the big question - the dominance of MS IT shops and MS products

[Robin Paulson]

the title comes out of a situation at work, but applies to many a
small-medium company, particularly those using external contractors.

we have IT contractors who run our systems, which are MS-centric, with
a ton of non-MS, but still Windows-only software

we are currently looking for a certain software solution which will be
a fairly major part of our infrastructure. when i talk to the IT
support, they say "oh, you want Microsoft such-and-such". no
consideration of other products (there are several which come highly
recommended), or knowledge of them when i mention them.

from my understanding, this is a common situation with IT shops in NZ
and probably elsewhere

so, my point: how does free software in general get over this hurdle?
switching IT shops is a big ask for any sizeable company, and trying
to get a useful comparison out of existing MS-centred companies is not
easy. the situation is further not helped when management are
(knowingly) not that IT-savvy, and have been brought up with
windows/word/outlook/excel

[Dave Lane]

Hello Robin,

Post by Robin Paulson
we are currently looking for a certain software solution which will be
a fairly major part of our infrastructure. when i talk to the IT
support, they say "oh, you want Microsoft such-and-such". no
consideration of other products (there are several which come highly
recommended), or knowledge of them when i mention them.
from my understanding, this is a common situation with IT shops in NZ
and probably elsewhere

Yes, a perennial problem. We encounter it all the time.

Post by Robin Paulson
so, my point: how does free software in general get over this hurdle?

Easily, in many areas. You simply need to engage a commercial FOSS
provider who can provide reference customers to convince your
prospective customers that it's a viable option - I can think of quite a
few off vendors and references off hand.

Post by Robin Paulson
switching IT shops is a big ask for any sizeable company, and trying
to get a useful comparison out of existing MS-centred companies is not
easy. the situation is further not helped when management are
(knowingly) not that IT-savvy, and have been brought up with
windows/word/outlook/excel

Yes, it's been a big challenge for us (I started Egressive in 1998 to
provide commercial FOSS solutions) but getting less so by the day. In
OZ, for instance, the gov't's just passed legislation on adopting open
source which lend it credibility.

At the moment, Drupal is the most frequently implemented CMS for NZ
Gov't sites (it's use is huge), and at least a few other FOSS web
technologies have a very good reputation in Gov't, e.g. Moodle,
Silverstripe, Koha, Plone, Wordpress to name a few.

I think if you provide some examples of high-profile implementations,
you'll find that the perception of risk evaporates. Moreover, you need
to know how to use the FUD of the incumbents against them.

For example, you can dispel the myth that FOSS solutions can't be
supported - because you provide it. And that there's a "throat to
throttle" - that's what your support agreement provides. Ask the
customer how much joy they've had trying to hold Microsoft accountable
over the years. Most will roll their eyes, and accept that they've had a
misplaced sense of security all these years.

You can also point out the advantages of distributed support costs - if
a number of organisations combine forces to get some FOSS functionality,
they don't each need to pay for it separately. If the FOSS is used by
others around the world, then the support costs are distributed as well.
Proprietary software users don't benefit from the economies of market
scale that FOSS users do.

Hope that helps some people.

Cheers,

Dave

[Nevyn]

Post by Dave Lane
Hello Robin,

Post by Robin Paulson
we are currently looking for a certain software solution which will be
a fairly major part of our infrastructure. when i talk to the IT
support, they say "oh, you want Microsoft such-and-such". no
consideration of other products (there are several which come highly
recommended), or knowledge of them when i mention them.
from my understanding, this is a common situation with IT shops in NZ
and probably elsewhere

<snip>

I always see this as the question not being quite answered. I draw
this conclusion from the number of times I hear "MS [whatever] will
sort do that". The question isn't/wasn't/is seldom "What MS product
fulfils this need?".

So I think this scenario arises from a number of sources:
* Training institutes teach the MS way because that's what the industry wants.
* The industry is stuck to some extent because the people in there
know MS products.
* The more people who know about the Closed source solutions, the more
demand goes up.
* People can be horribly protective of their business and what they
know. Fear of the unknown, reinforced by FUD etc. I remember seeing
the GPL used in an appendix as an example of "Freeware" to avoid.

Given that the question is never actually answered properly - "What
solution is there for [xtask]?", I think people have become
complacent. They don't go looking for the options. What really annoys
me is watching how much a business will change it's own
practises/outputs in order to fit around a piece of software.

So I think the only real way around it is to show a very practical
side. Don't talk about Free as in cost - and don't talk about
licensing. "Here's a solution, it does what you want it to do or with
some investment in development can do exactly what you're asking for.
Here are the options for support".

FLOSS doesn't make something inherently better for businesses
(arguable - the ability to change the software to your own needs is
definitely a plus) and when suggesting a solution the license is
seldom spoken about. What we need to bear in mind is that people are
interested in the solution, not the terms of the solution. Years down
the track, when they're looking at customizations and scalability, is
when the license is likely to come up in a big way.

Regards,
Nevyn
http://nevsramblings.blogspot.com/

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Robin Paulson]

Post by Dave Lane

Post by Robin Paulson
so, my point: how does free software in general get over this hurdle?

Easily, in many areas. You simply need to engage a commercial FOSS
provider who can provide reference customers to convince your
prospective customers that it's a viable option - I can think of quite a
few off vendors and references off hand.

the bigger question though, is how to do this? i'm sure the floss
provider can demonstrate the usefulness of some free/open (in fact,
completely ignoring this fact) product, but support becomes an issue

employ two companies - one to do the new open software, one to look
after the legacy systems? that doesn't sound ideal

get the MS-centric company to support the free software products
alongside the existing? unlikely

get the free/open company to support a host of legacy (i.e. not
supplied by them, thus in an unknown state) windows desktops and
servers? hmm, who knows

what do egressive recommend here? other companies?

