4 ms·

so how... exactly does microsoft lobby the governments into paying them a truckload of money in perpetuity for something essentially free and libre? sure there

so how... exactly does microsoft lobby the governments into paying them a truckload of money in perpetuity for something essentially free and libre? sure there is consultancy involved in foss and IMO that is a better use of money because locals are being paid instead of a megacorp. still, why do you rely on "macros" ? why isnt cash being paid to developers in adding more missing features in libreoffice instead of microsoft?

netizen-936824 5y ago
I think you've hinted at a more beneficial model. This idea is something I've been tossing around for a bit as well. What if there was no proprietary code? What if every company that uses software has a team of devs? Not to build stuff just for that company, but to contribute to the open source projects that the company relies on. They would be able to handle the features they need entirely in house, and if multiple companies need the same or similar features this allows more resources to be put towards that thing FOSS software would be actively maintained but a massive network of the companies that use the software, instead of relying on the small teams or individuals for whom its a pet project I think this system would generate far more robust software and the ecosystem to support it
- 2Gkashmiri 5y ago
  yeah. I contribute to libreoffice with any bug i encounter during my daily work, i report it. If i had the dev chops, i would've fixed this myself. Now, if i were an organisation like the the german government. Why can't they hire local developers and fix immediate problems, push the fix and everyone is happy?
  - netizen-936824 5y ago
    That's exactly the idea! The government and companies generally have IT Dept's now, sometimes with a dev team. Those resources can be geared towards supporting and contributing to open source (that they use internally) instead of giving money to these corporations for shit support and "maybe we'll add the feature you want (but probably not, and we're increasing the cost BTW ^^)"
    - Matthias247 5y ago
      that's a theory. But then those develping departs might be very understaffed and get swamped with feature requests, which means end users might still not get what they want. That happens even for any central tools in the big tech companies, which likely have more resources to work on those. And there's the additional challenge of actually getting contributions landed upsream, which requires work from other maintainers.
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  What would you choose between being a Microsoft Employee or a German Government employee? One of them is 4x the compensation of the other one...
  - netizen-936824 5y ago
    You seem to be assuming that pay would not change along with everything else. If everyone is supporting FOSS with their own developers, which they can pay more wages to because they aren't shelling out to Microsoft and apple, then Microsoft won't have as much income with which to pay exorbitant salaries. Multiple parts of the system interact, dont assume nothing else changes with this massive shift (I'm not only talking about the German gov doing this, but all companies)
    - 908B64B197 5y ago
      > If everyone is supporting FOSS with their own developers, which they can pay more wages to because they aren't shelling out to Microsoft and apple, then Microsoft won't have as much income with which to pay exorbitant salaries. That would require a huge coordination effort. There's going to be several companies that want different features and have their own devs on payroll (at different rates). VS Microsoft that can just organize a meeting with the leads for Office and plan out the roadmap. Also, exorbitant is one way of seeing it, but does it hold when you consider the insane added value these devs bring to millions of businesses? > I'm not only talking about the German gov doing this, but all companies The other issue, specifically with government, is that salaries are capped to public servant scales. There's no way they can hire Microsoft or Google talent at these rates.
jollybean 5y ago
Windows and Linux are different products and the per-capita costs of Windows is trivial. Windows is about the cost of a single support call to IT, so if it's just that much easier to maintain, it's worth it. Maybe it is, maybe it's not, but the cost threshold is right there. It's the cost of a nice keyboard or mouse for gosh sakes. The cost really shouldn't be hugely part of the equation, I mean, you want to negotiate for it of course, but beyond that it's mostly not the cost.
- 2Gkashmiri 5y ago
  https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-poses-threat-to-germanys-digital-sovereignty-warns-study/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-poses-threat-to-germ... this says "In 2018, the central government had spent €73m ($80m) on Microsoft licenses, around €25m ($27.5m) over the forecast budget – and that was without the cost of providing German state governments with Microsoft software. As opposition politicians pointed out, the total amounts to hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money."
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    They would have spent similar amounts when hiring contractors for FOSS solutions, because governments work with big consulting agencies regardless of the software source. Red-Hat is hardly cheaper when playing at this level.
  - jollybean 5y ago
    They spend more on toilet paper. Also, imagine when their IT bill goes up by $100M because of additional support calls due to Linux oddities. 75M is not a lot for important productivity software that people use all day.
cryptodan 5y ago
It's the OEM that offers the contracts. When a company goes to HP or Dell they say we need 500 computers 10 servers and what can you offer us and here is our budget. The OEM comes back and says we will give you 500 computers and 10 servers for 15 million dollars and every 4 years you get refreshed with the latest hardware and operating system bundles for the desktop. For the 10 servers we have 24/7 support with on-site replacement of hardware and advanced maintenance. With in these deals we offer ms windows latest build and the latest office packages. That's how it's done. The government doesn't lobby Microsoft at all.
- netizen-936824 5y ago
  Sounds to me like people are paying out the ass for things that can be managed in house with a competent dev/IT shop. Instead let's make a one time hardware purchase, with warranty for parts, and handle the software in house with FOSS.

