Microsoft has confirmed that under the forthcoming Public Sector Agreement (PSA12) government customers will pay just 1 per cent more for volume licences. The development was revealed by El Reg late last week but both the Cabinet Office and Microsoft refused to comment on the financial details at the time of writing. The firm …
Blah blah blah, tax payers' money, blah blah open source, blah blah blah, idiots.
There you go, saved 50% of the comments from being written. You're welcome.
Sadly, that's probably only a half-truth.
Which half - the "blah blah" or the other bits?
Sounds like someone in Government said "We are not paying that, we'll look elsewhere". Microsoft then made a more modest offer.
Which in itself is remarkable.....
Which in itself is remarkable
... on both sides
@JDX, you're right, it's ludicrous to think that the government could save taxpayers money by using open source software. As if!
It can happen. It does happen. I speak from experience!
Sadly, however, I had to work against the stream to do it. Too many of my esteemed colleagues heard the word "L***x" and cringed in pain! What a bunch of wimps!
Well, I work in the NHS, and we do use Linux. The problem is that 95% of the vendors of clinical systems don't support Linux.
Because these are the things that are used in safety critical things (tracking of patient health etc.), simply saying "We'll try WINE" isn't an option.
Any behemoth organisation will only change slowly, and the NHS has been steeped in Windows for many years. It won't change overnight (though there have been some vendors being a little more enlightened).
This agreement tends to cover things like desktop licenses as well as server, so there's a lot of churn there, and a lot of cash if you need to track it to the exact license count for circa 4k machines (per hospital) for desktop alone.
Covering licensing areas as part of a deal actually lessens ongoing management costs, saving ongoing money. It also strikes a good deal (1% instead of 30% increase).. Again, this saves money..
It's a simple fact that the government needs to buy servers, and a large portion of those are tied into what vendors will supply (usually Windows, with the odd few Linux/UNIX). This looks like a big saving where necessary purchases are made.
"Because these are the things that are used in safety critical things (tracking of patient health etc.), simply saying "We'll try WINE" isn't an option."
I would trust Linux over Windows every time ....
The issue they've got...
Is M$ is completely integrated in all facets of public sector in the UK, there is hardly any open source penetration in public sector, with the exception of the Eee PC's for schools and the like, any transition from M$ to OpenSource would cost far more money than the 1% increase in price that they are now offering, after some good bartering/blackmail from the government. I'll take my hat off to them (UK.gov) for once in my life this time, they did some good ol' british haggling.
"some good ol' british haggling" I thought we were famous for *not* haggling?
- Exclusive HP slaps dress code on R&D geeks: Bin that T-shirt, put on this tie
- Analysis Ballmer's billion-dollar blunders: When he gambled Microsoft's money and lost
- Blighty tablet sales plunge 31 per cent in saturated market
- Exclusive + analysis How to waste two years and lose $415m: Cisco's now-dead Whiptail deal
- Q. How much did Google just spend applying political pressure in the US? A. $4.6 million