It really is infuriating how unnecessarily expensive and confusing Microsoft has made creating and exchanging simple document files. I talk to people all the time that are unsure about how they'll edit their resume on a new system or think they'll need a new copy of Office to update a file on their new computer (and then they're confused as to what version to buy). It's amazing how few normal people know about Google Docs - Google should really be pushing this on consumers more.
Microsoft might have made a lot of money off of this confusion, but in the process they've become the antithesis of "it just works" in a lot of people's eyes. They've made some of the most basic functions of computing an expensive pain in the ass for most of the PC era.
Revision history would be nice, but I can't really agree about lock-in: you can very quickly/easily download all of your files (even allowing you to specify different formats for each file type). Switching to, say, Dropbox, would take a few minutes at most.
"...Linux’s Ubuntu operating system comes for free and requires no updates, upgrades or expensive antivirus software to keep the laptop in shape. ..."
This is not completely true since Ubuntu does provide (various software) updates and upgrades.
"... The proximity of the Clintons and the Gates is well known to the world and needs no explanation. ... And the revelations of WikiLeaks only show how the US has been forcing governments across the world to buy expensive Microsoft licenses."
Really? That statement seems a little outrageous.
Ultimately, as the article highlights, why are states "...moving back to laptops for poor rural students preloaded with Microsoft Windows."?
Does a computer preloaded with Microsoft Windows provide a significant advantage over a Linux distribution? For example, what is the goal of providing computer to poor rural students? Is it to make them computer proficient or Microsoft Office proficient?
(Also, presumably, these low-cost computers (provided to poor rural students) are not capable to run Windows 7 or Windows 8 - what version of Microsoft Windows is preloaded?)
As for your argument, "computer proficient" versus "microsoft office proficient" .. there is a lot more you can do with a computer besides word-process documents, in spite of what Microsoft want you to think^Wbuy^Wconsume ..
The Bosnian cable mentioned only licensed software, not specifically software under Microsoft's licenses. I'd be willing to wager people within the gov't are allowed to use GPL software right along propietary. A key clue as to why this was the case may be in the line "ction to ban pirated and unlicensed software from ministry offices". More than likely, the Bosnia gov't was pirated copies of Windows on the belief that they had no legal obligation to buy the software.
The second article about the Tunisia gov't seems infested with ideological speculation and not actual facts.
The third article is with regards to the fact that Brazilian gov't adopted a pro free software stance, and that Microsoft felt that was unfair to their business efforts. The US gov't did not intervene or arm twist, but an ambassador did offer suggestions on how to create a more fair standard that would allow for both OpenXML and ODF. By the way, as a friend of mine pointed out, both of those are standards controlled by various standards body (ISO and ECMA).
And what is the goal, well in the short term it is surely to make them more employable and the jobs requiring say Excel outnumber those requiring C++ 100:1.
>> For example, what is the goal of providing computer to poor rural students? Is it to make them computer proficient or Microsoft Office proficient?
I am no Microsoft supporter, but you have asked an important question here: If the long-term goal is to teach them Office, so that they can do administrative tasks etc. at their future workplaces (which are probably running Office2k on WinXP, based on my [anecdotal] observations), then Windows+Office training might actually be useful to them. Not everyone is being trained to become a programmer.
Not everyone is being trained to become a programmer.
Why do you assume using Linux means you are training to be a programmer?
Personally, I have installed Ubuntu Linux on friends' "old" laptops that have gotten "too slow" for Windows upgrades. Instead of being thrown out, these machines are still being used for common tasks such as internet browsing and e-mailing.
Ideally, a non-profit - if there isn't one already - could install a Linux distribution on an "older" machine and give those to low-income students in the States. (How often do government agencies cycle through machines? What happens to those old machines?)
> Why do you assume using Linux means you are training to be a programmer?
> Personally, I have installed Ubuntu Linux on friends' "old" laptops that have gotten "too slow" for Windows upgrades. Instead of being thrown out, these machines are still being used for common tasks such as internet browsing and e-mailing.
I'll vouch for this. My wife uses Xubuntu, and she's an accountant. There was a period of learning for her, but then again, part of that was due to the fact that one can automate just about anything via cron. (:
Would learning on Open Office and/or Google Docs really set them behind? The document metaphor is identical, all the core functions are the same. Learning on free/open document software would have real practical advantages - if their family got a cheap pc or laptop, they'd immediately be able to exchange files with their families and train them without added expense.
It is not the government's job to train a generation of school children to slavishly conform to a particular proprietary product. Teach them how to operate a word processor not how to click the icons in Word which, by the way, will be in a new place by the time they get of age to actually get a job.
>This is not completely true since Ubuntu does provide (various software) updates and upgrades.
They probably meant that a major upgrade won't be needed to be paid for.
Anyway this is Tehelka, one of the big 'rags' in India, so don't expect any kind of objectivity or even truth from them. They will print anything if it drives interest.
Off-topic but in the past, tehelka has not been one of the most ethical publications so I would take their reports with a pinch of salt.
