Re: [edlug] Stallman's talk

[Martin Fitzpatrick <martinf@xxx.xxx.xxx>]

Jumping in here, mostly in agreement..

David Marsh's listreading hat wrote:
> > 2: It's completely throwing the baby out with the bathwater and
> > frankly immoral to suggest to a guy who works for a charity that he
> > shouldn't work for that charity because they happen to use Microsoft

> For obvious reasons, many charities are fairly cashstrapped and have to
> use their money (and other resources) wisely.

The problem is, in short-terms continuing to use MS is actually more 
cost-effective than re-training, re-investigating, any open-source 
alternatives. While we might feel warm and fluffy on charities funding 
the use of other software, the general public might not be so keen on 
money they spend to support insert-your-cause-here going on promoting 
free software.  We'd obviously feel different, but we're biased.

Most work I've done with charities, and small companies (which are in 
many ways the same) has been on shockingly old software/hardware. Even 
between versions of Windows is prohibitavely expensive to upgrade (I 
dont think I ever have at home - far rather just buy a new piece of kit, 
and resign the old to something chuggy).

So, yes, it would be lovely if the charities stopped wasting money (as 
that is what it is) on proprietary software. But its aint free to move 
to "free" software either.

<snip>
> apply for funds from various schemes which either supply or enable them
> to buy, computer hardware. 
<snip>
> cash-strapped charity naturally goes for x86 hardware, and through lack
> of knowledge of alternatives they duly acquire Windoze and all the other
> expensive and closed cruft that that entails. Indeed, it can sometimes
> be the case that the terms of the funding require that they get a-hold
> of Word, etc "in order to be compatible with those they are working
> with" (often government agencies, who've been nicely stitched-up by M$
> in turn).

Haivng done some fund-raising on a small scale myself you're right about 
the weird restrictions that come into force.  It doesn't help that a lot 
of proprietary-software companies throw in special Educational/Charity 
licenses that make them seem like the best solution - until you get onto 
related things. I think there is a problem with the funding 
organisations not having enough of a grasp - perhaps (hopefully) this 
will filter down from government.

I can't imagine charities bring in a great deal of revenue for companies 
that do this however.  The point of the Educational licenses (get them 
young) is obvious, are the charity ones a case of PR or real 
do-the-right-thing?

And if they really *are* free (as in money), are the other concerns big 
enough to have problems with?  (Intrisic costs related to shoddy 
security, IT fixes, etc. spring to mind - not to mention the whole 
business based on supporting them...  )

> Later, the charity realises that it needs somebody to manage their
> systems, and that's where our friend comes in.
> Unfortunately, by then, they've already been using Windoze (etc) for
> months and work practices are set in stone.

The size of the business built around supporting dodgy computer systems 
would be funny if it wasn't slightly disturbing. Not to mention that for 
a large part it perpetuates a problem rather than solves it...

..although thats the same for a lot of jobs: justify your existance.

> They've already spent that money on Windoze, so it's been spent, it's
> gone. They can't get it back.

And nobody likes to admit they've made a mistake. I think the biggest 
chance for change is getting people outside IT 
departments/organisations, so that, should they get a job inside, they 
can then administer a change. There are very few Windows IT 
professionals who would willingly turn around to their bosses and say 
"Well, yknow all that stuff we'd been doing? Waste of time & money. Do 
this instead..."  becase a) you look like an idiot, and b) why should 
they believe you this time?

> I agree that RMS appeared to take a very hard line on this issue, and
> surely it is better that the support staff attempt to implement a
> _gradual_ authorised migration (Mozilla, OpenOffice..) _eventually_
> flipping over to GNU/Linux-KDE "when nobody's looking one evening", than

I have tried in my own little way to convert members of my family, and 
to most intents and purposes its worked... not through ideology, just 
through the fact that Moz software is better than the IE/Outlook mess. 
I have to admit its a relief that its got to that point... people aren't 
too up on causing themselves grief for a sake of an ideology they aren't 
interested in.

I still use XP, cos this laptop is/was too new when I got it...  and, 
being pragmatic about it, it was taking more time to get it work than I 
was actually spending working.  That isn't good when you're doing the 
self-employed thing.

As KDE, and other desktop things, improve (they're still young... and 
better than Windows was at their age), it'll become easier and easier to 
transfer. Personally (I could be full of chaff) I think some standards 
around the desktop<->OS connection would help.

If you could use a KDE desktop on top of a windows kernel (ho ho ho, 
what a thought) or vice-versa then we would have real choice.

> with any chance of using OSS). Of course, I think it is fair to say, if
> the organisation really isn't willing to change, the medium-term best
> ethical plan probably is to look for a different job. 

The question is, are there jobs to take? I think perhaps a better idea 
would be putting internal pressure on to change.... otherwise you get a 
constant sea of ship-jumping OSSers (no T) and companies staffed by MS 
monkeys. Not my idea of a good time.

I may regret saying this, but my experience is if you can convince a 
single high-level-ish manager that its the "next big thing" and that 
they are "behind the curve" (or whatever they say now) you've got a long 
way to effecting a change. These sorts of changes are better if they 
come from outwith IT (even if the IT people instigate them..)

> * the shared appointments calendar 
> * the contacts database 
> Does anybody have any ideas on those two fronts?

I'd be interested to hear similar.  Although I've been suprised in a few 
jobs how few people knew how to mail-merge anyway... even using a 
provided database and document template.  I was put on a temp placement 
to type 100 or so things into something by hand.... which instead took 
10 minutes.

If free software could address the lack of knowledge - especially for 
charity organisations, but also for companies who want to save on IT 
costs, there would be space for a real impact.  Perhaps thats something 
that a community can solve better than a corporation.

What a ramble. On another note, I actually live in York after moving 
away from Edinburgh about a year ago. Its a testament to the list that 
I've stayed on despite not being in the town, nor able to use Linux for 
a good 6 monhts...  But, looks as though I'll be back up there come end 
of this month, spare kit in tow, more plug sockets & a bit of spare 
time... heres hoping I finally make it to a meet up :)

Fitz
--
Artifiction.com :: Contemporary Art & Design
http://www.artifiction.com/
-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can find the EdLUG mailing list FAQ list at:
http://www.edlug.org.uk/list_faq.html