14 ms·

Thats why every smart person and institution should insist on using ončy completely free and open documents formats (like OpenDocument Format for office documen

Thats why every smart person and institution should insist on using ončy completely free and open documents formats (like OpenDocument Format for office documents), protocols and standards. So that the chance of getting trapped into vendor locking is greatly reduced.

troupo 3y ago
You will get locked in to the one/two vendors that can make those free and open document formats and protocols work, interoperate, and integrate with all the processes and requirements of a government. "Free and open" is not a silver bullet. Neither is Microsoft, but Microsoft has been providing government services for decades, and they know the ins and outs, the requirements, the policies, the access levels and a billion other details. None of that exists in "free and open". I wouldn't be surprised if just resolving the complex web of Active Directories in a small government department will make anyone mad.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  The fact that Active Directory is asinine isn't a slight against free software. Pretty much every reason I can imagine a government picking Microsoft has to do with prior contracts and integration. > You will get locked in to the one/two vendors that can make those free and open document formats and protocols work You don't seem to understand what the phrase "locked-in" means. A document format that is open and documented is not lock-in at all. It's the opposite - it enables people to create competing and integrated solutions without licensing proprietary software. Better yet, it incentives companies like Microsoft and Google to support something other than their own document format if they want to be competitive. An effective democracy cannot have a government that only supports customers of a product. "Locked-in" are the poor saps that license Microsoft software to control their battleships, their SAM sites, their CIWS and their TACANs. Nobody is ever going to disrupt their dominance even if Active Directory is the worst option available on the market. The lack of meaningful competition and standardization literally costs lives in some industries. It's why every modernized military is backed by a government that strictly drafts and defines it's demands for competing contractors.
  - troupo 3y ago
    > You don't seem to understand what the phrase "locked-in" means. A document format that is open and documented is not lock-in at all. An open document format in the context of a government is only as good as the integrations made with these formats. What you seem to not understand is why the "poor saps" are locked into Google, Oracle etc. Because OSS is incapable of understanding that a format or a protocol on their own are worth nothing

troupo 3y ago

You will get locked in to the one/two vendors that can make those free and open document formats and protocols work, interoperate, and integrate with all the processes and requirements of a government. "Free and open" is not a silver bullet. Neither is Microsoft, but Microsoft has been providing government services for decades, and they know the ins and outs, the requirements, the policies, the access levels and a billion other details. None of that exists in "free and open". I wouldn't be surprised if just resolving the complex web of Active Directories in a small government department will make anyone mad.

smoldesu 3y ago
The fact that Active Directory is asinine isn't a slight against free software. Pretty much every reason I can imagine a government picking Microsoft has to do with prior contracts and integration. > You will get locked in to the one/two vendors that can make those free and open document formats and protocols work You don't seem to understand what the phrase "locked-in" means. A document format that is open and documented is not lock-in at all. It's the opposite - it enables people to create competing and integrated solutions without licensing proprietary software. Better yet, it incentives companies like Microsoft and Google to support something other than their own document format if they want to be competitive. An effective democracy cannot have a government that only supports customers of a product. "Locked-in" are the poor saps that license Microsoft software to control their battleships, their SAM sites, their CIWS and their TACANs. Nobody is ever going to disrupt their dominance even if Active Directory is the worst option available on the market. The lack of meaningful competition and standardization literally costs lives in some industries. It's why every modernized military is backed by a government that strictly drafts and defines it's demands for competing contractors.
- troupo 3y ago
  > You don't seem to understand what the phrase "locked-in" means. A document format that is open and documented is not lock-in at all. An open document format in the context of a government is only as good as the integrations made with these formats. What you seem to not understand is why the "poor saps" are locked into Google, Oracle etc. Because OSS is incapable of understanding that a format or a protocol on their own are worth nothing