[Nick Rout]

Post by Robin Paulson

Post by Dave Lane

Post by Robin Paulson
so, my point: how does free software in general get over this hurdle?

Easily, in many areas. You simply need to engage a commercial FOSS
provider who can provide reference customers to convince your
prospective customers that it's a viable option - I can think of quite a
few off vendors and references off hand.

the bigger question though, is how to do this? i'm sure the floss
provider can demonstrate the usefulness of some free/open (in fact,
completely ignoring this fact) product, but support becomes an issue
employ two companies - one to do the new open software, one to look
after the legacy systems? that doesn't sound ideal
get the MS-centric company to support the free software products
alongside the existing? unlikely
get the free/open company to support a host of legacy (i.e. not
supplied by them, thus in an unknown state) windows desktops and
servers? hmm, who knows
what do egressive recommend here? other companies?

Any support company worth it's salt should be able to support both
open and closed source solutions, and even integrate them. Of course
there's not a lot of incentive to "sell" a free product, when there is
no markup.

But I dare say if you went to a decent FLOSS company will be able to
support mixed environments. They may not like it, they may try and
steer you in other directions, but ultimately they will help you.

In the meantime, show your bosses this article, it's on the front page
of today's Press newspaper:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/technology/4606052/Internet-Explorer-users-exposed-to-hackers

Ask them if this is the level of support they expect from their lead
software architects?

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Daniel Lawson]

Post by Nick Rout
Any support company worth it's salt should be able to support both
open and closed source solutions, and even integrate them. Of course
there's not a lot of incentive to "sell" a free product, when there is
no markup.

There's not a lot of markup in selling most commercial software either.
Most of your money is made up from services around the sale - time spent
installing/configuring etc. That's nominally the same for both
commercial and "free" products.



_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Nevyn]

Post by Nick Rout
Any support company worth it's salt should be able to support both
open and closed source solutions, and even integrate them. Of course
there's not a lot of incentive to "sell" a free product, when there is
no markup.

There's not a lot of markup in selling most commercial software either. Most
of your money is made up from services around the sale - time spent
installing/configuring etc. That's nominally the same for both commercial
and "free" products.

While we're talking about weird morality within the IT trade:

Since finally getting to work with schools I've been hearing all sorts
of horror stories.

Support companies who've convinced the IT clueless to buy and use MS
Exchange for their Staff's email (all 20 or so of them).

People being horribly protective of their positions as the support
provider - where if a switch over is happening, they refuse to give
the schools the passwords for the school's own servers.

Just plain overcharging or taking the mickey on the job. i.e. I heard
of one company who, while they have a cheaper hourly rate that most of
them, charge 5 hours for re-imaging a laptop.

Not looking at the options when finding a solution pretty much comes
under this category. Although Dave's point about Linux people only
grudgingly supporting Windows platforms is a fair one. I know I'm
biased towards FLOSS and only after all of those options have been
exhausted will I perhaps look at the proprietary solutions depending
on how important it is to me. I'm pretty sure I'd be a bit more
amendable to a proprietary solution if in the workplace but that
doesn't make me unbiased.

As for the argument about mark up on software. It's the same as
selling the hardware. Pricing yourself out of the market simply isn't
worth it. Sell it at cost and make the money on services. And people
remember the service more than you having provided the software so it
has a hell of a lot more value.

Regards,
Nevyn
http://nevsramblings.blogspot.com/

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Bryan Baldwin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Post by Nevyn
Since finally getting to work with schools I've been hearing all sorts
of horror stories.
Support companies who've convinced the IT clueless to buy and use MS
Exchange for their Staff's email (all 20 or so of them).
People being horribly protective of their positions as the support
provider - where if a switch over is happening, they refuse to give
the schools the passwords for the school's own servers.
Just plain overcharging or taking the mickey on the job. i.e. I heard
of one company who, while they have a cheaper hourly rate that most of
them, charge 5 hours for re-imaging a laptop.
Not looking at the options when finding a solution pretty much comes
under this category. Although Dave's point about Linux people only
grudgingly supporting Windows platforms is a fair one. I know I'm
biased towards FLOSS and only after all of those options have been
exhausted will I perhaps look at the proprietary solutions depending
on how important it is to me. I'm pretty sure I'd be a bit more
amendable to a proprietary solution if in the workplace but that
doesn't make me unbiased.
As for the argument about mark up on software. It's the same as
selling the hardware. Pricing yourself out of the market simply isn't
worth it. Sell it at cost and make the money on services. And people
remember the service more than you having provided the software so it
has a hell of a lot more value.

I was shocked to find out that IT in NZ was predominantly
Windows/proprietary when I got here. I thought that due to the size and
resources of the country, DIY and elbow grease would have been the
preferred method.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNSd5sAAoJEHblvm1J+WqMPxoH/jzX5xIS4dVOGE3tJMHONLlO
fEBDpZhF6SEmBf2IqWUHneDpV4tQ/UQYfWDJZG7kF9F5Er6UaGImWcqufRHHQOHy
q81hRBNpwxZ+7juXi96xEiqL54eIs1VLmU4N+dkL7egAkWT7uWZoH714PWsBE5qy
3otNjEv3fVsCchuOaZau4qOovlszwZOP2gXf/SrORHRhxmjrDt8Rydh0P0xGiVy5
YLqTDud0cBwLcTX8KK4t0QYpY3UfogOCPvcueIPX0fTOcWLxy+FMBYc3tcLcoF47
uLwz+sM6EfumXowJ3YeLeeyNdcH2hzvF30cGGGAYEH3GJsN3Y8773+qOUauUazg=
=v2nE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Jim Cheetham]

Post by Bryan Baldwin
I was shocked to find out that IT in NZ was predominantly
Windows/proprietary when I got here. I thought that due to the size and
resources of the country, DIY and elbow grease would have been the
preferred method.

