The quite famous FOSS developer Poul-Henning Kamp (aka PHK) has posted his feedback to the EU regarding European Open Digital Ecosystems [Intro in Danish, article in English] and their call for evidence. In it he brings their attention to open standards in points 2 and 3:
At the most fundamental level, the EU has three options:
1. Pick and bless a set of winners, consisting of:
a) Operating system, portable to any reasonable computer architecture.
b) Text-processing, suitable for tasks up to a book.
c) Spreadsheet
d) Email client.
e) Web Browser
f) Accounting software, suitable for small organizations.and fund organizations to maintain, develop and support the software for the future as open source, turning that software into infrastructure like water, power and electricity, free for all, individuals, startups and established companies alike, to use and benefit from.
2. Continuously develop/pick, bless and meticulously enforce open standards of interoperability, and then "let the competition loose".
3. Both. By providing a free baseline and de-facto reference implementations for the open standards, "the market" will be free to innovate, improve and compete, but cannot (re)create walled gardens.
Indeed, if the protocols and file formats are not publicly documented, freely available, and royalty-free, then what benefit would there be to implement them, FOSS or not?
There is an unreproducable javascript link on the EC page which goes to a relevant PDF document. It is labeled, "Call for evidence - Ares(2026)69111". It is worth checking before sending in feedback. Although English is the main language, the other official languages of EU member states can be used. The deadline for feedback is 03 February 2026.
Previously:
(2025) Why People Keep Flocking to Linux in 2025 (and It's Not Just to Escape Windows)
(2025) Europe's Plan to Ditch US Tech Giants is Built on Open Source - and It's Gaining Steam
(2025) Euro Techies Call for Sovereign Fund to Escape US Dependency
(2025) Petition on EU Linux Operating System in Public Administrations
« A 2,000-Year-Old Fingerprint May Solve Mystery of Scandinavia's Oldest Wooden Boat | A Sit-Stand Ratio ‘Sweet Spot’ May Boost Office Productivity »
Related Stories
The European Parliament's petition service is hosting Petition No 0729/2024 which is on the implementation of an EU-Linux operating system in public administrations across all EU countries.
[Editor's Note: The link works in some browsers but not in others.]
The petitioner calls for the European Union to actively develop and implement a Linux-based operating system, termed 'EU-Linux', across public administrations in all EU Member States. This initiative aims to reduce dependency on Microsoft products, ensuring compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and promoting transparency, sustainability, and digital sovereignty within the EU. The petitioner emphasizes the importance of using open-source alternatives to Microsoft 365, such as LibreOffice and Nextcloud, and suggests the adoption of the E/OS mobile operating system for government devices. The petitioner also highlights the potential for job creation in the IT sector through this initiative.
What do soylentils see as the advantages or disadvantages of Yet Another Distro? Would the EU be better off throwing its weight behind further development of an existing independent distro or two? Which national or regional initiatives already exist?
Previously:
(2023) Open Source Bodies Say to EU that Cyber Resilience Act Could Have 'Chilling Effect' on Software
Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
A group of technology companies and lobbyists want the European Commission (EC) to take action to reduce the region's reliance on foreign-owned digital services and infrastructure.
In an open letter to EC President Ursula von der Leyen and Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty Henna Virkkunen, the group of nearly 100 organizations proposed the creation of a sovereign infrastructure fund to invest in key technology and lessen dependence on US corporations.
The letter points to recent events, including the farcical Munich Security Conference, as a sign of "the stark geopolitical reality Europe is now facing," and says that building strategic autonomy in key sectors is now an urgent imperative for European countries.
Signatories include aerospace giant Airbus, France's Dassault Systèmes, European cloud operator OVHcloud, chip designer SiPearl, open source biz Nextcloud, and a host of others including organizations such as the European Startup Network.
OVHcloud said the group was calling "for a collective industrial policy strategy to strengthen Europe's competitiveness and strategic autonomy. We are convinced this is the premise of what we hope will be a larger movement of the entire ecosystem."
Proposals include the sovereign infrastructure fund, which would be able to support public investment, especially in capital-intensive sectors like semiconductors, with "significant additional commitment of funds allocated and/or underwritten" by the European Investment Bank (EIB) and national public funding bodies.
It also suggests there should be a formal requirement for the public sector to "buy European" and source their IT requirements from European-led and assembled solutions, while recognizing that these may involve complex supply chains with foreign components.
