SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Microsoft could get the boot from the French government if a new recommendation from an official advisor is adopted.
DISIC (Direction interministérielle des systèmes d'information et de communication de l'État) has recommended that French authorities ditch Microsoft Office tools in favour of the Open Document Format (ODF). DISIC is responsible for harmonising and reducing the costs of all state computers, including government ministries, state and regional departments and local authorities, and sees ODF as the best way to make them all interoperable.
According to sources, an initial draft of the report envisaged outlawing Microsoft's Open XML altogether, although with some agencies using tools specifically developed for use with Open XML, DISIC relented.
However, the final version strongly encourages the phasing out of Microsoft's ware in favour of ODF.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2015, @02:28PM
You modded AC a troll? Not everyone has to be an F/OSS zealot.
There is nothing wrong with paying for software that meets your needs. You may not be a fan of <insert name of big software company you hate> but that doesn't make their customers trolls, or evil or stupid (as many F/OSS advocates like to state).
I bill by the hour, so not having to futz with software that doesn't really meet my needs costs me more than the price of software that doesn't require the extra efforts or that has all the features I need (implemented correctly and reliably). It also makes it cheaper for my clients.
I'm not knocking F/OSS. It does the job for millions and millions of people. That doesn't mean it meets everyone's needs.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2015, @03:01PM
And this is the problem with the "open source" mentality; it focuses on convenience rather than freedom. The four freedoms are essential for any software to be called free, and proprietary software certainly does not qualify. Maybe you do not care about your freedoms being violated, but the government and schools have absolutely no business providing corporate welfare or using software that discourages education and subjugates users.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2015, @12:17AM
this is the problem with the "[closed-]source" mentality; it focuses on convenience rather than freedom
That works for me now.
...and, of course, that "convenience" is short-term; the next release of the closed app and its proprietary formats will be incompatible with previous versions[1] and will require you to get back on the treadmill with your wallet out.
[1] ...and as tekk mentioned above, the old documents are incompatible with the new version of the proprietary app often enough to negate the "convenient" argument.
...and the FOSS app does a better job with those.
.
this is the [advantage of] the "open source" mentality; it focuses on [freedom rather than convenience]
That now works for me as well.
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2015, @12:37AM
Your AC here.
Maybe you do not care about your freedoms being violated ...
I'm paying for software and using it for what I need it for. I'm not giving up anything except money. Software is a tool for me and I use it to generate income for my family. The "if you're not using F/OSS you're a pawn in the software industry's game and you have traded your soul for a license to use their software" mentality is too drama queen for me. I buy something that meets my needs. It works and meets my needs. Period. My time has value, just like yours does. I choose to spend less of it twiddling with something that comes close to getting the job done, but not quite, and more of it either working billable hours or spending it with my family. It may only save me an hour or two a week, but that's enough to watch a movie on the couch.
... but the government and schools have absolutely no business providing corporate welfare or using software that discourages education and subjugates users.
If you're saying that governments - and by extension any federal, state or local agencies that use taxpayer dollars to fund their operation - should always try to use products that are lower cost (as long as their needs are met) then I agree with you. The cost of ownership - including support over the expected lifetime of the product - should be the lowest as long as it meets their actual needs and not some "ooh, and one person needs xyz so we all have to have Product ABC!" bullshit (the same kind of crap that employers use to sneak N1B visa workers into the country). If a F/OSS product - and its support - meet their requirements then the F/OSS products should be used.
Total cost of ownership can be as fuzzy as Hollywood accounting, but it should be easy to calculate "if we switch to this F/OSS product, and have to spend $X millions to retrain everyone, will it still save us $ millions in the long run?". The answer will often be "Yes!" and so that effort should be made. Unfortunately that type of long-term commitment isn't a priority in any taxpayer-funded situation.
But when it comes to me, I'm allowed to trade my money for time with my family. And if you think that means I'm giving up freedoms, well, you and I have very different priorities.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @08:34AM
Remember the introduction of ribbons?
How about windows 8?
The argument that FOSS TCO is more expensive because everyone is used to Windows and would otherwise require training is retarded. LibreOffice Writer is more like old versions of Word than current versions of Word is.
In many cases FOSS is cheaper because it's free and the amount of work integrating it isn't significantly higher than integrating any updated Microsoft product. Where FOSS really shines though is savings over the long run.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Justin Case on Saturday July 25 2015, @04:26PM
> all the features I need (implemented correctly and reliably)
If you're mentioning reliable software in the same breath as Microsoft, well, all I can say is you and I inhabit different universes. Who is President over there? Has Greece paid back their loans yet?
MS intentionally makes it so MS Office files can't be opened in other versions of MS Office, just to drive the upgrade churn. How is that "reliable"?
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Saturday July 25 2015, @05:33PM
Of 3 computers running 2 different versions of windows that I have, I was having problems just moving the same .doc files between them, all on Different ages of MS Office. Once I'd loaded OO on all three I've never had any problem opening or working with any text document nor any spreadsheet document. Nor any formatting problems even with MS Office documents. And no problems opening any cloud file nor any file sent to me via email. With MS Office I often had problems opening and working with cloud files and file sent via email.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2015, @11:27AM
It's lucky you never have to open files with references or cross-references [documentfoundation.org].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2015, @11:33PM
I bill by the hour, so not having to futz with software that doesn't really meet my needs costs me more than the price of software that doesn't require the extra efforts or that has all the features I need (implemented correctly and reliably). It also makes it cheaper for my clients.
This also describes my use of an office suite. And explains why I (have to [1]) use the free one instead of the ms version.
[1] Depends on which features you need, YMMV etc