No contradiction there. With good stable free software and open source
software, you install, configure and generally forget. With
proprietary software you install, configure, license, license,
upgrade, re-license, upgrade, upgrade because something else upgraded,
re-license ... lots of elbow grease being used there, just to keep
what you thought you already had.

-jim

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Robin Paulson]

Post by Jim Cheetham
No contradiction there. With good stable free software and open source
software, you install, configure and generally forget. With

oh, come on: this is a pipe-dream. there's not a single, non-trivial
application out there there that doesn't need significant support

even the most trivial things need to at the very least provide help
for users - support is about helping users use the software as much as
making sure a system doesn't crash/is backed up/secure/etc.

i get endless user help questions every week, no matter how much i
encourage people to look through help files and use web search - i'm
not so naive as to think ubuntu, open office and firefox will
magically make it go away

if we're going to sing the merits of FLOSS, let's be realistic

Post by Jim Cheetham
proprietary software you install, configure, license, license,
upgrade, re-license, upgrade, upgrade because something else upgraded,

and even with a supposedly well-packaged FLOSS OS i get dependency
problems sometimes

Post by Jim Cheetham
re-license ... lots of elbow grease being used there, just to keep
what you thought you already had.

i'm with you on the licensing thing though - i read a piece a couple
of weeks back about the money MS makes from people not understanding
the licences they have bought, buying too many, paying for upgrades
they don't need, etc. it was estimated to be a huge amount

[Jim Cheetham]

Post by Robin Paulson

Post by Jim Cheetham
No contradiction there. With good stable free software and open source
software, you install, configure and generally forget. With

oh, come on: this is a pipe-dream. there's not a single, non-trivial
application out there there that doesn't need significant support

Sure, but there's a difference between supporting the *use* of the
application, and supporting the application itself.

Email servers are a case in point; you have to manage the mail queue,
and the users use of the mailstore, but not the program itself (until
your external requirements change).

Post by Robin Paulson
even the most trivial things need to at the very least provide help
for users - support is about helping users use the software as much as
making sure a system doesn't crash/is backed up/secure/etc.

Users are a common factor to any solution, regardless of the source of
the code. So I don't see how it helps the argument, unless you can
show that it's easier to support a user of a proprietary solution than
a user of an open one.

Post by Robin Paulson
and even with a supposedly well-packaged FLOSS OS i get dependency
problems sometimes

Right. How often do Debian release an update into stable, that renders
the packaging system unstable? You could counter that with "How useful
is a system only using packages from Debian stable?" which is a fair
comment.

-jim

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Dave Lane]

Hi Robin,

Post by Robin Paulson

Post by Dave Lane

Post by Robin Paulson
so, my point: how does free software in general get over this hurdle?

Easily, in many areas. You simply need to engage a commercial FOSS
provider who can provide reference customers to convince your
prospective customers that it's a viable option - I can think of quite a
few off vendors and references off hand.

the bigger question though, is how to do this? i'm sure the floss
provider can demonstrate the usefulness of some free/open (in fact,
completely ignoring this fact) product, but support becomes an issue

Indeed.

Post by Robin Paulson
employ two companies - one to do the new open software, one to look
after the legacy systems? that doesn't sound ideal

It's generally the only option. Most businesses have multiple IT support
providers anyway, e.g. their Desktop (and perhaps server) support, their
website support, their finance/accounts system support, their server
support (if not managed by the desktop folks).

We normally do some Windows support for customers connecting to our
servers, but we point out to them the extra costs they're bearing in
terms of support due to the inadequacies of the MS Windows platform.

Sadly, due almost entirely to the pathological perceived dependence on
MS Office, none have yet abandoned MS Win for Linux desktops (although
some have trialled it, and the lack of MS Office was their *only* issue).

Post by Robin Paulson
get the MS-centric company to support the free software products
alongside the existing? unlikely

You might be surprised. Many MS-only shops are recognising the writing
on the wall - the FOSS stuff is getting better and better, and if they
don't embrace it, they'll be "disrupted" out of existence. It's worth
talking to them.

Post by Robin Paulson
get the free/open company to support a host of legacy (i.e. not
supplied by them, thus in an unknown state) windows desktops and
servers? hmm, who knows

We have a *very* hard time finding Linux-savvy people who are also
willing to sully their hands with MS Windows technologies - very few
people, once exposed to Linux, can still stomach Windows (in my
experience). There's more of a Linux/Mac cross-over, but some us find
that only slightly less distasteful :)

Post by Robin Paulson
what do egressive recommend here? other companies?

Most of our customers have come to us from MS-only vendors. In some
cases, we've installed a server to augment their existing supplier, in
others, we've replaced the incumbent. In quite a few cases, the customer
has asked us to take over support for all their systems, but we don't do
Windows servers. As mentioned above, we provide (grudging) support for
MS and Apple desktops, but would vastly prefer to offer thin client
Linux solutions, which would be substantially more cost-effective, if
the very unfortunate dependence on MS Office could be mitigated.

I suspect that if gov'ts around the world standardised on ODF document
formats rather than "whatever MS Office supports right now", we'd see a
pretty swift and decisive departure from the status quo. Australia's
moving in that direction (their Nat'l Archive only accepts ODF for
archival purposes, not MS formats).

Cheers,

Dave

[Nick Rout]

Post by Dave Lane
Hi Robin,

Post by Robin Paulson

Post by Dave Lane

Post by Robin Paulson
so, my point: how does free software in general get over this hurdle?

