Based on Ubuntu. Interface and functionality like Windows, users will not feel much difference. BRICS countries committed to their own Linux distributions. South Africa has been the exception.
Based on Ubuntu. Interface and functionality like Windows, users will not feel much difference. BRICS countries committed to their own Linux distributions. South Africa has been the exception.
Germany’s attempt at switching to Linux is a prime example of bad management, wrong decisions and, well, idiocy.
If memory serves: they chose Debian, instead of Ubuntu and didn’t do enough research concerning hardware compatibility. When they were already in progress, it turned out they had craploads of office hardware like scanners, printers and such, that weren’t working under Debian.
Did they choose debian? IIirc they tried rolling their own release based on debian and quickly fell behind.
Faulty project management is spot on tho. No control of what hw they were working with. Should anyways have started with 5 years of requiering new hardware to be linux compatible. To weed out the worst win-only-devices
Could’ve written their own drivers, and shared them with the rest of the world on GitHub!
Reverse engeneering blackbox drivers without vendor support is insanly time and resource consuming. And would instantly remove any economic sense in their project.
I was obviously joking. I know it’s pain because I’ve tried getting my unsupported fingerprint reader working to no avail.
I’m not sure how things were really, since across the years the message has changed.
In the initial “we failed, let’s revert to Win” times, Debian was named. I remember those times and news well, since I made a bunch of flamewars on both Debian and Ubuntu forums concerning the choice, especially since I myself had similar - hardware compatibility - issues in our corporate environment and I perceive the choice of distro as equally puzzling and idiotic.
Exactly.
Or, they should check what hardware they need to replace on the spot and how much it’d cost.
Got a source other than “Germany” wanted to switch to Linux? The only thing I am aware of is the city of Munich switching for a couple of years, which went fine, but then a new mayor from the conservative shitheads who has about as much clue of technology as a towel probably rolled it all back to Windows.
What is “Debian, instead of Ubuntu” supposed to imply? Ubuntu is a piece of shit ever since canonical ramped up the enshittification, first with desktop search expressions being default-forwarded to canonical servers, and then with snap repositories under control of the corporation.
That we’re discussing the topic older than a decade ago, when things were wildly different to how they are now.
I don’t store bookmarks for that old events. Feel free to consult Google for that…
https://www.govtech.com/archive/german-government-goes-linux.html
wow - 2002ish - okay, that really went by me at the time, I was still running on Windows (2000) myself back then, maybe that’s why. Indeed - back then, it was a wholly different story about HW support. Thanks for the link!
Noprob.
From what I gather, there were similar projects in the past attempted by great many deal of bodies and organizations. Some were quite successful. For example,CERN used and supported CENTOS-based computers and allowed Windows machines but on the “you care of this crap on your own” basis.
As far as I can tell, the most important challenges were:
luckily the relevant points have been solved in the past 20 years
In terms of support, however, competent Linux support on site is a lot more feasible than competent windows support. Most organisations nowadays hire braindead morons for IT support & IT management, and then use Microsoft cloud / Office 365 services, and for any ticket the dumb mtherfckers in house can’t solve, they open a ticket at microsoft. And if that isn’t addressed, the user is shit outta luck.
I have seen the same dumb and stubborn idiots in corporate IT first level (and second level) support across most major organisations whose core business is not IT, because - especially engineering - CEOs tend to think “IT is just enabling our “actual” work, so let’s give the controllers authority to procure IT services from a contractor”.
Oh, and yes, that’s a lot of frustration speaking from my choice of words :)
I agree, but there’s one thing, that needs to be perceived from different perspective: Linux Office suites > ARE < awful.
They look ugly. They overcomplicate certain, simple tasks. They aren’t as compatible with MS’ documents as they need to be. The only exceptions to it are WPS Office, but since it joined the dark side (ads(, it can no longer be suggested, and OnlyOffice - possibly one of the most recent entries to the list of possible MS’ Office alternatives.
Yes, yes, I know “I can do in Libre everything MS packet can do, and more”.
…but the problem is that it’s not you who will need to work with it. People in business need a tool that gets the job done, is well supported and doesn’t get in the way. Libre, unfortunately does - everyone who tried to apply an unorthodox page numbering to a document knows that it’s too complicated for non tech-savvy user.
I haven’t worked somewhere that really requires a desktop office suite in like 15 years. Almost everyone seems to get by with browser based tools. The big exception being finance and their excel monstrosities.
I haven’t seen an enterprise, where Excel wasn’t present.
…and I am in IT since late 90s.
I am honestly surprised about the conclusions you came to. I use LibreOffice as my daily driver, and while it’s far from perfect, Microsoft Office is not even playing in the same league in terms of usability & stability. MS Office is an abomination of bloatware, and the ribbon kills all productivity. Not to mention load times, and sporadic multi-second hangs on a quick CTRL-S. Literally the only thing MS Office has that LibreOffice does not, is MS Access - and the only thing MS Office does better is VBA, and that’s probably more so for trademark / copyright reasons rather than LO not being able to implement the same thing.
I work with “people in business”, and I see on a daily basis that most of them are unable to even memorize the simplest hotkeys / keyboard functions, such as shift + arrow keys to select, ctrl + arrow keys to jump words, wordstar (ctrl x,c,v) and so many others. I don’t think you will find many people who prefer MS Office and can work more efficiently on MS Office than an avid LibreOffice user on LO.
The office suite directs the workflow of the user, and MS Office getting rid of the standard drop-down menus in 2007, guided all MS Office users down a road to insanity.
Not quite. 😉
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/enterprise/office365-plans-and-pricing
E3 plan is the norm in more complicated workspaces now. Exchange, Outlook, Teams, OneNote, Sharepoint are commonly used in such an environment, followed by Forms (HR department loves these and rightly so), Onedrive and PowerBI. Viva (formerly Yammer) makes waves now. Teams entered the market aggressively during Pandemics and it had evolved almost as fast as Android. It can now connect to great many deal of applications thus expanding the possible workflow and collaboration.
The ribbon being the productivity killer you’re talking about is a non-existent issue, since typical office workers rarely venture further than the main set of icons + they have the most useful shortcuts pinned to the quick access toolbar.
In every environment where people have been using both pieces of software (MS Office and Star/Open/Apache/Libre), the former was preferred for its ease of use.
Again: Linux/FOSS movements tends to produce the mindset that is hard to convince that there’s something wrong about anything it does, while listening to people’s - common people, instead of experienced power users - complains, and following tested and appreciated standards should be preferred.
Debian 12 out for less than three months and people imagine that stable Debian was good with hardware :/.
But that should be a lesson to people as to why going Linux is foolhardy.
If the Germany government, with all its money and resources and knowledge, failed at switching (or staying switched), then why the bloody hell should an individual or business? I think the Germans have a well deserved reputation for being smart and tech savvy, so if they can’t do it, then why should some random individual out there bother trying? And blaming it on the distro is ridiculous. I have zero interest in Linux, but even I’ve heard of Debian (as well as Ubuntu and others), so there is no excuse why such a well known distro be incapable of handling what the Germans might have wanted.
As a German: LOL
Also this…
Sounds like someone who has not visited Germany.
Op has never installed Linux, never met a German, and once saw a Volkswagen driving down his street.
As an engineer, it irks to no end hearing marketers say “German engineering” as if it is some kind of superpower that makes that particular product automatically better, but I’m not going to take anything away from the German people. I’d give them a lot of faith that they would choose the most logical, best solution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astra_Linux
The choice of a distro makes huge - crucial - difference. It dictates the possibilities, limitations and future evolution of every ecosystem it’s supposed to support.
Wrong choice = a disaster.
That’s absurd. So installing a distro as a n00b and you happen to pick one because you’ve heard of it before only to find out it’s not the one you should have used. That’s not some obscure one that no one’s heard either.
You understand how frustrating that can be for a new user, right? I see all the Linux people have downvoted the hell out of me, and that’s fine, but Linux has a massive user-friendliness issue if you seemingly have to pick the right one, or your fucked. I’m sure the Germans didn’t take that selection lightly, and now someone is claiming that it’s because of that choice that the switch over failed.
Can this OS be any more user UNfriendly? It’s to the point of being user-hostile.
That’s not really a “Linux” issue.
“Linux” isn’t some singular OS, it’s an ecosystem. It’s just like choosing a car, just because most cars have four wheels and an engine doesn’t mean they’re all the same. Selecting the right car is rightfully frustrating and can and does make a huge difference.
It’s like selling a Tesla to a 90 year old grandma and then her complaining that it’s unfriendly. And just because the Tesla is unfriendly to a particular audience doesn’t automatically make it a bad car, but even if it was, that doesn’t mean that all electric vehicles are as bad as Tesla.
I’m not sure about the scope and details of Germany’s attempt to switch to Linux, but for the average user, any of the popular distros would likely serve them well. I think there’s a huge difference between a user installing Linux on a general purpose PC vs. trying to incorporate it into an entire country’s worth of devices.
I’ve heard horror stories of people spending loads of time tinkering with their OS to fix obscure issues, but generally, these distros are often as easy-to-use (if not more so) than Windows these days. I think the main issues people have stem from software built specifically for Windows that won’t work on Linux, which hardly seems the fault of Linux imo.
I would probably choos Debian over Ubuntu vecause “debian” is more fun yo say. Or even Arch. “Ubuntu” is just a clunky 3-syllable word that makes me sound like I have a speech imprdiment. I dont know the difference between any of those distros and would probably choose wrongly.
It seems like you need to be an expert to pick a distro, but how do you become an expert without actually using it.
Even the most complicated Linux distro is more user friendly than Windows 10 or later. And the mainstream linuxes are trivial to install and use as a daily driver. The only tech skills required are when you want to
Linux can be easy to use if it’s set up to be easy to use, and you have the right hardware. It’s the set up process that most people can’t get through on their own.
I tried installing Fedora the other day with the provided installer, and it failed to even launch from USB. Then I used the same image and wrote it with Rufus instead, and it worked fine. But your average person wouldn’t know to even try that.
Linux is almost never as easy to set up as techies make it out to be. And you can’t just hand wave issues like graphics drivers. Even after I installed the Nvidia drivers I still had to sign them manually so secure boot would actually accept them. That’s just too many hoops for most people.
You have heard about Debian because it’s a really good distro that has wide usage (especially in the server space). It’s however a bad distro to install on PCs that are to be used by office workers who aren’t necessarily familiar with it, and whoever advised the government should’ve known that Debian is picky about hardware compatability.
It was truly a baffling decision to go for Debian in this instance.
why would you think debian to be a bad distro for office workspaces? genuinely curious, as someone who uses debian for a daily driver for 10+ years
Good question…me too. Most office apps are browser based now. Sometimes you have to build things from source to get bleeding edge versions of things, but a good Linux admin will have no trouble rolling their own repo with their own packages for the bleeding edge stuff. Most of the time the repo versions are fine though. The only thing I maintain from source on my personal machine is GnuCash.
This is just wrong. Well, they might have the reputation, but let me tell you: Every aspect of German governance relies on fax machines and paper forms. You can hardly do anything online, and when you can, it’s usually not at all easy to use.
The latest thing they tried was electronic doctor’s notes. (In Germany, when you’re sick, you go to a doctor and let him write a note that you can’t work. You still get paid for your sick leave if you bring a doctor’s note.) Two months ago my colleage got ill and it took 8 weeks to have the deducted hours added again.
Why is Germany stuck in the 90s in particular? Why not other countries and why the 90s?
One important factor is that one of our biggest political parties (the CDU/CSU, the one Angela Merkel is in) is basically run by and for 60+ year old people who stopped caring about technology in their teens.
To them, the internet with its homepages and electronic mail is a very recent and poorly understood development that will surely require another few decades of observation before anyone will know whether it’s actually good for anything.
And that’s the party that ran Germany for almost two decades uninterrupted. They’re by far not the only reason but they’re a major one.
As a Japanese I can attest that at least one other country is stuck like that too, and likely many others
Because German culture despises progress.
German bureaucracy is notoriously obtuse, inflexible and old-fashioned. Think Little Britain’s “Computer says no”, but then on a countrywide scale.