3 ms·
It seems like people agree that EU alternatives are nice and that open source software is great... but even in software development the people making the choice
by KronisLV 1y ago
It seems like people agree that EU alternatives are nice and that open source software is great... but even in software development the people making the choices still opt for databases like Oracle or SQL Server and the large US-centric cloud providers, or even communication apps like Teams/Slack instead of just self-hosting Mattermost/Zulip/whatever.
I don't think anyone is taking this seriously enough.
- BLKNSLVR 1y agoNo one listens to the technical people that espouse the alternatives, partially due to the mainly-impenetrable language difference: business vs technical. Management would rather depend on "Microsoft" than "that employee that talks a lot without saying anything useful / understandable". That's a huge bridge to cross. Even under the mad king, I think most Management would prefer to remain dependent on Microsoft and go out of their way to avoid the ire of the The Kingdom of Trumpistan than to migrate their "everything computer" to a lesser known, lesser proven entity.
- pas 1y agoit's not a technical question simply. this is a business/operations risk management question. compliance, legal liability, BCP, regulatory environment flux, and so on. the case of the ICC obviously shows how little they cared about these things. MS closed the account? where are the offsite/independent backups? etc.
- pas 1y agosome do some don't. obviously most IT/software/tech businesses - especially weighted by capital, impact, influence, pedigree, and other factors of visibility and sales pushiness - are US based, so there's no point in caring too much about picking non-US vendors. and many European businesses are targeting the US market, so again not much they can do to escape the influence of Uncle Trump.