Anthony Atkielski wrote:

Or the city administration of Munich, which intends to move its
Windows desktops to a Linux/KDE-based installation.
Why not just burn taxpayer euro in a bonfire?  It would have the same
end result and it would be faster.

Well, if you just run a set of 1-3 applications, and don't do anything else with the computer, there shouldn't be much of a difference. Think, for example, of the software that the clerks feed applications for driving licenses or passports into. That's (most likely) one do-it-all software running on the terminal-like PC all the time. Or a secretary, using some kind of office software (I don't know if they consider OpenOffice). Apart from making a political statement, the advantage is of course being independent from the Microsoft update cycle. Of course whether it's cheaper having the inhouse staff or a consulting firm update the Linux desktops needs to be evaluated first (and I'm sure they did). Another point, as far as I got it, was security, i.e., higher resilience towards worms and viruses.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to