netizen-936824 5y ago

I think you've hinted at a more beneficial model. This idea is something I've been tossing around for a bit as well. What if there was no proprietary code? What if every company that uses software has a team of devs? Not to build stuff just for that company, but to contribute to the open source projects that the company relies on. They would be able to handle the features they need entirely in house, and if multiple companies need the same or similar features this allows more resources to be put towards that thing FOSS software would be actively maintained but a massive network of the companies that use the software, instead of relying on the small teams or individuals for whom its a pet project I think this system would generate far more robust software and the ecosystem to support it

2Gkashmiri 5y ago
yeah. I contribute to libreoffice with any bug i encounter during my daily work, i report it. If i had the dev chops, i would've fixed this myself. Now, if i were an organisation like the the german government. Why can't they hire local developers and fix immediate problems, push the fix and everyone is happy?
- netizen-936824 5y ago
  That's exactly the idea! The government and companies generally have IT Dept's now, sometimes with a dev team. Those resources can be geared towards supporting and contributing to open source (that they use internally) instead of giving money to these corporations for shit support and "maybe we'll add the feature you want (but probably not, and we're increasing the cost BTW ^^)"
  - Matthias247 5y ago
    that's a theory. But then those develping departs might be very understaffed and get swamped with feature requests, which means end users might still not get what they want. That happens even for any central tools in the big tech companies, which likely have more resources to work on those. And there's the additional challenge of actually getting contributions landed upsream, which requires work from other maintainers.
908B64B197 5y ago
What would you choose between being a Microsoft Employee or a German Government employee? One of them is 4x the compensation of the other one...
- netizen-936824 5y ago
  You seem to be assuming that pay would not change along with everything else. If everyone is supporting FOSS with their own developers, which they can pay more wages to because they aren't shelling out to Microsoft and apple, then Microsoft won't have as much income with which to pay exorbitant salaries. Multiple parts of the system interact, dont assume nothing else changes with this massive shift (I'm not only talking about the German gov doing this, but all companies)
  - 908B64B197 5y ago
    > If everyone is supporting FOSS with their own developers, which they can pay more wages to because they aren't shelling out to Microsoft and apple, then Microsoft won't have as much income with which to pay exorbitant salaries. That would require a huge coordination effort. There's going to be several companies that want different features and have their own devs on payroll (at different rates). VS Microsoft that can just organize a meeting with the leads for Office and plan out the roadmap. Also, exorbitant is one way of seeing it, but does it hold when you consider the insane added value these devs bring to millions of businesses? > I'm not only talking about the German gov doing this, but all companies The other issue, specifically with government, is that salaries are capped to public servant scales. There's no way they can hire Microsoft or Google talent at these rates.

jollybean 5y ago

Windows and Linux are different products and the per-capita costs of Windows is trivial. Windows is about the cost of a single support call to IT, so if it's just that much easier to maintain, it's worth it. Maybe it is, maybe it's not, but the cost threshold is right there. It's the cost of a nice keyboard or mouse for gosh sakes. The cost really shouldn't be hugely part of the equation, I mean, you want to negotiate for it of course, but beyond that it's mostly not the cost.

2Gkashmiri 5y ago
https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-poses-threat-to-germanys-digital-sovereignty-warns-study/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-poses-threat-to-germ... this says "In 2018, the central government had spent €73m ($80m) on Microsoft licenses, around €25m ($27.5m) over the forecast budget – and that was without the cost of providing German state governments with Microsoft software. As opposition politicians pointed out, the total amounts to hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money."
- pjmlp 5y ago
  They would have spent similar amounts when hiring contractors for FOSS solutions, because governments work with big consulting agencies regardless of the software source. Red-Hat is hardly cheaper when playing at this level.
- jollybean 5y ago
  They spend more on toilet paper. Also, imagine when their IT bill goes up by $100M because of additional support calls due to Linux oddities. 75M is not a lot for important productivity software that people use all day.

cryptodan 5y ago

It's the OEM that offers the contracts. When a company goes to HP or Dell they say we need 500 computers 10 servers and what can you offer us and here is our budget. The OEM comes back and says we will give you 500 computers and 10 servers for 15 million dollars and every 4 years you get refreshed with the latest hardware and operating system bundles for the desktop. For the 10 servers we have 24/7 support with on-site replacement of hardware and advanced maintenance. With in these deals we offer ms windows latest build and the latest office packages. That's how it's done. The government doesn't lobby Microsoft at all.

netizen-936824 5y ago
Sounds to me like people are paying out the ass for things that can be managed in house with a competent dev/IT shop. Instead let's make a one time hardware purchase, with warranty for parts, and handle the software in house with FOSS.