Easily, in many areas. You simply need to engage a commercial FOSS
provider who can provide reference customers to convince your
prospective customers that it's a viable option - I can think of quite a
few off vendors and references off hand.

the bigger question though, is how to do this? i'm sure the floss
provider can demonstrate the usefulness of some free/open (in fact,
completely ignoring this fact) product, but support becomes an issue

Indeed.

Post by Robin Paulson
employ two companies - one to do the new open software, one to look
after the legacy systems? that doesn't sound ideal

It's generally the only option. Most businesses have multiple IT support
providers anyway, e.g. their Desktop (and perhaps server) support, their
website support, their finance/accounts system support, their server
support (if not managed by the desktop folks).
We normally do some Windows support for customers connecting to our
servers, but we point out to them the extra costs they're bearing in
terms of support due to the inadequacies of the MS Windows platform.
Sadly, due almost entirely to the pathological perceived dependence on
MS Office, none have yet abandoned MS Win for Linux desktops (although
some have trialled it, and the lack of MS Office was their *only* issue).

I recently went out and formed my own law firm again. As part of that
I tried Openoffice extensively - the writer part (the other stuff I
rarely use, except spreadsheets, which is occasional).

Legal docs tend to be heavily formatted, headings, numbered paragraphs
several layers deep (ie (1)(a)(ii)) - OOO just did not hack it,
particularly when trying to deal with documents across the OOO/MS
divide.

So the office uses MS Office. It's a shame. I sometimes even feel ashamed!

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Dave Lane]

Hi Nick,

Post by Nick Rout

Post by Dave Lane
Sadly, due almost entirely to the pathological perceived dependence on
MS Office, none have yet abandoned MS Win for Linux desktops (although
some have trialled it, and the lack of MS Office was their *only* issue).

I recently went out and formed my own law firm again. As part of that
I tried Openoffice extensively - the writer part (the other stuff I
rarely use, except spreadsheets, which is occasional).
Legal docs tend to be heavily formatted, headings, numbered paragraphs
several layers deep (ie (1)(a)(ii)) - OOO just did not hack it,
particularly when trying to deal with documents across the OOO/MS
divide.
So the office uses MS Office. It's a shame. I sometimes even feel ashamed!

Unsurprising - OOo/LibreOffice are not ideal apps to be sure. My
suggestion, however, is the one I gave to AU Gov't representatives last
week, who're debating the use of OOXML (MS's proprietary "open in name
only" standard) over ODF for AU gov't docs:

A gov't and/or industry group of sufficient size, whose normal
cumulative MS Office license/upgrades fees are in the millions should
seriously consider investing something up to that license fee
expenditure in hiring local developers to improve OOo/LibreOffice to do
what's required. A million $ would buy quite a lot of improvements. It's
just up to a visionary gov't (or, say, the AU/NZ Law Associations) to do it.

Then your (currently) legitimate complaints would no longer be
impediments to transition. MS knows this is inevitable, which is why
they're trying to pass legislation to hobble FOSS - things like software
patents, ACTA, DCMA, FTAs, TPPA, etc.

Cheers,

Dave

[Nevyn]

Post by Dave Lane
Hi Nick,

Post by Nick Rout
I recently went out and formed my own law firm again. As part of that
I tried Openoffice extensively - the writer part (the other stuff I
rarely use, except spreadsheets, which is occasional).
Legal docs tend to be heavily formatted, headings, numbered paragraphs
several layers deep (ie (1)(a)(ii)) - OOO just did not hack it,
particularly when trying to deal with documents across the OOO/MS
divide.
So the office uses MS Office. It's a shame. I sometimes even feel ashamed!

Unsurprising - OOo/LibreOffice are not ideal apps to be sure. My
suggestion, however, is the one I gave to AU Gov't representatives last
week, who're debating the use of OOXML (MS's proprietary "open in name

*Grumble* I'm still of the opinion that the reliance on these bits of
software is a lack of imagination.

99% of the time, you don't need the level of formatting that word
processors give you. Do you really need to be able to format an
individual character? Why then does my screen have to be clogged with
20,000 formatting buttons (just a slight exaggeration) when just a
style selector will do? (and perhaps a button to bring up a style
editor).

And why oh why is there such a heavy reliance on spreadsheets?!?! This
bit really upsets me. The three reasons say it all really:
* One Offs
* Prototyping
* Doing a half arse job

Take those licensing costs from MS Office, and do up a database.
Perhaps find a SaaS for a word processor if you absolutely must have
one in there otherwise promote the use of forms or finally come up
with a decent document processor (lyx is probably the closest out
there).

Regards,
Nevyn
http://nevsramblings.blogspot.com/

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Nick Rout]

Post by Nevyn

Post by Dave Lane
Hi Nick,

Post by Nick Rout
I recently went out and formed my own law firm again. As part of that
I tried Openoffice extensively - the writer part (the other stuff I
rarely use, except spreadsheets, which is occasional).
Legal docs tend to be heavily formatted, headings, numbered paragraphs
several layers deep (ie (1)(a)(ii)) - OOO just did not hack it,
particularly when trying to deal with documents across the OOO/MS
divide.
So the office uses MS Office. It's a shame. I sometimes even feel ashamed!

Unsurprising - OOo/LibreOffice are not ideal apps to be sure. My
suggestion, however, is the one I gave to AU Gov't representatives last
week, who're debating the use of OOXML (MS's proprietary "open in name

*Grumble* I'm still of the opinion that the reliance on these bits of
software is a lack of imagination.
99% of the time, you don't need the level of formatting that word
processors give you. Do you really need to be able to format an
individual character? Why then does my screen have to be clogged with
20,000 formatting buttons (just a slight exaggeration) when just a
style selector will do? (and perhaps a button to bring up a style
editor).

I agree, styles in particular could be used a lot more. The trouble is
that most secretaries and document preparers use the WP as a
typewriter with super twink for their errors and changes.

