4 ms·

Europe (and the rest of the world!) really needs proper alternatives to Microsoft's cloud offerings!

jlpcsl 3y ago
We just need to start using what libre and opensource software is already available. That is what every public institutions should use if they are serious about privacy and sovereignty
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  On the contrary, we need to fund their improvement, and use them once they are ready
  - cesarb 3y ago
    > and use them once they are ready There's always some tiny little thing which is missing for someone. If you demand 100% completion before you can switch, you will never switch. > we need to fund their improvement, and use them once they are ready That would mean funding for a long time, without getting any tangible results (since you refuse to use it until it's "ready") until the very end. The end result would be that the funding is abandoned after a while, and you never switch.
  - prmoustache 3y ago
    There is no such thing as funding and wait for it to be ready. I once worked for a company that was building among other things a videoconference app. The quality of the product only really started to increase when employees were sent home during covid and they started using their own tool.
nullindividual 3y ago
Those tools are 25-30+ years old in the making, both client and server software. Making a true alternative would take an army of developers many years.
- sam_lowry_ 3y ago
  It's not about tools, tools are easy to build, and many great tools are already available. It is about workflows, traditions and proper training.
  - Tijdreiziger 3y ago
    I mean, if you could even find the capital in Europe, you could try to start a company to take on MS/Google, but what executive would ever choose it? ‘Nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft.’ (And MS/Google can just use their deep pockets to make an offer you can’t refuse, or to lobby against you, or both.)
  - nullindividual 3y ago
    The tools are decidedly _not_ easy to build. SharePoint is a massive, massive beast alone. And Exchange is another monster. It is unrealistic to play catch-up with Microsoft, let alone exceed their current pace of development. If tools were "easy", ReactOS would be beyond the NT4 era.
    - sam_lowry_ 3y ago
      Please understand me. I am not talking about replicas. Drupal is already the default CMS in EU institutions and it can replace Sharepoint and Microsoft Word, but this requires a massive change of workflows, breaking of habits and quite some training. git (yes, git) can be use by Publications Office to track recitals and publish directives. It's just a matter of concerted work together against the dominance of US IT companies. It will be hard. But possible. The first move is to ban Active Directory. Without it, the house of Microsoft cards will fall apart in a decade.
      - nullindividual 3y ago
        > Drupal is already the default CMS in EU institutions and it can replace Sharepoint and Microsoft Word Are you familiar with SharePoint? Drupal and SharePoint are not the same. Word, especially co-authoring, can't be replaced. LibreOffice/OpenOffice are not alternatives. > git (yes, git) This is unfortunately what engineers think an appropriate UX is for end users. It isn't. git is far too complex, too convoluted, and doesn't bring SharePoint's strong advantages for Office-related content. It isn't possible. Simply is not. Google demonstrates it isn't possible. > The first move is to ban Active Directory. Without it, the house of Microsoft cards will fall apart in a decade. AD is not required for M365.
thomaszander 3y ago
This is a bit of a simplification, one that indeed not many will disagree with. The wider problem is that when governments and (non-profit) organizations did create alternatives for Microsoft products, the governments themselves ended up showing they are corrupted and the internal rules quickly changed to stop allowing the competing (open source) offerings. A good example here is the Munich Linux desktop efforts a couple of decades ago. The actual workers were much happier, the sysadmins were ecstatic (much less work) and there wasn't really anyone that had problems with Openoffice and kmail at the time. Yet, the funding to companies supporting the features they wanted dried up. Requirements got written that disallowed upgrades to "dangerous" new open source releases and after some time they went back to Microsoft because problems were not getting solved. (duh!). So, sure, we'd need a set of alternatives. But what we really need is not the end-products. What we really need is more honest bureaucrats that actually work for the benefit of the people. And those I have not yet found.
- vmfunction 3y ago
  >The wider problem is that when governments and (non-profit) organizations did create alternatives for Microsoft products, the governments themselves ended up showing they are corrupted and the internal rules quickly changed to stop allowing the competing (open source) offerings. Not just government, also corporations. How many times, has superior product being ignore because it doesn't have some MS/Google/Oracle (fill in the blank). Current politics in the world does NOT support meritocracy. Doesn't matter if in gov or corporate.