One topic dominated the recent 2025 OpenInfra Summit Europe, and it wasn't AI:
Unlike any tech conference I've attended in the last few years, the top issue at the 2025 OpenInfra Summit Europe at the École Polytechnique Paris was not AI. Shocking, I know. Indeed, OpenInfra Foundation general manager Thierry Carrez commented, "Did you notice what I didn't talk about in my keynote? I made no mention of AI." But one issue that did appear -- and would show up over and over again in the keynotes, the halls, and the vendor booths -- was digital sovereignty.
Digital sovereignty is the ability of a country, organization, or individual to control its own digital infrastructure, technologies, data, and online processes without undue external dependency on foreign entities or large technology companies. In other words, Europeans are tired of relying on what they see as increasingly unreliable American companies and the US government.
Carrez explained: "We've seen old alliances between the US and the EU being questioned or leveraged for immediate gains. We have seen the very terms of exchange of goods changing almost every day. And as a response to that, in Europe, we're moving to digital sovereignty." That shift, in turn, means open-source software.
"The world needs sovereign, high-performance and sustainable infrastructure," continued Carrez, "that remains interoperable and secure, while collaborating tightly with AI, containers and trusted execution environments. Open infrastructure allows nations and organizations to maintain control over their applications, their data, and their destiny while benefiting from global collaboration."
Carrez thinks a better word for what Europe wants is not isolation from the US: "What we're really looking for is resilience. What we want for our countries, for our companies, for ourselves, is resilience. Resilience in the face of unforeseen events in a fast-changing world. Open source," he concluded, "allows us to be sovereign without being isolated."
[...] To make life easier for users -- and to turn a profit, naturally -- many European companies are now offering technology programs to help users achieve digital sovereignty. These programs include Deutsche Telekom, with its Open Telekom Cloud, and OVH, STACKIT, and VanillaCore. Each of these companies relies on OpenStack to power its European-based cloud offerings for individuals, companies, and governments. In addition, other European open-source-based tech businesses, such as SUSE and NextCloud, offer digital sovereignty solutions using other programs.
By my count, Linux has over 11% of the desktop market. Here's how I got that number - and why people are making the leap:
My colleague Jack Wallen and I have been telling you for a while now that you should switch from Windows to the Linux desktop. Sounds like some of you have been listening.
The proof of the pudding comes from various sources. First, with Windows 10 nearing the end of its supported life, we told you to consider switching from Windows to Linux Mint or another Windows-like Linux distribution. What do we find now?
Zorin OS, an excellent Linux desktop, reports that its latest release, "Zorin OS 18 has amassed 1 million downloads in just over a month since its release." What makes it especially interesting is that over "78% of these downloads came from Windows" users.
[...] Many have already been making the leap. By May 2025, StatCounter data showed the Linux desktop had grown from a minute 1.5% global desktop share in 2020 to above 4% in 2024, and was at a new American high of above 5% by 2025.
In StatCounter's latest US numbers, which cover through October, Linux shows up as only 3.49%. But if you look closer, "unknown" accounts for 4.21%. Allow me to make an educated guess here: I suspect those unknown desktops are actually running Linux. What else could it be? FreeBSD? Unix? OS/2? Unlikely.
In addition, ChromeOS comes in at 3.67%, which strikes me as much too low. Leaving that aside, ChromeOS is a Linux variant. It just uses the Chrome web browser for its interface rather than KDE Plasma, Cinnamon, or another Linux desktop environment. Put all these together, and you get a Linux desktop market share of 11.37%. Now we're talking.
If you want to look at the broader world of end-user operating systems, including phones and tablets, Linux comes out even better. In the US, where we love our Apple iPhones, Android -- yes, another Linux distro -- boasts 41.71% of the market share, according to StatCounter's latest numbers. Globally, however, Android rules with 72.55% of the market.
Associate professor, David Eaves, writes about the essential role of the commodification of services in digital sovereignty. The questions to ask on the way to digital sovereignty are not as much about owning the stack but about the ability to move workloads. In other words, open standards for protocols, file formats, and more are the prerequisites. The same applies to the software supply chain. However, as we recently discussed here, PHK recently pointed out that Free and Open Source reference implementations would be of great benefit. Associate professor Eaves writes:
There is growing and valid concern among policymakers about tech sovereignty and cloud infrastructure. A handful of American hyperscalers — AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud — control the digital substrate on which modern economies run. This concentration is compounded by a US government increasingly willing to wield its digital industries as leverage. As French President Emmanuel Macron quipped: "There is no such thing as happy vassalage."
While some countries appear ready to concede market dominance in exchange for improved trade relations, others are exploring massive investments in public sector alternatives to the hyperscalers, advocating that billions, and possibly many many billions, be spent to on sovereign stack plans, and/or positioning local telecoms as alternatives to the hyperscalers.