Post by Nevyn
And why oh why is there such a heavy reliance on spreadsheets?!?! This
* One Offs

Yeah typical use is a matrimonial property calculation. There are
maybe 40 variables, the variable bit is the value we attribute to an
asset or debt. Each is truly a one-off, built for the situation. It is
easy to change a number of variables and get the result. Not worth
building a database.

Post by Nevyn
* Prototyping
* Doing a half arse job
Take those licensing costs from MS Office, and do up a database.
Perhaps find a SaaS for a word processor if you absolutely must have
one in there otherwise promote the use of forms or finally come up
with a decent document processor (lyx is probably the closest out
there).

My ideal document creation system, for template documents like wills
and employment contracts
would be a web based system, tied into a database backend and feeding
data to latex. Nice type, easy pdf creation, etc.

Post by Nevyn
Regards,
Nevyn
http://nevsramblings.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Bryan Baldwin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Post by Nevyn

Post by Dave Lane
Hi Nick,

Post by Nick Rout
I recently went out and formed my own law firm again. As part of that
I tried Openoffice extensively - the writer part (the other stuff I
rarely use, except spreadsheets, which is occasional).
Legal docs tend to be heavily formatted, headings, numbered paragraphs
several layers deep (ie (1)(a)(ii)) - OOO just did not hack it,
particularly when trying to deal with documents across the OOO/MS
divide.
So the office uses MS Office. It's a shame. I sometimes even feel ashamed!

Unsurprising - OOo/LibreOffice are not ideal apps to be sure. My
suggestion, however, is the one I gave to AU Gov't representatives last
week, who're debating the use of OOXML (MS's proprietary "open in name

*Grumble* I'm still of the opinion that the reliance on these bits of
software is a lack of imagination.
99% of the time, you don't need the level of formatting that word
processors give you. Do you really need to be able to format an
individual character? Why then does my screen have to be clogged with
20,000 formatting buttons (just a slight exaggeration) when just a
style selector will do? (and perhaps a button to bring up a style
editor).
And why oh why is there such a heavy reliance on spreadsheets?!?! This
* One Offs
* Prototyping
* Doing a half arse job
Take those licensing costs from MS Office, and do up a database.
Perhaps find a SaaS for a word processor if you absolutely must have
one in there otherwise promote the use of forms or finally come up
with a decent document processor (lyx is probably the closest out
there)

OMFG Lyx++

If you need to get into a doc and change formatting piecemeal all over
the place, your style is broken and you either need to fix it, or pick
on that works.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNSRzHAAoJEHblvm1J+WqMC+wH/ibrdOVBrJmzP+/lChy+k9Hp
joLpICgMkZsMAVp7/D720/ey0j+RgHjhMwjEk4P1S1Fjk62uAwVhYWpRK0wYmvMY
sg03/PFdftvQXGh71XEUcvX0JDN+tIOTAiwbN8IF7a3t4PhwKRPidZ2KjazmtcCA
C5lyxfkJ61uys9T3HAU2PVmoM1FcUV0OIqEJj3LmHQ3mCxaTvIKNahxG01omLgFU
E+gAKd/TFI5QzIEjpNlgmaUpxnk675VYDxy8u53KUCphU/6NLwNkp8QDlT86ek8M
eMZjCm/WPFVUc1LObn85AQwRALxfwhZbvPYqSXJJVv/p93yfAcqEfTRwLlxL/6o=
=voRG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Ryan McCoskrie]

Post by Dave Lane
We have a *very* hard time finding Linux-savvy people who are also
willing to sully their hands with MS Windows technologies.

Exactly what counts as savvy? Ive got a qualification and am desperate enough
to work with Windows, the problem is though that everyone seems to only be
willing to employ long-beared wizards.

[Dave Lane]

The important things to realise if you're looking for work in the Linux
world are (this is just one FOSS employer's perspective):
1. Linux/FOSS shops don't tend to advertise positions. With a couple
exceptions, most of us are small (fewer than 10 people), and don't tend
to market themselves actively. They work through word of mouth.
2. Most IT jobs are found through word of mouth. If you impress me, I'll
try to find work for you. A professional qualification means nothing to
me, and a 1 or 2 year diploma even less. A university degree means more
(doesn't have to be Comp Sci - any hard science, engineering, maths, and
perhaps others). Ultimately, if you don't strike me as having the right
attitude and knowing what you're talking about, forget it.
3. The best way to impress a prospective FOSS savvy employer is to show
them the contributions you've made to FOSS projects in your own time.
Otherwise, it's just talk. Unless you're fundamentally passionate about
working with Linux and fiddle with it at home, you're unlikely to know
enough to interest me.
4. We only hire people we're not afraid to put in front of clients.
Knowing the tech isn't enough. You have to know how to talk (and
*write*) to people of all skill levels in a way that's thoughtful, good
humoured, and literate.

Part of the reason we find it tricky to find good people is that we have
high expectations. And we're unapologetic about that. Anyone running a
small business can't afford to be indiscriminate. One weak link in a
team of five or even ten in a knowledge industry like IT, can sink it.
Weak links also tend to damage company culture.

For what it's worth, we have no staff with beards other than goatees or
the odd "coded-all-through-the-night-on-some-epic-hack" 24 hour shadow,
and occasionally ill-advise mo's during Movember. Hope that provides
some insights.

Cheers,

Dave

Post by Ryan McCoskrie

Post by Dave Lane
We have a *very* hard time finding Linux-savvy people who are also
willing to sully their hands with MS Windows technologies.

Exactly what counts as savvy? Ive got a qualification and am desperate enough
to work with Windows, the problem is though that everyone seems to only be
willing to employ long-beared wizards.

[Mark Foster]

I wrote a novel in response to this, and then canned it... twice...

