Microsoft), which influenced Munich's reversal. Munich's switch to LiMux was an embarrassment to Microsoft, and one of the reasons for their move to Munich was to gain political clout by becoming a more important stakeholder to Munich. Generally speaking, companies have more influence on a city's decisions when they are actually located in the city, because they pay taxes to the city and have more employees living there. This isn't a "conspiracy theory", it's common sense. In summary: You: Munich switched back to Windows solely because there were issues with the LiMux deployment, and Windows software is superior to Linux software. Me: Munich switched back to Windows because there were issues with the LiMux deployment, and because Microsoft made itself more important to Munich by moving its headquarters to the city. We can agree to disagree.

detaro 7y ago

To note is that accenture didn't even go as far as to recommend the complete switch back to Windows the city decided to do. EDIT: > role of politics Role of politics is a somewhat different claim than just "pressure/influence by Microsoft" (which for sure happened, but it's hard to gauge how large the influence was), and includes lots of other factors that are likely to have also played a role. The entire thing is quite murky and I think "it happened because X" is too easy whatever the X is.

macspoofing 7y ago

Unbelievable. You keep spreading FUD. Literal definition of FUD. Now it's Accenture who is secretly killing the project because they are in pocket of Microsoft. And why is Accenture involved? Because Munich commissioned their opinion. And why did Munich commission their opinion? Because they are in the pocket of Microsoft of course. And why is Munich in the pocket of Microsoft? Why, because Microsoft moved their German headquarters Munich - not for any business reasons - but for secret nefarious reasons. And where did the move it from? Why, from Unterschleißheim a city (suburb) approximately 16KM away!!!!!! Surely no corporation would ever want to move downtown to a major metropolis from a suburb into a bigger office complex. Let me repeat that: this nefarious move you keep using as an example, was a grand total of 16 km, from a suburb of Munich to Munich. AGAIN, the BIG picture - this deployment didn't turn out to be the success Munich had hoped it was going to be. They could limp along, sure, and I'm sure there are plenty of people who like it, especially the guy who runs the entire project, and the people who are ideological inclined against Microsoft, and the Green party... I mean Jesus, the only way they could get this LiMux thing to work was by maintaining Windows licenses for legacy software and interoperability, virtualizing Office because OpenOffice/LibreOffice sucks (and it does), and moving to Exchange for Calendar and Email. This is a chimera. It sucks. There were good reason to ditch Windows in the first place, and now there are good reasons to ditch this Linux experiment as well. That's the big picture. >I invite you to provide evidence for your assertion that the role of politics in Munich's decision is a "conspiracy theory" and "FUD". I invite you to provide evidence that your bias has not coloured your interpretation of events. Have fun proving a negative. (I read all the things you cited - it's the same kind of stuff - high on speculation, light on evidence).

commoner 7y ago
> Why, because Microsoft moved their German headquarters Munich - not for any business reasons - but for secret nefarious reasons. Here is where you are misinterpreting all of the above. I did not say there were any "secret nefarious reasons". All involved parties made the decision that would be most beneficial to them ("business reasons" in the case of Microsoft), which influenced Munich's reversal. Munich's switch to LiMux was an embarrassment to Microsoft, and one of the reasons for their move to Munich was to gain political clout by becoming a more important stakeholder to Munich. Generally speaking, companies have more influence on a city's decisions when they are actually located in the city, because they pay taxes to the city and have more employees living there. This isn't a "conspiracy theory", it's common sense. In summary: You: Munich switched back to Windows solely because there were issues with the LiMux deployment, and Windows software is superior to Linux software. Me: Munich switched back to Windows because there were issues with the LiMux deployment, and because Microsoft made itself more important to Munich by moving its headquarters to the city. We can agree to disagree.