They were one of the few publications who were extremely pro-IIPM when investigative bloggers were pointing out that IIPM was a degree mill. It turned out later that the IIPM family was a big contributer to Tehelka.
I think their Wikipedia page does a good job of showing their record. They've done more investigative journalism than all of the other papers combined.
I didn't really call it fake, did I? It's a sensationalist publication that once actually offered and sent prostitutes rigged with hidden cameras to politicians. It's not a traditional publication by any means. In fact, the name itself means 'Sensation'.
There probably is some truth in this story, but take it with a healthy dose of skepticism, because you're not going see objectivity here.
Umm, you wrote "so don't expect any kind of objectivity or even truth from them" (note the last phrase). I think 'kang' was right to challenge you.
Anyway for readers who don't know India: Tehelka is an independent newsmagazine that specializes in investigative journalism. I also hold them in very high regard.
The article says that over the next 5 years, about 7 Million laptops will be purchased. The price of windows mentioned in the article is about $110 at current rates, which means $770 million order for MS. That definitely is a big order for MS, considering the full laptop is only expected to cost ~$300.
I really can't see any good reason to spend that money to put windows in laptops for poor children. It would be much wiser to use linux and buy more laptops.
Even now, RedHat Linux is used in local government offices. Wondering what happened now, for switching to Windows 7 for freebie laptops. Huge drain on the exchequer.
No way this is right. $100 for Windows 7 Starter Edition? Not a chance. W7 Starter probably wouldn't cost that much retail, and there's no way OEMs are paying that much. I've read that HP/Dell/etc pay more like $25-$30 for Home
Premium, which is several tiers above Starter.
Just so you know, I work for Microsoft, but not on Windows. I have no inside knowledge of Windows OEM pricing, but I'd be very surprised if Starter cost an OEM more than $5-$10.
the last place i worked paid $35 per desktop for office, so if they're actually paying $110 for windows, i'd suspect there's a kickback happening at the OEM level, not unheard of in many countries.
Too much "the IT intelligentsia", "not offend one of the world’s most profitable and powerful corporations", "the future of computing", "The proximity of the Clintons and the Gates is well known to the world and needs no explanation" for me to take the article seriously.
A bad defense of free and open-source software is not always better than no defense.
I rolled my eyes too, but the next three paragraphs put it in a reasonable light.
Two cables, one originating in the embassy at Hanoi and the other at the embassy in Tunis, throw enough light on the scale and nature of the government-corporation nexus in the United States and its influence on world governments.
According to one of the cables, the US government ‘intervened’ to force Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dzung to sign an agreement with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer that would require Hanoi to pay Microsoft $20 million for 3 lakh licences. This even though the Vietnamese PM wanted to hold the Microsoft deal as a deliverable till he met the US president later that year.
Now put that deal in an Indian context where 68 lakh licences would be required under Jayalalithaa’s ambitious free laptop scheme and the business of diplomacy becomes clear. The Microsoft deal of 3 lakh licences was dubbed in the cable as ‘the most significant agreement Vietnam has ever signed with a US business’.
"Microsoft representatives also highlighted their
concerns about recent GVN comments that it plans to switch
to open source software (like Linux) to "fix" its IPR
problems. While acknowledging that the decision on what
type of software the GVN wants to use is up to the
Government... Switching to open source does not insulate the
GVN from the responsibility of ensuring that all software
used by the GVN is legitimately licensed, Microsoft asserted"
It sounds like they know how to throw their weight around in the developing world.
It's very common (not to say it's right) for governments to actively engage in protecting the interests of companies based in them. Microsoft is no exception.
I use MS as well as nix depending, and I do agree that this scenario has simple, clear cut advantages to use nix. That being said, this article just made me feel dirty. I don't know why people have to overstate a point or politicize everything.
One of the things that makes a typical Linux install better is the preconfigured programming environments on it such as Perl or Python.
Unlike Windows 7. It would be so nice if Microsoft installed Visual Basic Express on all Windows as a matter of course.
(Of course, this carries with it the presumption that creation is better than consumption, and to really use a computer, you need to be able to program it).
Some key points from the article.
The first requirement was " A dual boot system that had free open source Linux with the proprietary Microsoft Windows starter edition with antivirus software valid for a year."
The second requirement was "In its new tender, ELCOT asked bidders to provide only Microsoft Windows and removed Linux from the list."
And a key point made from someone from ELCOT: " “We will retain dual boot laptops to ensure uniformity in the supply of laptops by different vendors,"
Windows was always going to be on the laptops. More than likely, the vendors charge more for setting up dual boot systems.
Sensationalism aside, reducing HDD capacity by half, removing wifi, removing a whole bunch of educational software just to pay for Windows? Just. Wrong.
EDIT: Although, I don't completely buy the argument about upgrades. I still have laptops running Windows XP that work great.
Microsoft might have made a lot of money off of this confusion, but in the process they've become the antithesis of "it just works" in a lot of people's eyes. They've made some of the most basic functions of computing an expensive pain in the ass for most of the PC era.