However my key point of view is that because you can't just go to
University and graduate as a 'FOSS engineer' you need to be able to
demonstrate your nous to potential employers in other ways.

This means
- Taking more menial jobs that might 'get you in the door'
- Spending (your own) time developing your skills to the point you can
cite 'experience' on your CV, even if none of that experience is
commercial
- be a high quality applicant in many other ways. Personal and
professional development; appearance; hygiene (!); communications skills;
attitude.

When an advertising employer wants experience, they're looking
for someone who can hit the ground running. If you demonstrate an ability
to think on your feet and can bring other useful traits, you stand a
better than even chance. Even the most clooful bearded-one will be
overlooked if you're seen to have better potential and are simultaneously
likely to help them retain or gain new business, or help them out in some
other way (say with additional skills or capabilities you bring to the
workplace).

I can say with confidence that my (largely self-developed, and with
considerable help from the various LUG's im involved with and certain
folks who've participated in these) own linux abilities have helped my
career development - and strictly speaking, I don't work with FOSS. I do
however work with Networks, and FOSS servers and tools frequently feature.

Mark.

Post by Dave Lane
The important things to realise if you're looking for work in the Linux
1. Linux/FOSS shops don't tend to advertise positions. With a couple
exceptions, most of us are small (fewer than 10 people), and don't tend
to market themselves actively. They work through word of mouth.
2. Most IT jobs are found through word of mouth. If you impress me, I'll
try to find work for you. A professional qualification means nothing to
me, and a 1 or 2 year diploma even less. A university degree means more
(doesn't have to be Comp Sci - any hard science, engineering, maths, and
perhaps others). Ultimately, if you don't strike me as having the right
attitude and knowing what you're talking about, forget it.
3. The best way to impress a prospective FOSS savvy employer is to show
them the contributions you've made to FOSS projects in your own time.
Otherwise, it's just talk. Unless you're fundamentally passionate about
working with Linux and fiddle with it at home, you're unlikely to know
enough to interest me.
4. We only hire people we're not afraid to put in front of clients.
Knowing the tech isn't enough. You have to know how to talk (and
*write*) to people of all skill levels in a way that's thoughtful, good
humoured, and literate.
Part of the reason we find it tricky to find good people is that we have
high expectations. And we're unapologetic about that. Anyone running a
small business can't afford to be indiscriminate. One weak link in a
team of five or even ten in a knowledge industry like IT, can sink it.
Weak links also tend to damage company culture.
For what it's worth, we have no staff with beards other than goatees or
the odd "coded-all-through-the-night-on-some-epic-hack" 24 hour shadow,
and occasionally ill-advise mo's during Movember. Hope that provides
some insights.
Cheers,
Dave

Post by Ryan McCoskrie

Post by Dave Lane
We have a *very* hard time finding Linux-savvy people who are also
willing to sully their hands with MS Windows technologies.

Exactly what counts as savvy? Ive got a qualification and am desperate enough
to work with Windows, the problem is though that everyone seems to only be
willing to employ long-beared wizards.

--
http://egressive.com Free/OpenSourceSoftware: because to share is human
Only use Open Standards - w3.org, Drupal powers communities - drupal.org
Effusion Group http://effusiongroup.com Software Patents kill innovation
_______________________________________________
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Cliff Pratt]

Post by Ryan McCoskrie

Post by Dave Lane
We have a *very* hard time finding Linux-savvy people who are also
willing to sully their hands with MS Windows technologies.

Exactly what counts as savvy? Ive got a qualification and am
desperate enough to work with Windows, the problem is though that
everyone seems to only be willing to employ long-beared wizards.

Experience only comes with time, but if you can demonstrate experience
and willingness to learn you shouldn't have any problems getting a job.
Experience doesn't mean a grey beard, but it is unfortunately a chicken
and egg situation. You only have experience by first getting it, but you
can't get it if you don't already have some. Polytechnics try to help
the situation by arranging internships and industry placings.

Some employers are actually reluctant to employ people straight out of
university or polytechnic because of a know-it-all attitude. Some are
willing to take youngsters if they seem willing to learn and maybe do
the slightly more boring bits for a while, while learning how businesses
operate.

Cheers,

Cliff

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Nevyn]

Post by Ryan McCoskrie

Post by Dave Lane
We have a *very* hard time finding Linux-savvy people who are also
willing to sully their hands with MS Windows technologies.

Exactly what counts as savvy? Ive got a qualification and am desperate enough
to work with Windows, the problem is though that everyone seems to only be
willing to employ long-beared wizards.

Speaking from the perspective from someone who found himself
essentially whoring himself out and writing VBA code and is finally
working full time with Linux (though currently as a volunteer):

Find a passion. Everyone can tell when you're not terribly keen on
something. I went to an interview once where the woman interviewing me
stopped about 10 minutes in and asked "you don't actually want to be
doing this do you?". Help desk for an ISP. Yuck.

You can probably fake it for a little while but it's not making your
or your employer any happier.

Again - find a passion. Doing something you love doing for little pay
is better than doing something you dread for loads of money. The
attitude is going to make all the difference and that's a two way
street.

Oh and say as little about yourself as humanly possible - people then
start using their imaginations about your abilities ;)

Regards,
Nevyn
http://nevsramblings.blogspot.com/

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Bryan Baldwin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Post by Nevyn
Speaking from the perspective from someone who found himself
essentially whoring himself out and writing VBA code and is finally
Find a passion. Everyone can tell when you're not terribly keen on
something. I went to an interview once where the woman interviewing me
stopped about 10 minutes in and asked "you don't actually want to be
doing this do you?". Help desk for an ISP. Yuck.
You can probably fake it for a little while but it's not making your
or your employer any happier.
Again - find a passion. Doing something you love doing for little pay
is better than doing something you dread for loads of money. The
attitude is going to make all the difference and that's a two way
street.
Oh and say as little about yourself as humanly possible - people then
start using their imaginations about your abilities ;)

Attend LUG meetings. Meet the people who show up there, participate, and
mind the quiet people. They are often the ones who know something. The
loud ones won't be hard to miss and will let you know how much they know
or don't know very quickly.