We just need to start using what libre and opensource software is already available. That is what every public institutions should use if they are serious about privacy and sovereignty

ClumsyPilot 3y ago
On the contrary, we need to fund their improvement, and use them once they are ready
- cesarb 3y ago
  > and use them once they are ready There's always some tiny little thing which is missing for someone. If you demand 100% completion before you can switch, you will never switch. > we need to fund their improvement, and use them once they are ready That would mean funding for a long time, without getting any tangible results (since you refuse to use it until it's "ready") until the very end. The end result would be that the funding is abandoned after a while, and you never switch.
- prmoustache 3y ago
  There is no such thing as funding and wait for it to be ready. I once worked for a company that was building among other things a videoconference app. The quality of the product only really started to increase when employees were sent home during covid and they started using their own tool.

nullindividual 3y ago

Those tools are 25-30+ years old in the making, both client and server software. Making a true alternative would take an army of developers many years.

sam_lowry_ 3y ago
It's not about tools, tools are easy to build, and many great tools are already available. It is about workflows, traditions and proper training.
- Tijdreiziger 3y ago
  I mean, if you could even find the capital in Europe, you could try to start a company to take on MS/Google, but what executive would ever choose it? ‘Nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft.’ (And MS/Google can just use their deep pockets to make an offer you can’t refuse, or to lobby against you, or both.)
- nullindividual 3y ago
  The tools are decidedly _not_ easy to build. SharePoint is a massive, massive beast alone. And Exchange is another monster. It is unrealistic to play catch-up with Microsoft, let alone exceed their current pace of development. If tools were "easy", ReactOS would be beyond the NT4 era.
  - sam_lowry_ 3y ago
    Please understand me. I am not talking about replicas. Drupal is already the default CMS in EU institutions and it can replace Sharepoint and Microsoft Word, but this requires a massive change of workflows, breaking of habits and quite some training. git (yes, git) can be use by Publications Office to track recitals and publish directives. It's just a matter of concerted work together against the dominance of US IT companies. It will be hard. But possible. The first move is to ban Active Directory. Without it, the house of Microsoft cards will fall apart in a decade.
    - nullindividual 3y ago
      > Drupal is already the default CMS in EU institutions and it can replace Sharepoint and Microsoft Word Are you familiar with SharePoint? Drupal and SharePoint are not the same. Word, especially co-authoring, can't be replaced. LibreOffice/OpenOffice are not alternatives. > git (yes, git) This is unfortunately what engineers think an appropriate UX is for end users. It isn't. git is far too complex, too convoluted, and doesn't bring SharePoint's strong advantages for Office-related content. It isn't possible. Simply is not. Google demonstrates it isn't possible. > The first move is to ban Active Directory. Without it, the house of Microsoft cards will fall apart in a decade. AD is not required for M365.

thomaszander 3y ago

This is a bit of a simplification, one that indeed not many will disagree with. The wider problem is that when governments and (non-profit) organizations did create alternatives for Microsoft products, the governments themselves ended up showing they are corrupted and the internal rules quickly changed to stop allowing the competing (open source) offerings. A good example here is the Munich Linux desktop efforts a couple of decades ago. The actual workers were much happier, the sysadmins were ecstatic (much less work) and there wasn't really anyone that had problems with Openoffice and kmail at the time. Yet, the funding to companies supporting the features they wanted dried up. Requirements got written that disallowed upgrades to "dangerous" new open source releases and after some time they went back to Microsoft because problems were not getting solved. (duh!). So, sure, we'd need a set of alternatives. But what we really need is not the end-products. What we really need is more honest bureaucrats that actually work for the benefit of the people. And those I have not yet found.

vmfunction 3y ago
>The wider problem is that when governments and (non-profit) organizations did create alternatives for Microsoft products, the governments themselves ended up showing they are corrupted and the internal rules quickly changed to stop allowing the competing (open source) offerings. Not just government, also corporations. How many times, has superior product being ignore because it doesn't have some MS/Google/Oracle (fill in the blank). Current politics in the world does NOT support meritocracy. Doesn't matter if in gov or corporate.