Ironically, both strategies may increase dependency, limit government agency and increase economic and geopolitical risks — the very problems sovereignty seeks to solve. As Mike Bracken and I wrote earlier this year: "Domination by a local champion, free to extract rents, may be a path to greater autonomy, but it is unlikely to lead to increased competitiveness or greater global influence."
Any realistic path to increased agency will be expensive and take years. To be sustainable, it must focus on commoditizing existing solutions through interoperability and de facto standards that will broaden the market (and enable effective) national champions. This should be our north star and direction of travel. The metric for success should focus on making it as simple as possible to move data and applications across suppliers. Critically, this cannot be achieved by regulation alone, it will also require deft procurement and a willingness to accept de facto as opposed to ideal standards. The good news is governments have done this before. However, to succeed, it will require building the capacity to become market shapers and not market takers — thinking like electricity grids and railway gauges, not digital empires .
The essential role of commodities has been widely known and acknowledged for decades. We are in this situation because key companies and/or monopolies saw that long ago and were allowed to fight so hard all this time against ICT remaining as commodities. Sadly, the discussion about commodification probably peaked in the years just after the infamous Halloween Documents, particularly the first one. Eric S Raymond, author of The Cathedral and the Bazaar and early FOSS developer, published these leaked documents which covered potential strategies relating to M$ fight against free and open source software and, in particular, against Linux back in 1998. In retrospect these documents have turned out to be blueprints, used against FOSS and open standards by other companies as well.
Previously:
(2026) Sorry, Eh
(2026) Poul-Henning Kamp's Feedback to the EU on Digital Sovereignty
(2026) A Post-American, Enshittification-Resistant Internet
(2025) This German State Decides to Save €15 Million Each Year By Kicking Out Microsoft for Open Source
(2025) Why People Keep Flocking to Linux in 2025 (and It's Not Just to Escape Windows)
(2025) Microsoft Can't Guarantee Data Sovereignty – OVHcloud Says 'We Told You So'
(2014) US Offering Cash For Pro-TAFTA/TTIP Propaganda
(Score: 2) by Dr Spin on Tuesday January 13, @05:20PM (5 children)
^^^^^ A thousand time, THIS ^^^^^
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 4, Touché) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 13, @06:09PM (4 children)
Just imagine: funding FOSS with 1/2 the money paid to M$...
Of course, a large portion of the M$ fees are for "handholding" - ( empty ) assurances from a big company that everything will be alright...
🌻🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 13, @06:13PM (3 children)
> Just imagine: funding FOSS with 1/2 the money paid to M$...
Or take that 1/2 and use 1/4 for FOSS developers and 1/4 for hookers and blow.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 13, @06:35PM (2 children)
> 1/4 for hookers and blow.
You mean: business as usual in the contracts selection department?
🌻🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 13, @06:52PM (1 child)
> You mean: business as usual in the contracts selection department?
Yes, that would be FOSS working with the system as it is, wouldn't it?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday January 14, @01:57PM
>Yes, that would be FOSS working with the system as it is, wouldn't it?
I guess the difficulty is in re-training the hookers and blow acquisition agents to work with developer support contracts instead of shrink-wrap license delivery... not sure they can handle something that complex.
🌻🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 13, @05:30PM (1 child)
There should be a closing BLOCKQUOTE element just before the paragraph starting with "Indeed"
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday January 13, @08:40PM
Thanks - added and updated.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Tuesday January 13, @05:35PM (4 children)
Maybe they could start with chromebooks and migrate off slowly. I figure that would cover everything except the accounting software to start. Start with that, set up one of the free google-docs-alike competitors on a country-hosted server, and keep vectoring towards a completely free solution?
(Score: 2) by canopic jug on Tuesday January 13, @05:49PM (2 children)
TIL that ChromiumOS [wikipedia.org] is completely different from ChromeOS [gentoo.org].
However, the general premise of building something from Gentoo or another foundational distro like Arch makes a lot of sense. With the right staffing the EU member states could quickly have their own collective distro up and running. Translation and localization would take time and effort and have to be funded as well. The gotcha with a project like that is that there are so few people any more with basic computer skills that enticing them into a government job might be quite difficult unless they are patriotic enough. Even then you still want to reach those few people that are skilled not the subset of people willing (for whatever reasons) to take a government job.
Then there is also the problem of vetting the new staff to ensure that the standard Redmond practice of deploying moles does not happen.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Tuesday January 13, @06:14PM (1 child)
[Advertisement at the end]
Maybe the government could provide computer education and skills, as a cost of running the government. You know, like a "paid internship," or maybe just "job training," like they do for the armed forces. Too much hassle? Then they'll buy the skills from private (presumably local) contractors.