I got lucky. I'm doing something I love and have a *lot* to learn
{from,about}. Thanks New Zealand.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNS9JnAAoJEHblvm1J+WqMO6MH/2WWA3jU34BJr6CnMOZmN8m2
jWFDQ1cPOsZIv2dvZfrg16tUeHj/uSqQUWTBNIRExeziqI5kWKpjXSdINnTkw+fn
2Lp00T9YtwGHQNbJO3xDKPzqGn1ZT6rxG7f0tbgLNMpuuiq49ZMCa1yfxO11N1rG
NrC1jcGzQFW3zIA1I6mGzZrcSPD9A/kayKlJn3PWIK4z9vmVFxyT2Zi+PnrouVJ4
ao5N2mqgGTjZUFghvZ0/SFsUKLdizCtAQQkfPa9StKpalxO/e1sd2aDakHex86/3
KwVc7PMyeB6tfJz1Nb4jTaEMzN/+R+9MvTLqCHLAYZaCkzmfQ8ypwd6/SJ319ks=
=PP2/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Steve Withers]

The only way out of this is to find IT people who know more than Microsoft
products. You can't reasonably expect to get any other answer from people
who operate like that.

From their point of view, it keeps everything simpler and they don't have to

know as much. So they will shepherd customers into the products and services
they already know.

If these are your IT support people, you need to get new ones. There isn't
really any other way. They will foot drag, resist...and quietly trash-talk
any OSS advocate behind their back.....and have been very successful at
death-by-a-thousand-cuts blockage over the years. They will use their own
ignorance and lack of skill as a "cost" argument against any non-Windows
solution.

You really have to get such people out of the way and start with people who
know what they are doing and who can get the job done.

Steve Withers
***@gmail.com
[phone]

the title comes out of a situation at work, but applies to many a
small-medium company, particularly those using external contractors.
we have IT contractors who run our systems, which are MS-centric, with
a ton of non-MS, but still Windows-only software
we are currently looking for a certain software solution which will be
a fairly major part of our infrastructure. when i talk to the IT
support, they say "oh, you want Microsoft such-and-such". no
consideration of other products (there are several which come highly
recommended), or knowledge of them when i mention them.
from my understanding, this is a common situation with IT shops in NZ
and probably elsewhere
so, my point: how does free software in general get over this hurdle?
switching IT shops is a big ask for any sizeable company, and trying
to get a useful comparison out of existing MS-centred companies is not
easy. the situation is further not helped when management are
(knowingly) not that IT-savvy, and have been brought up with
windows/word/outlook/excel
--
robin
http://tangleball.org.nz/ - Auckland's Creative Space
http://bumblepuppy.org/blog/
_______________________________________________
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Dagan McGregor]

Post by Steve Withers
You really have to get such people out of the way and start with people who
know what they are doing and who can get the job done.

And in this category, if the company has Microsoft Gold Partner or
similar plastered all over their marketing material and website, and
Microsoft customers for references, then you can be assured you will
*never* get a honest and balanced viewpoint when dealing with them.

They have visibly hopped into bed with the Microsoft ecosystem as their
business model, and no amount of foot-dragging or attempts otherwise will
get them to move.
Some of them may agree to support open source products, but the 'support'
will be very lacking.

Cheers,
Dagan

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Adrian Mageanu]

Post by Robin Paulson
the title comes out of a situation at work, but applies to many a
small-medium company, particularly those using external contractors.
we have IT contractors who run our systems, which are MS-centric, with
a ton of non-MS, but still Windows-only software
we are currently looking for a certain software solution which will be
a fairly major part of our infrastructure. when i talk to the IT
support, they say "oh, you want Microsoft such-and-such". no
consideration of other products (there are several which come highly
recommended), or knowledge of them when i mention them.
from my understanding, this is a common situation with IT shops in NZ
and probably elsewhere
so, my point: how does free software in general get over this hurdle?
switching IT shops is a big ask for any sizeable company, and trying
to get a useful comparison out of existing MS-centred companies is not
easy. the situation is further not helped when management are
(knowingly) not that IT-savvy, and have been brought up with
windows/word/outlook/excel

Business are in business to make money, so you have to "talk money" so
to speak, to win them over to your solution.

Do a TOC for your preferred FOSS solution(s) and make a comparison with
what was considered so far. Show benefits, advantages and, most
important, savings. Do this for short, medium and long term.

Put dollar figures near every point in your proposal, be it time,
opportunities, customer retention, what have you, and support the
figures with examples both pro and con from other business - the closer
to your company the better, even better if they are business partners -
and/or local studies (a bit harder here, but achievable).

If you can show a FOSS solution is more profitable than the alternative,
you have a good chance to win the management over. And when the
management is on your side, the internal IT will follow, don't worry
about that.


Good luck,

Adrian



_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Adrian Mageanu]

Post by Adrian Mageanu
Do a TOC for your preferred FOSS solution(s) and make a comparison with

Sorry, I meant TCO - Total Cost of Ownership


_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Bruce Clement]

[...]

Post by Adrian Mageanu
If you can show a FOSS solution is more profitable than the alternative,
you have a good chance to win the management over. And when the
management is on your side, the internal IT will follow, don't worry
about that.

If only that were true. I've seen so much heel dragging and outright
sabotage in my career that it isn't funny. Staff who are captive to a
vendor, any vendor, are often the worst at this.

