The Old Joel on Software Forum: Part 4 (of 5) - Munich Migration to Linux Update

Munich Migration to Linux Update

Joel blogged about this a while back.

Wired magazine has an update on how it's going:

http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,62236,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_6

Seems like the problems are more with the project plan, (or lack thereof) and inertia in the user base.

Jason
Thursday, February 12, 2004

The usual problem of being a leader, instead of a follower. You deal with all kinds of issues that can be documented and resolved so easily for everyone behind you.

T.J.
Thursday, February 12, 2004

I for one would really like to know what software, and in particular what sort of software they are having trouble with - which applications they are having to re-write and port.

It would give a good indication of what sort of software is missing from the arsenal.

Les C
Thursday, February 12, 2004

T. J.,
You bring up an interesting point.

I am a Microsoft software consultant/developer and implement/customize MS software 6 days a week. There are a ton of resources available on and off the web to people like me, both from Microsoft and third parties, that give suggestions, plans, things to watch out for, etc. when doing migrations and implementations.

Can someone with more knowledge of the open source community comment on the amount and quality of How To's, suggested project plans, installation guides, etc. for large scale implementations/conversions of open source software? Does it differ based on the type of software? More for the widely used Linux distros and things like OpenOffice, less so for other things?

Just curious.

Jason
Thursday, February 12, 2004

I would suspect you will have to turn to IBM for those kind of stuff, but IBM do not really let those details away easily. It gives them a huge competitive advantage over other companies.

Maybe that is the problem -- Linux is not owned by anyone that have an interest in teaching EVERYONE what it is all about in a clear way. Microsoft have that interest with Windows.

T.J.
Thursday, February 12, 2004

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39146113,00.htm

A little update.

fw
Thursday, February 12, 2004

In other words, it's not actually such a good idea.

Which is what many people who actually know about software, as opposed to all the Kule open source dudes, were saying on this forum.

me
Thursday, February 12, 2004

Does anyone know which version of Linux they're using?

I've been assuming that the whole point of the project was to replace Redmond-based Microsoft with Nürnberg-based Suse Linux and IBM, which has heavy German connections.

Am I right or wrong?

Celia Redmore
Friday, February 13, 2004

Interesting link - the overcoming of assumptions - that the only computer systems are Windows systems. We would have exactly the same thing here where I work - a UK charity.

However, that does not automatically make it a bad thing, as 'Me' suggests - any changes in the workplace are usually seen as bad by employees who fear that the changes will be bad for them - less money, out of a job, etc.

http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-roadmap.html

---> another link for consumption.

Jon C
Friday, February 13, 2004

Whether it was a good idea or not will not be known for a decade at least.

However, it's a good thing that it happened. It forces Microsoft to compete more seriously. It makes it easier to threaten a migration to Linux if all you really want is a really good deal from Microsoft.

Munich will pave the way, possibly with their own ground-up-and-used-as-gravel careers, and the rest of us will learn from their travails.

Richard P
Friday, February 13, 2004