Going off the FAANG grid is going to take some money, but I suspect it's just the cost of moving to a nationally self-reliant information infrastructure. But it doesn't have to happen all at once, at thanks to (at least) Google's offerings being nearly all web-based, separable, and affordable.
[Semi-advertisement]
While I'm not casting Google as an evil overlord, they also have a special half-price deal which includes a crapload of "Pro" AI access [google.com], 2TB for the year, and all of it is sharable to 5 people, but it expires Jan 14 so if you want it, jump on it now. You may not have access to it from one of your Google accounts (if it's part of a family plan, for example), but may from a different one, so try a couple of your accounts.
I would normally *never* pitch for a specific product without going into depth on which features I like about it (I've already gotten benefits from the "Deep Research" Gemini feature), but this one is expiring pretty much right away and at the price it's worth it just to experiment with the whole suite. And I really suspect they're slashing the price on this now to jumpstart making them the AI platform of choice, because the pricing feels *very* loss-leader-ish for what it offers.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Tuesday January 13, @11:29PM
Sorry, I think it expires Jan 15.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Dr Spin on Wednesday January 14, @07:29AM
I think you have mis-understood the concept/proposal:
The idea is that the EU (ie a government covering the European continent all (significant) European Countries (each with a different language) - imagine all of North and South America) - yes,we do have one already - funds FOSS to create a distro which they all agree to use so as to ensure interoperability. And it is free to anyone who wants it, but with well funded professional maintenance and support for the specific requirements of all EC countries.
There is no reason for this to be based on any existing distro - although it could be.
After this decision has been taken, any PC manufacturer who does not support it sells no computers in Europe because European users are going to want at home what they use at work, and what they use at work has to be compatible with the government they pay tax to.
The entire thing is not for profit although the programmers get paid obviously.
Please NO AI because obviously there is no way to have any privacy/security in the face of AI. if you want AI on your machine, "do it yourself" ie YOU bear the risk which is unquantifiable and immense.
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday January 13, @05:51PM (3 children)
How about a more modern architecture to install software.
I have not used b,c,d, or f natively in ... decades maybe.
You need a working (FOSS) OS and a working (FOSS) browser and a way to run docker. Now if you want to run insane workloads you need insane hardware but if you want to run office software anything raspi or better is OK up to and including docker installed on the same laptop thats running the browser. Yes about 99% of the internet insists you can only run Docker on Ubuntu but it works fine on windows I have seen it done and its not just a WSL hack (supposedly)
Then you hit up https://docs.linuxserver.io/images/docker-libreoffice/ [linuxserver.io]
And connect your web browser to https localhost:3001 or wtf.com:3001 raspi.local:3001 or whatever and you're "more or less" done. You gonna want to bind a directory thats permanent and backed up to /config in your OO container.
Note there is a raging debate among users if thats the "right" way to do it or below is the "right" way to do it.
https://docs.linuxserver.io/images/docker-webtop/ [linuxserver.io] "desktop linux in a container". Better pay attention to your tags. I like alpine-i3 and I like ubuntu-xfce. Now if you install proot app onlyoffice (not really OO but pretty good) you "may" have a better system than the above. Personally I disagree but whatever.
https://docs.linuxserver.io/images/docker-code-server/ [linuxserver.io] is kind of shit just install a webtop and run vscode on the webtop as a proot permanent(ish) software install (the thing thats "impossible" under docker but works anyway, long interesting story)
The conversion from KASM or whatever it was to Selkies about a year ago was VERY exciting but thats all in the rear view mirror now it "just works". And docker being what it is just lock your container to a specific old version using the tag its not a big deal if you're still mad about the Selkies conversion.
I like the freecad container, the calibre container, transmission container, inkscape, kicad, a couple others. I'd suggest run your own netbox, node-red, netboot-xyz, audiobookshelf, home automation (home assistant and music assistant) etc.
I've never exposed any of these to "the internet" although I know people who do who are "happy" about it. I VPN into systems running and accessible only from RFC1918 addresses. Also I use "real" K8S not ghetto docker on a windows laptop or whatever. I like my CEPH storage like anyone else would.
I use this architecture for work and at home, which at least makes it consistent. Most of the world I am in uses google docs or office 359 or whatever in a browser instead of OO but I keep the above around. Its kind of like "KASM for lazy people" if I had to make a slogan. I've never personally had any issue developing in a browser. It helps that my cluster is ENORMOUS compared to any laptop that doesn't require a forklift.
Anyway the architecture they seem to propose would be cutting edge in 2005. Legal/Government is always so far behind the times.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 13, @06:13PM (2 children)
What they really need is an IT staff who can:
A) setup and maintain these configurations on their machines for them
and
B) hold their hand and tell them, again, which icon to click to find that document they saved last week.
Staff costs money, and for every X headcount of users, they will need Y headcount of IT staff.
Unfortunately, every time you make a change to the official configuration, that Y becomes Y * 4 until everybody settles down and forgets they used to do it differently.
🌻🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Disagree) by VLM on Wednesday January 14, @01:04PM (1 child)
Yeah I'd agree but consider a reproducible run-everywhere container would make life easier on whomever is running it.
The euros could take what exists for running OO or similar in a container, then euro the heck out of it I18N to the max, add the usual euro big brother is watching you support, etc.
There's probably some feather bedding going on where one dude could just do it given how far along existing projects are, but they're trying to set up a whole bureaucracy to "support" that one dude doing the actual work which sounds very EU.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday January 14, @01:52PM
> a reproducible run-everywhere container would make life easier on whomever is running it.
More or less, that's what Windows provides. Now, it's more complex than that of course since M$ has bullied the vendors of the world into writing their own drivers and installing and configuring them all before selling a Windows equipped PC, but... overall... there's still that somewhat plug-and-play "experience" in Windows that keeps their IT drones afraid of the alternatives.
The more that Linux maintainers can emulate that experience for their users, the better - all it takes is developer time (iow money, because developers have to eat...)
🌻🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Informative) by Thexalon on Tuesday January 13, @06:05PM (3 children)
The people who you're trying to convince tend to be stuck in a model of procurement. The process goes something like this:
1. The people who have to use the tools, or their bosses, are asked to come up with a checklist of features that they want, and pass them to somebody with the authority to buy it.
2. The checklist of features turns into an RFP or something similar that gets distributed out to both the general public and the salespeople that the buyer has always worked with.
3. The salespeople fall over themselves glad-handing and promising that their stuff has satisfied 100% of the checklist features, for the low low price of €X. This part is the most fun for the buyer, because the salespeople get to use their corporate expense account to butter them up.
4. The buyer then picks one of the salespeople's bids, most likely the one that they picked before, until the next cycle.
5. The IT department and the people who have to use the tools then deal with the fact that the checklisted features only kinda sorta work as advertised.
An open-source project that has most or even all of the features that you need, combined with hiring a programmer or two to add whatever you need feature-wise and chip in on maintenance for that and the 10 other open-source things you use, doesn't fit into this process. Even if the cost is < €X, and even if instead of getting a feature matrix saying that you bought what you needed you get a programmer who builds you what you actually needed. In part because step 3 doesn't happen anymore and that's no fun, but also because the bureaucracy and mental model says that's not how things are done.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 4, Insightful) by canopic jug on Tuesday January 13, @06:11PM
I've noticed that in recent decades, point #2, the writing of the checklist, is done by the vendors themselves. That is done by them either outright or else by their embedded sales teams on the payroll of the victim organization. But, yeah, the check list has been a problem since the 1990s and still is a big one. Nowadays, does it matter at all that LibreOffice or Calligra has n% fewer 'features' than MSO if those missing n% are never, ever used? For most people, Calligra or LibreOffice meet 100% of their needs. What the government can do is push to require the OpenDocument Format for official communications and just like that, M$ monopoly over office suites goes away in the same instant.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 13, @06:16PM (1 child)
You're missing the "procurement CEO" level of things.
Somebody "manages the budget" of the department, division, region, etc. And the bigger that budget is, the bigger the salary of the budget manager is. It's a not so subtle dis-incentive to save money, right up there with "use it or lose it" mandates to spend all available budget dollars by end of the fiscal year, or have the following years' budgets decreased by the amount unspent...
🌻🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday January 13, @07:47PM
That's a very good point.
Although I assume that if an executive is trying to waste company money, there are plenty of other fun ways of doing it, e.g. sending the executive to Vegas or Dubai for a "business meeting", renovations for the executive offices, hiring a brother-in-law to do nothing in particular, etc etc. And all of those involve getting more direct personal benefit than running it through a sales drone and getting a kickback.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 2, Insightful) by shrewdsheep on Wednesday January 14, @08:10AM
I have not heard of PHK so maybe not too much credit should be given, but 1 and 3 are simply no options. I'm at a loss how a (purportedly) FOSS advocate could suggest to pick "winners". Standards are key not only in software but in industry more generally to foster competition and quality.
Instead of salivating about the latest GUI updates in the "winning app", people should have a hard look at the current standard to decide what needs to be updated. And develop test suites to document and enforce the standards.