This can also be tackled by the in-house team. As an employee it is your
duty to do the best you can for your employer & trying to get them to
consider (and if possible deploy) better software solutions is part of doing
your best.

One good tactic I use internally is when "they" suggest a proprietary
solution is to ask them which FLOSS solutions they considered and why they
rejected them.

Usually they admit to investigating none, but sometimes they make vague
mutterings about unnamed packages, when this happens challenge them for the
names of the packages.

The usual response is to admit they haven't actually researched any. With
any luck boss tasks them with an investigation. They will come back in a
week with the names of packages they have got from Google and claim that
none of them are suitable, without being able to say why ... again they need
to be challenged on this.

If you have pre-warning that a solution is being sought for a problem you
can do your own research & find something that the FOSS does well that the
proprietary solution either doesn't do, or does poorly. Then you just need
to sell this feature to the boss. When "they" come back with their
unresearched claims that the FLOSS solutions don't meet the company's needs
you can start asking pointed questions about the killer feature.
--
Bruce Clement

Home: http://www.clement.co.nz/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/Bruce_Clement
Google Buzz: http://www.google.com/profiles/aotearoanz

"Before attempting to create something new, it is vital to have a good
appreciation of everything that already exists in this field." Mikhail
Kalashnikov
_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Reed Wade]

Post by Adrian Mageanu
If you can show a FOSS solution is more profitable than the alternative,
you have a good chance to win the management over. And when the
management is on your side, the internal IT will follow, don't worry
about that.

Or you might have a director like the one at a place I used to work
(in the US--that could never happen here) who made us shut down our
nice new sendmail based set up so he could switch the company to
Exchange.

I said, "Hey, email is important to our existence and this works so
much better than what we used to have."

He said, "Yeah, we will lose some mail but that'll force us to become
experts in Exchange which is a valuable skill we can sell since all
small businesses are going to be using Exchange and Sharepoint for
everything pretty soon. Hey, check out the new MS Partner wall plaque
they just sent us!"

So, a small, well respected consulting company who people would come
to for advice and interesting solutions goes down a path like
that?--on purpose?

I don't remember much of the following year but woke up working for
Catalyst and living in Wellington with the same cat and wife so the
story does have a happy ending for me.

I do see hope but it will take a while. Like racism, it fades when
younger generations are raised up in the right way and the older die
off. Sense will win out over time--it's just more sustainable long
term.

It doesn't make me feel any better but that company doesn't seem to
have done much since going hard MS. I'm pretty sure they're still
alive and renting out people but I just checked the web site and it's
still touting the interesting work we did 4 years ago on the main
page--nothing new to report apparently.

I know I'm not alone in being saddened that the most insidious effects
of the MS disease are how strongly it stifles creativity and dulls the
senses to beautiful ideas and possibilities.

-reed

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug

[Dave Lane]

Hi Reed,

Post by Reed Wade
Or you might have a director like the one at a place I used to work
(in the US--that could never happen here) who made us shut down our
nice new sendmail based set up so he could switch the company to
Exchange.

Heh - not so fast! It has happened to us here in NZ... We set up and
supported a a postfix server for a rather rural District Council. The
server ran flawlessly for 3 years, the first 18 months of it with a
dial-on-demand modem until ADSL became available in their area. It cost
the council almost nothing.

They rang us up one day and said: "As good as your service has been,
we're going to replace it with MS Exchange because it's free to us, and
our local Windows support guy wants to maintain it for us." Presumably
because he thought it'd be a good thing to have on his otherwise
unimpressive CV. That was around 2004. I pointed out to the council
employee the irony of having my country's government, funded by my own
tax dollars, screwing my local company over, preferring to hand the
profit to a US-based multinational corporation instead... I don't think
she got it.

Pretty unjust and probably anti-competitive, in my opinion.

Dave

[Peter Harrison]

Post by Robin Paulson
the title comes out of a situation at work, but applies to many a
small-medium company, particularly those using external contractors.
we have IT contractors who run our systems, which are MS-centric, with
a ton of non-MS, but still Windows-only software
we are currently looking for a certain software solution which will be
a fairly major part of our infrastructure. when i talk to the IT
support, they say "oh, you want Microsoft such-and-such". no
consideration of other products (there are several which come highly
recommended), or knowledge of them when i mention them.

This is a concern if you are depending on these guys to make
technology decisions. Forgetting the issue of open source options it
is a concern when the people who are meant to have a good grasp of
product options are ignorant of all the possibilities. However, if
they are clearly a Microsoft shop; that is they advertise this fact,
then I think it's pretty clear what they will push.

Post by Robin Paulson
from my understanding, this is a common situation with IT shops in NZ
and probably elsewhere

It depends on who you are using for IT services. I'm surprised at how
many companies offer more balanced options, including open source. I'm
not saying it's as popular as I would like, but if you want to shop
around you can find companies that will be technology agnostic.

Post by Robin Paulson
so, my point: how does free software in general get over this hurdle?
switching IT shops is a big ask for any sizeable company, and trying
to get a useful comparison out of existing MS-centred companies is not
easy. the situation is further not helped when management are
(knowingly) not that IT-savvy, and have been brought up with
windows/word/outlook/excel

Ultimately it has to come down to cost and risk. MS has been seen as
the "safe" option. There is a whole commercial ecosystem founded
around MS products. The one drawback of open source, not changed since
at least 2002, is the fact that it's not good business to promote open
source. If you do your competitors can leverage off it.

You will note that Red Hat does not talk about "Linux" much; they have
branded themselves, and all their products. Other open source
companies are doing very similar things.

IT companies are in the know, and have high levels of open source
adoption. Other companies however are being - taken advantage of - not
just in software but in hardware. Imagine spending $50K on a server -
we are talking a pretty average machine loaded with "server" software.
Perhaps a backup tape.

_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list ***@linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug