[Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
See http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/12/uk-government- open-standards-the-great-betrayal-of-2012/index.htm. There's vague talk of a new definition of what is Open, but until then, there is no longer a definition, so anything goes. I know I get a bit heated about these things at times, but to me, the definition of an 'Open Standard' is pretty self evident and the original guidance had a perfectly good explanation, so this can only be intervention from the companies with money. Most of the world now recognises the benefits of Open Source and Open Standards and the UK Government steps back to the dark ages. You can rely on them to do the right thing for UK PLC. -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
The withdrawal of PPN 3/11 is a scandal! I was using it to try and get some non-M$ products into a government project - looks like that particular prop to my case has been well and truly kicked out :( On 24/12/11 08:56, Terry Coles wrote: http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/12/uk-government- open-standards-the-great-betrayal-of-2012/index. -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Wednesday 28 Dec 2011 11:14:30 Simon P Smith wrote: > The withdrawal of PPN 3/11 is a scandal! > > I was using it to try and get some non-M$ products into a government > project - looks like that particular prop to my case has been well and > truly kicked out :( Can I suggest that you write to your MP and point this out. By pure coincidence, I had just sealed the envelope holding my letter to my MP (Annette Brooke) when I saw your post. I pointed out that the decision favours the foreign corporates and disadvantages UK companies. It can't do any harm. -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Simon >From: Simon P Smith >Subject: Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT >To: dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk >Message-ID: <4efafa16.6000...@askitsdone.co.uk> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >The withdrawal of PPN 3/11 is a scandal! >I was using it to try and get some non-M$ products into a government >project - looks like that particular prop to my case has been well and >truly kicked out :( Are you willing to supply some more info about this because as far as I know HMG still want to use Open Source? For example I am organizing a series of internal HM Government events for Senior Civil servants on Open Source as Chair of the BCS Open Source SG (OSSG). The first of which will take place in February 2012. Therefore your experience sounds like it would be of interest to the HMG staff I am dealing with setting up these events. In other words they want to know examples about barriers to adoption of Open Source by HMG. Just for the record I've looked at this recent statement about Open Standards and feel its more about getting the statement bullet proof as opposed to actually dropping intention to make greater use of (Free and) Open Source. Mark Elkins -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Wednesday 28 Dec 2011 13:31:52 Mark Elkins wrote: > Just for the record I've looked at this recent statement about Open > Standards and feel its more about getting the statement bullet proof as > opposed to actually dropping intention to make greater use of (Free and) > Open Source. Hmm. You're obviously not as old and cynical as I am. If the Government simply wanted to make the statement bullet proof, then all they needed to do was leave it in place and then issue a clarification as soon as they'd completed their 'investigation'. Instead, they've completely revoked the original Policy: 'This note updates and supersedes Procurement Policy Note 3/11, Use of Open Standards when specifying ICT requirements.' leaving the situation as it was before PPN 3/11 came out. given the glacial pace that Government Departments do anything, this gives ample opportunity for the corporate lobbyists to get their ducks in a row. There was nothing wrong with the old Policy statement, so this intervention is totally counter-productive. (Unless you work for a major foreign software supplier of course.) -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Wednesday 28 Dec 2011 13:47:03 Terry Coles wrote: > On Wednesday 28 Dec 2011 13:31:52 Mark Elkins wrote: > > Just for the record I've looked at this recent statement about Open > > Standards and feel its more about getting the statement bullet proof as > > opposed to actually dropping intention to make greater use of (Free and) > > Open Source. I just want to add that PPN 3/11 (or 9/11 come to that) is nothing to do with Open Source software. As the name says, the Policy Note is to do with Open Standards, which allows the door to open for Open Source, but there are plenty of proprietary solutions that conform to Open Standards. Gosh. Even Microsoft could if they wanted to, instead of pretending to. -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Mark, On 28/12/11 13:31, Mark Elkins wrote: Are you willing to supply some more info about this because as far as I know HMG still want to use Open Source? For example I am organizing a series of internal HM Government events for Senior Civil servants on Open Source as Chair of the BCS Open Source SG (OSSG). The first of which will take place in February 2012. Therefore your experience sounds like it would be of interest to the HMG staff I am dealing with setting up these events. In other words they want to know examples about barriers to adoption of Open Source by HMG. One of the main issues in this department is the insistence on security accreditation and the push to use CESG approved products. The problem with OS is that you need time and money to submit the product for evaluation and gain some meaningful EAL certification; individual projects cannot afford this. SUSE enterprise and RedHat Enterprise are listed there albeit older versions as those organisations can see some benefit of funding this. I wanted to pilot a system on Ubunutu LTS with SE and use MySQL (or Postgres) instead of MSSQ; you end up spending a great deal of time showing how it can be (1) secure (2) supportable. We are in a laughable position where people will, when faced with a need for a routing MTA in a DMZ, select exchange and have to put in 2 ADs and and exchange box just to provide the MTA; just because "you never get sacked for usign M$". I am interested in your BCS events and if you send me the programme I will forward it to the "Enterprise Architect" civil servants for info. Just for the record I've looked at this recent statement about Open Standards and feel its more about getting the statement bullet proof as opposed to actually dropping intention to make greater use of (Free and) Open Source. Or also allowing the vested interests to lobby it more to water it down - perhaps I am cynical. Cheers, Simon -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Simon Apologies for not replying sooner. I know some progress has been made with regard to CESG and Open Source and will dig out a few links on this. >"Enterprise Architect" civil servants for info. Sounds good. I'll send you details across next week once I'm back in contact with HMG about this. Cheers Mark From: Simon P Smith To: Mark Elkins Cc: Mark Elkins ; "dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk" Sent: Wednesday, 28 December 2011, 13:56 Subject: Re: OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT Mark, On 28/12/11 13:31, Mark Elkins wrote: > >Are you willing to supply some more info about this because as far as I know >HMG still want to use Open Source? For example I am organizing a series of >internal HM Government events for Senior Civil servants on Open Source as >Chair of the BCS Open Source SG (OSSG). The first of which will take place in >February 2012. Therefore your experience sounds like it would be of interest >to the HMG staff I am dealing with setting up these events. In other words >they want to know examples about barriers to adoption of Open Source by HMG. > One of the main issues in this department is the insistence on security accreditation and the push to use CESG approved products. The problem with OS is that you need time and money to submit the product for evaluation and gain some meaningful EAL certification; individual projects cannot afford this. SUSE enterprise and RedHat Enterprise are listed there albeit older versions as those organisations can see some benefit of funding this. I wanted to pilot a system on Ubunutu LTS with SE and use MySQL (or Postgres) instead of MSSQ; you end up spending a great deal of time showing how it can be (1) secure (2) supportable. We are in a laughable position where people will, when faced with a need for a routing MTA in a DMZ, select exchange and have to put in 2 ADs and and exchange box just to provide the MTA; just because "you never get sacked for usign M$". I am interested in your BCS events and if you send me the programme I will forward it to the "Enterprise Architect" civil servants for info. >Just for the record I've looked at this recent statement about Open Standards and feel its more about getting the statement bullet proof as opposed to actually dropping intention to make greater use of (Free and) Open Source. > Or also allowing the vested interests to lobby it more to water it down - perhaps I am cynical. Cheers, Simon -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
This perhaps shows the difference in philosophy of some in the private sector to those in perhaps another part of the private sector who support FOSS: http://www.bsa.org/country/News%20and%20Events/News%20Archives/enGB/2010/enGB-10072010-endorsement.aspx In a way I might suggest we are into an argument about what are meaning of the terms "private sector" and "free market". Mark Elkins From: "dorset-requ...@mailman.lug.org.uk" To: dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk Sent: Sunday, 1 January 2012, 12:00 Subject: dorset Digest, Vol 416, Issue 4 Send dorset mailing list submissions to dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dorset or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to dorset-requ...@mailman.lug.org.uk You can reach the person managing the list at dorset-ow...@mailman.lug.org.uk When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of dorset digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT (Mark Elkins) 2. Re: Wimborne networking event. (c...@pampru.org) 3. Re: Wimborne networking event. (C A Wills) -- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 15:40:52 +0000 (GMT) From: Mark Elkins Subject: Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT To: Simon P Smith , Mark Elkins Cc: "dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk" Message-ID: <1325346052.53240.yahoomail...@web27404.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Simon Apologies for not replying sooner. I know some progress has been made with regard to CESG and Open Source and will dig out a few links on this. >"Enterprise Architect" civil servants for info. Sounds good. I'll send you details across next week once I'm back in contact with HMG about this. Cheers Mark From: Simon P Smith To: Mark Elkins Cc: Mark Elkins ; "dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk" Sent: Wednesday, 28 December 2011, 13:56 Subject: Re: OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT Mark, On 28/12/11 13:31, Mark Elkins wrote: > >Are you willing to supply some more info about this because as far as I know >HMG still want to use Open Source? For example I am organizing a series of >internal HM Government events for Senior Civil servants on Open Source as >Chair of the BCS Open Source SG (OSSG). The first of which will take place in >February 2012. Therefore your experience sounds like it would be of interest >to the HMG staff I am dealing with setting up these events. In other words >they want to know examples about barriers to adoption of Open Source by HMG. > One of the main issues in this department is the insistence on security accreditation and the push to use CESG approved products.? The problem with OS is that you need time and money to submit the product for evaluation and gain some meaningful EAL certification; individual projects cannot afford this.? SUSE enterprise and RedHat Enterprise are listed there albeit older versions as those organisations can see some benefit of funding this.? I wanted to pilot a system on Ubunutu LTS with SE and use MySQL (or Postgres) instead of MSSQ;? you end up spending a great deal of time showing how it can be (1) secure (2) supportable.? We are in a laughable position where people will, when faced with a need for a routing MTA in a DMZ, select exchange and have to put in 2 ADs and and exchange box just to provide the MTA; just because "you never get sacked for usign M$". I am interested in your BCS events and if you send me the programme I will forward it to the "Enterprise Architect" civil servants for info. >Just for the record I've looked at this recent statement about Open Standards and feel its more about getting the statement bullet proof as opposed to actually dropping intention to make greater use of (Free and) Open Source. > Or also allowing the vested interests to lobby it more to water it down - perhaps I am cynical. Cheers, Simon -- Message: 2 Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 09:54:38 -0600 From: c...@pampru.org Subject: Re: [Dorset] Wimborne networking event. To: dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk Message-ID: <20111231095438.14992xtys6muc...@mail.pampru.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Clive, Peter, Walter, I would be interested in learning about setting up a network, and especially in joining in to create a self-help group. Please count me in. Regards, Charles Miller Wareham My setup:- * New Aleutia PC with Ubuntu 11.0
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Simon Few recent links on CESG and Open Source http://www.guardian.co.uk/government-computing-network/2011/nov/08/cesg-open-source-security However in http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/open-source-procurement-toolkit as of yet no public access to https://cesgiap.gsi.gov.uk/ia-policy-portfolio/good-practice-guides.shtml Not being a civil servant I can't access this but you (Simon) may be able to (although I'm not requesting any infringements). Finally a story of success? for Bristol City Council with regard to CESG and Open Source http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240105786/Bristol-Council-gets-open-source-go-ahead-after-CESG-discussions Mark Elkins From: Mark Elkins To: Simon P Smith ; Mark Elkins Cc: "dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk" Sent: Saturday, 31 December 2011, 15:40 Subject: Re: OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT Simon Apologies for not replying sooner. I know some progress has been made with regard to CESG and Open Source and will dig out a few links on this. >"Enterprise Architect" civil servants for info. Sounds good. I'll send you details across next week once I'm back in contact with HMG about this. Cheers Mark From: Simon P Smith To: Mark Elkins Cc: Mark Elkins ; "dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk" Sent: Wednesday, 28 December 2011, 13:56 Subject: Re: OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT Mark, On 28/12/11 13:31, Mark Elkins wrote: > >Are you willing to supply some more info about this because as far as I know >HMG still want to use Open Source? For example I am organizing a series of >internal HM Government events for Senior Civil servants on Open Source as >Chair of the BCS Open Source SG (OSSG). The first of which will take place in >February 2012. Therefore your experience sounds like it would be of interest >to the HMG staff I am dealing with setting up these events. In other words >they want to know examples about barriers to adoption of Open Source by HMG. > One of the main issues in this department is the insistence on security accreditation and the push to use CESG approved products. The problem with OS is that you need time and money to submit the product for evaluation and gain some meaningful EAL certification; individual projects cannot afford this. SUSE enterprise and RedHat Enterprise are listed there albeit older versions as those organisations can see some benefit of funding this. I wanted to pilot a system on Ubunutu LTS with SE and use MySQL (or Postgres) instead of MSSQ; you end up spending a great deal of time showing how it can be (1) secure (2) supportable. We are in a laughable position where people will, when faced with a need for a routing MTA in a DMZ, select exchange and have to put in 2 ADs and and exchange box just to provide the MTA; just because "you never get sacked for usign M$". I am interested in your BCS events and if you send me the programme I will forward it to the "Enterprise Architect" civil servants for info. >Just for the record I've looked at this recent statement about Open Standards and feel its more about getting the statement bullet proof as opposed to actually dropping intention to make greater use of (Free and) Open Source. > Or also allowing the vested interests to lobby it more to water it down - perhaps I am cynical. Cheers, Simon -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On 01/01/2012 14:14, Mark Elkins wrote: > o. > Sounds good. I'll send you details across next week once I'm back in contact > with HMG about this. > > Appreciate that Mark. I am back in office today and looked at that good practise guide (OSS) - published in June 2011 which is why I may have missed it. Thanks for that and the other references. Best regards & Happy New Year to all on the list... Simon -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Saturday 24 Dec 2011 08:56:37 Terry Coles wrote: > See http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/12/uk-government- > open-standards-the-great-betrayal-of-2012/index.htm. > > There's vague talk of a new definition of what is Open, but until then, > there is no longer a definition, so anything goes. > > I know I get a bit heated about these things at times, but to me, the > definition of an 'Open Standard' is pretty self evident and the original > guidance had a perfectly good explanation, so this can only be intervention > from the companies with money. > > Most of the world now recognises the benefits of Open Source and Open > Standards and the UK Government steps back to the dark ages. > > You can rely on them to do the right thing for UK PLC. Just to bring this issue up to date see Glyn Moody's latest at: http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2012/01/uk-cabinet-office- betrayal-of-open-standards-confirmed/index.htm -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, second Tuesday 2012-01-10 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Wednesday 28 Dec 2011 12:06:09 Terry Coles wrote: > On Wednesday 28 Dec 2011 11:14:30 Simon P Smith wrote: > > The withdrawal of PPN 3/11 is a scandal! > > > > I was using it to try and get some non-M$ products into a government > > project - looks like that particular prop to my case has been well and > > truly kicked out :( > > Can I suggest that you write to your MP and point this out. By pure > coincidence, I had just sealed the envelope holding my letter to my MP > (Annette Brooke) when I saw your post. I pointed out that the decision > favours the foreign corporates and disadvantages UK companies. Well, it's taken very nearly three months, but I've finally got a reply to my letter. Annette Brooke responded almost immediately after the New Year break, saying that she had forwarded my letter to Vince Cable. It then went quiet for a while, until I got an email from her constituency office saying that the letter had gone to the Cabinet Office. Here's part of what it said: 'This is just to let you know that we have just heard from the Department of Business that Annette’s letter of 10 January on your behalf, has been passed to the Cabinet Office. BIS advised that the inordinate delay has been due to waiting for the Cabinet Office to accept the case. I am very sorry about this.' Today, I received via Annette Brooke's constituency office, a letter from Francis Maude. Unsurprisingly, he never answered my original question, which was effectively 'why did the Government reverse the perfectly adequate Policy on Open Standards in Government?'. Instead he tells me all about the current consultation that is ongoing on Open Standards, which I was already well aware of because I participated in the preliminary survey last year. This kind of response was only to be expected expected really. You can't expect a straight answer out of a senior politician. Anyway, can I encourage anyone who has an interest in this (and can spare the time), to go to http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/, download the Policy Document and respond to the consultancy? Remember, this is about Open Standards, not Open Source. Even so, this country needs to adopt Open Standards in IT to prevent the kind of lock-in we've had for the last 20 years or so. Don't forget that if we don't participate, then the proprietary companies will prevail, because you can be sure they'll be responding. -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Thanks for posting about this. I am a West Dorset Kubuntu user and I have just joined your mailing list and I was totally unaware of the consultation. After a quick read I realise that I need to know a lot more to make an informed response. I was unable to come to the last meeting in Bournemouth and was wondering when or if there could be a meeting in Dorchester/Weymouth or Bridport as there are a number of us Linux users over this way. A meeting could be a good way of coordinating a response to the consultation. I have no great faith in consultations but I know the outcome of not responding. Dave Neylan On 23 March 2012 15:07, Terry Coles wrote: > On Wednesday 28 Dec 2011 12:06:09 Terry Coles wrote: > > On Wednesday 28 Dec 2011 11:14:30 Simon P Smith wrote: > > > The withdrawal of PPN 3/11 is a scandal! > > > > > > I was using it to try and get some non-M$ products into a government > > > project - looks like that particular prop to my case has been well and > > > truly kicked out :( > > > > Can I suggest that you write to your MP and point this out. By pure > > coincidence, I had just sealed the envelope holding my letter to my MP > > (Annette Brooke) when I saw your post. I pointed out that the decision > > favours the foreign corporates and disadvantages UK companies. > > Well, it's taken very nearly three months, but I've finally got a reply to > my > letter. Annette Brooke responded almost immediately after the New Year > break, > saying that she had forwarded my letter to Vince Cable. It then went quiet > for a while, until I got an email from her constituency office saying that > the > letter had gone to the Cabinet Office. Here's part of what it said: > > 'This is just to let you know that we have just heard from the Department > of > Business that Annette’s letter of 10 January on your behalf, has been > passed > to the Cabinet Office. BIS advised that the inordinate delay has been due > to > waiting for the Cabinet Office to accept the case. I am very sorry about > this.' > > Today, I received via Annette Brooke's constituency office, a letter from > Francis Maude. Unsurprisingly, he never answered my original question, > which > was effectively 'why did the Government reverse the perfectly adequate > Policy > on Open Standards in Government?'. Instead he tells me all about the > current > consultation that is ongoing on Open Standards, which I was already well > aware > of because I participated in the preliminary survey last year. This kind > of > response was only to be expected expected really. You can't expect a > straight > answer out of a senior politician. > > Anyway, can I encourage anyone who has an interest in this (and can spare > the > time), to go to http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/, > download the Policy Document and respond to the consultancy? > > Remember, this is about Open Standards, not Open Source. Even so, this > country needs to adopt Open Standards in IT to prevent the kind of lock-in > we've had for the last 20 years or so. > > Don't forget that if we don't participate, then the proprietary companies > will > prevail, because you can be sure they'll be responding. > > -- >Terry Coles >64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux > > -- > Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 > Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ > New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk > How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Saturday 24 Mar 2012 11:20:08 David Neylan wrote: > Thanks for posting about this. I am a West Dorset Kubuntu user and I have > just joined your mailing list and I was totally unaware of the > consultation. After a quick read I realise that I need to know a lot more > to make an informed response. Welcome to the Group Dave. In my original post on this, I mentioned that you should consider responding if you have "an interest in this (and can spare the time)". I'm now about halfway through the consultation document and have to say it seems to be saying the right kind of things. However, it is over 30 pages (including the questions and response form), so there is an investment needed. > I was unable to come to the last meeting in Bournemouth and was wondering > when or if there could be a meeting in Dorchester/Weymouth or Bridport as > there are a number of us Linux users over this way. > A meeting could be a good way of coordinating a response to the > consultation. I have no great faith in consultations but I know the outcome > of not responding. We used to meet on alternate months in Dorchester, when we had a fairly large contingent from Weymouth, Bridport and round about. Recently however, only Ralph turned up regularly from the Dorchester area, so we switched to alternating with Blandford. That was good for a while, but then we had a couple of meetings that only attracted about three of us, so we moved permanently to Bournemouth, where we generally get a good turn-out. If you can get enough support for returning to Dorchester, then I suspect we could resurrect the alternating scheme. -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Terry >From what I can make out - the pressure for further consultation on Open >Standards actually originated in part from BIS (Vince Cable's Dept) if this is >correct: http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/01/microsoft-hustled-uk-retreat-o.html Mark Elkins -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Saturday 24 Mar 2012 21:04:39 Mark Elkins wrote: > From what I can make out - the pressure for further consultation on Open > Standards actually originated in part from BIS (Vince Cable's Dept) if this > is correct: > > http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/01/microsoft-hustled- > uk-retreat-o.html I was aware of the Microsoft intervention from reading Glynn Moody's blog on the subject, but I hadn't seen this item. >From the article: 'Microsoft said it supported the aims of UK open standards policy - specifically that government systems should be interoperable, that it should be possible for government to re-use purchased software components, and that government should not be "locked-in" to using particular technologies.' How they have the bare-faced gall to use lock-in as a reason to *avoid* Open Standards I'll never know. I've now got a bit further through the Consultation Document and there is no doubt that whoever was responsible for producing it 'got it'. Open Source Software is specifically mentioned as a good reason for FRAND licensing terms and 'Royalty Free' is also covered in the context of the payment of Royalties being a show stopper for FLOSS tools. However, someone in BIS 'drank the Kool Aid' as the Yanks would say and believed all this guff, which is why the original Policy was overturned. Whether it was believed due to ignorance or payola is open to question. Previously I would have said the former with a healthy dose of party funding, but after this morning's revelations about Tory funding methods, I would reverse that and think maybe that someone was paid to be ignorant. (Yes I am aware that Vince Cable isn't a Tory, but he is a politician.) -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Terry The Open Source Consortium (OSC) http://www.opensourceconsortium.org/ are mentioning the http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/01/microsoft-hustled-uk-retreat-o.html again in their blog. Just a thought but you might find this blog good reading if you want to join it - which can be done for free. Also rather timely OSSG are on the case of FRAND etc this Thursday eve http://ossg.bcs.org/2012/03/29/ Cheers Mark From: Terry Coles To: Mark Elkins ; Dorset Linux User Group Sent: Sunday, 25 March 2012, 9:09 Subject: Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT On Saturday 24 Mar 2012 21:04:39 Mark Elkins wrote: > From what I can make out - the pressure for further consultation on Open > Standards actually originated in part from BIS (Vince Cable's Dept) if this > is correct: > > http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/01/microsoft-hustled- > uk-retreat-o.html I was aware of the Microsoft intervention from reading Glynn Moody's blog on the subject, but I hadn't seen this item. >From the article: 'Microsoft said it supported the aims of UK open standards policy - specifically that government systems should be interoperable, that it should be possible for government to re-use purchased software components, and that government should not be "locked-in" to using particular technologies.' How they have the bare-faced gall to use lock-in as a reason to *avoid* Open Standards I'll never know. I've now got a bit further through the Consultation Document and there is no doubt that whoever was responsible for producing it 'got it'. Open Source Software is specifically mentioned as a good reason for FRAND licensing terms and 'Royalty Free' is also covered in the context of the payment of Royalties being a show stopper for FLOSS tools. However, someone in BIS 'drank the Kool Aid' as the Yanks would say and believed all this guff, which is why the original Policy was overturned. Whether it was believed due to ignorance or payola is open to question. Previously I would have said the former with a healthy dose of party funding, but after this morning's revelations about Tory funding methods, I would reverse that and think maybe that someone was paid to be ignorant. (Yes I am aware that Vince Cable isn't a Tory, but he is a politician.) -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Monday 26 Mar 2012 12:13:37 Mark Elkins wrote: > The Open Source Consortium (OSC) http://www.opensourceconsortium.org/ are > mentioning the > http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/01/microsoft-hustled > -uk-retreat-o.html again in their blog. Just a thought but you might find > this blog good reading if you want to join it - which can be done for free. I'll keep an eye on this as I work through the responses. > Also rather timely OSSG are on the case of FRAND etc this Thursday eve > http://ossg.bcs.org/2012/03/29/ I'll be interested to see the outcome. In all this I see two distinct camps in the Government side: 1. The people who genuinely want to get it right and understand the issues. In other words they know what is needed to ensure that citizens and UK companies get the best chance of reading and using government documents. 2. The people who listen to 'Industry' and believe that they have to keep the likes of Microsoft and Oracle 'happy'. Quite why they might have that belief is open to interpretation (and vested interests). We live in interesting times ;-) -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
There is one reliable rule when judging which way these things go - look for where the money is! There is no cashflow from Open Document Format. There is, however, 'lobbying' (and all that entails!) from the big commercial companies, so the result is entirely predictable. I downloaded the Consultation Document. The bureaucratic obfuscation it contains, and the frequent inclusion of external references (FRAND being one example) ensures that understanding the document would be such a massive task that so few would be able to do it and mount an effective challenge that the big players will be assured of victory (as usual!). Although Linux, and other Open Source software which use ODF, seems to be growing in market share, it is nowhere near stable or usable enough for the main market drivers, business, to rely upon. Producing stable and reliable office software that business can use with confidence - an equivalent to the full MS-Office suit - that doesn't suffer from frequent upgrades or patches (a version that runs for a decade without changes would be a good target) is what is sorely needed. I know many MS-based business who deliberately do not upgrade for as long as they can, and I ran XP-Pro and Office-Pro for about that long on that very basis - that plan only went wrong when new PCs only came with Vista and XP was not available. I am using Linux now for as much of work as I can, but it is the 'office' applications that enable the power giants to rule in business and in government, and it is here that Linux has a long way to go. Only when Linux is good and stable enough to attract business, most of whom require no more than MS-Office suit's offerings for their normal daily internal and external work and inter-business communications, will the uptake be strong enough to starve the lobby-supported giants. Make them wither on the vine! This 'Consultation' will support the lobbing giants as I am sure it is designed to do. I am keeping my eyes, and hopes, on developing Open Source offerings. When Open Source is stable and usable enough (when you don't need a full-time IT to make it work!), I plan, through my organisation, to offer free training and support to small and medium-sized business who want to set up on it or make the switch. I would still support a challenge, think this is a better, more practical, and eventually more effective, way to challenge the power-giants than getting sucked into a bogus 'Consultation'. Well, that's my view anyway. Charles Miller PAMPRU Institute -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Tuesday 27 Mar 2012 11:10:27 c...@pampru.org wrote: > This 'Consultation' will support the lobbing giants as I am sure it is > designed to do. I am keeping my eyes, and hopes, on developing Open > Source offerings. You could be right http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/03/microsoft-redeploys- ooxml-in-o.html -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-04-03 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Terry >I'll be interested to see the outcome. An unedited streamed MP3 recording of the Open Standards, FRAND, and FOSS event held on Thursday 29th March is now available at: http://ossg.bcs.org/2012/02/25/open-standards-frand-and-foss-london-290312/#comments Mark Elkins Chair OSSG From: "dorset-requ...@mailman.lug.org.uk" To: dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk Sent: Tuesday, 27 March 2012, 13:00 Subject: dorset Digest, Vol 429, Issue 2 Send dorset mailing list submissions to dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dorset or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to dorset-requ...@mailman.lug.org.uk You can reach the person managing the list at dorset-ow...@mailman.lug.org.uk When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of dorset digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT (Terry Coles) 2. Re: OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT (c...@pampru.org) -- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:42:45 +0100 From: Terry Coles Subject: Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT To: Dorset Linux User Group Message-ID: <6471691.jZCUBdry2V@beige> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Monday 26 Mar 2012 12:13:37 Mark Elkins wrote: > The Open Source Consortium (OSC) http://www.opensourceconsortium.org/ are > mentioning the > http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/01/microsoft-hustled > -uk-retreat-o.html again in their blog. Just a thought but you might find > this blog good reading if you want to join it - which can be done for free. I'll keep an eye on this as I work through the responses. > Also rather timely OSSG are on the case of FRAND etc this Thursday eve > http://ossg.bcs.org/2012/03/29/ I'll be interested to see the outcome. In all this I see two distinct camps in the Government side: 1. The people who genuinely want to get it right and understand the issues. In other words they know what is needed to ensure that citizens and UK companies get the best chance of reading and using government documents. 2. The people who listen to 'Industry' and believe that they have to keep the likes of Microsoft and Oracle 'happy'. Quite why they might have that belief is open to interpretation (and vested interests). We live in interesting times ;-) -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux ------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 11:10:27 +0100 From: c...@pampru.org Subject: Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT To: Dorset Linux User Group Message-ID: <20120327111027.1334392hhoaf6...@mail.pampru.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" There is one reliable rule when judging which way these things go - look for where the money is! There is no cashflow from Open Document Format. There is, however, 'lobbying' (and all that entails!) from the big commercial companies, so the result is entirely predictable. I downloaded the Consultation Document. The bureaucratic obfuscation it contains, and the frequent inclusion of external references (FRAND being one example) ensures that understanding the document would be such a massive task that so few would be able to do it and mount an effective challenge that the big players will be assured of victory (as usual!). Although Linux, and other Open Source software which use ODF, seems to be growing in market share, it is nowhere near stable or usable enough for the main market drivers, business, to rely upon. Producing stable and reliable office software that business can use with confidence - an equivalent to the full MS-Office suit - that doesn't suffer from frequent upgrades or patches (a version that runs for a decade without changes would be a good target) is what is sorely needed. I know many MS-based business who deliberately do not upgrade for as long as they can, and I ran XP-Pro and Office-Pro for about that long on that very basis - that plan only went wrong when new PCs only came with Vista and XP was not available. I am using Linux now for as much of work as I can, but it is the 'office' applications that enable the power giants to rule in business and in government, and it is here that Linux has a long way to go. Only when Linux is good and stable enough to attract business, most of whom require no more than MS-Office suit's offerings for their normal daily internal and external work and inter-business communications, will the uptake be strong enoug
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Saturday 31 Mar 2012 12:31:12 Terry Coles wrote: > On Tuesday 27 Mar 2012 11:10:27 c...@pampru.org wrote: > > This 'Consultation' will support the lobbing giants as I am sure it is > > designed to do. I am keeping my eyes, and hopes, on developing Open > > Source offerings. > > You could be right > > http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/03/microsoft-redeploy > s- ooxml-in-o.html Well you were right: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/27/microsoft-government- consultation. Basically, it turns out that one of the public consultation meetings was facilitated by a consultant who was also being paid by Microsoft to 'advise on issues arising'. He never divulged the relationship and the results of his meeting has now had to be dropped. To give you a flavour of his results (in case you thought this might be co-incidence): 'he wrote that the "gut feel" among the majority of the 16 attendees was that open standards would be "detrimental" to innovation and competition.' If you visit the consultation website and follow the links to the questions, you will see that most of the respondents to the web consultation were very pro Open and in some cases openly anti Microsoft, so his findings are completely at odds with the real world. Elsewhere in the article, it is suggested that Microsoft are paying lawyers to stack the meetings. This is straight out of Microsoft's play book and exactly how they got OOXML through ISO. The story about Microsoft's dirty tricks was started by Glyn Moody. His blog is at: http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2012/04/how-microsoft- lobbied-against-true-open-standards-i/index.htm and here is the Government announcement: http://digital.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/2012/04/26/open-standards-consultation- important-update/ -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-05-01 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Hi Terry, > Well you were right: > http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/27/microsoft-government- > consultation. KMail splits your URLs on hyphens BTW. https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=209030 Though I suspect the list's readers are capable of handling two bits to paste. :-) Cheers, Ralph. -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-05-01 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Well, there you go... The only way for Open Source to compete is to produce ONE software suit strong enough to challenge the dominance and powerful strangle-hold of the giants right across citizens, businesses, and governments worldwide. The tendency amongst Linux/Open Source developers is to compete against one another for top spot of the very small OS/FOS market instead of joining together to produce ONE suit capable of use by the people who are stuck with the giants because, quite simply, the giants are the ONLY ones producing common-use software suits capable of widespread use. As a long-time 'Windows power user' (MS Office) who is trying to break free and use OS or FOS products instead, I have not yet found an Open Source product that is good enough to use beyond a very small circle of Linux enthusiasts. The lack of manufacturers producing Linux drivers for their products is a straight indication that they do not see Linux/OS/FOS as a viable market either, and the ever-changing kaleidoscope of Linux/OS/FOS offerings isn't helping because it is not producing a stable product for manufacturers to focus upon. Some body, the ideal would be Linus Torvalds himself, needs to develop a specification for the OS/FOS developer community to aim for as the greatest product for the greatest common good. Quite simply, 'equal to or better than MS-Office' would be a great start, and one that would enable greatest numbers of users to inter-act with each other right across the user spectrum. The government (civil servants who are supposed to work for and represent us!) would come under greater pressure to yield, and (hopefully) the giants would then wither down to size. I feel sure that there are growing millions would gladly pay a contribution toward development costs as the price for such a product. Reflecting on the recent 'consultation', there is something intrinsically wrong about the 'our' government using our collective buying power to negotiate bulk-buy licences and then keeping the benefit just for themselves while leaving citizens citizens and business to pay much higher licence fees. A petition calling for the UK government to negotiate a bulk-buy price for the entire nation (who they purport to represent and who pay for the entire operation and their wages!) instead of negotiating just for themselves would indicate that they are 'our government' and really do have our best interest at heart. Meantime, keep a watch on farm animals for any sign of pigs preparing to fly. Charles Miller Quoting Terry Coles : On Saturday 31 Mar 2012 12:31:12 Terry Coles wrote: On Tuesday 27 Mar 2012 11:10:27 c...@pampru.org wrote: > This 'Consultation' will support the lobbing giants as I am sure it is > designed to do. I am keeping my eyes, and hopes, on developing Open > Source offerings. You could be right http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/03/microsoft-redeploy s- ooxml-in-o.html Well you were right: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/27/microsoft-government- consultation. Basically, it turns out that one of the public consultation meetings was facilitated by a consultant who was also being paid by Microsoft to 'advise on issues arising'. He never divulged the relationship and the results of his meeting has now had to be dropped. To give you a flavour of his results (in case you thought this might be co-incidence): 'he wrote that the "gut feel" among the majority of the 16 attendees was that open standards would be "detrimental" to innovation and competition.' If you visit the consultation website and follow the links to the questions, you will see that most of the respondents to the web consultation were very pro Open and in some cases openly anti Microsoft, so his findings are completely at odds with the real world. Elsewhere in the article, it is suggested that Microsoft are paying lawyers to stack the meetings. This is straight out of Microsoft's play book and exactly how they got OOXML through ISO. The story about Microsoft's dirty tricks was started by Glyn Moody. His blog is at: http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2012/04/how-microsoft- lobbied-against-true-open-standards-i/index.htm and here is the Government announcement: http://digital.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/2012/04/26/open-standards-consultation- important-update/ -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-05-01 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-05-01 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xu
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Sunday 29 Apr 2012 14:40:48 you wrote: > The only way for Open Source to compete is to produce ONE software > suit strong enough to challenge the dominance and powerful > strangle-hold of the giants right across citizens, businesses, and > governments worldwide. I can't agree with that, because competition is needed to ensure that each vendor tries harder to innovate. Don't forget too that we aren't really talking about Open Source here; we are talking about Open Standards. If the Government gets this consultation right, then there are several suites strong enough to compete in each category; some are Open Source and some aren't. In the Office domain, there is Open/Libre Office of course, which are strong and getting stronger. However, IBM’s Office Suite (Lotus Symphony) is ODF compliant and it is *not* Open Source. What's needed is for the lock-in to stop. Once it isn't *necessary* to be MS Office compliant to do business, then the free and cheaper packages will come into their own. Munich managed it and saved 4 million Euros, not counting the additional 15 million Euros that it would have taken to upgrade their old NT based PCs to run a version of Windows that could do the modern stuff: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/29/munich_linux_savings/ > The tendency amongst Linux/Open Source developers is to compete > against one another for top spot of the very small OS/FOS market > instead of joining together to produce ONE suit capable of use by the > people who are stuck with the giants because, quite simply, the giants > are the ONLY ones producing common-use software suits capable of > widespread use. I think IBM might argue with that and Libre Office is getting there and it’s free. > As a long-time 'Windows power user' (MS Office) who is trying to break > free and use OS or FOS products instead, I have not yet found an Open > Source product that is good enough to use beyond a very small circle > of Linux enthusiasts. The lack of manufacturers producing Linux > drivers for their products is a straight indication that they do not > see Linux/OS/FOS as a viable market either, and the ever-changing > kaleidoscope of Linux/OS/FOS offerings isn't helping because it is not > producing a stable product for manufacturers to focus upon. I install various flavours of Linux on a variety of PC hardware and problems with drivers is the rarity these days. In fact, I get extremely frustrated trying to get Windows Apps working these days because of incompatibilities, especially when Direct-X is involved. I know that if someone has a virus or Windows driver problem, I can usually write off several days to re-install everything from scratch, because the damage done is not easily fixable. > Some body, the ideal would be Linus Torvalds himself, needs to develop > a specification for the OS/FOS developer community to aim for as the > greatest product for the greatest common good. Quite simply, 'equal to > or better than MS-Office' would be a great start, and one that would > enable greatest numbers of users to inter-act with each other right > across the user spectrum. The government (civil servants who are > supposed to work for and represent us!) would come under greater > pressure to yield, and (hopefully) the giants would then wither down > to size. I feel sure that there are growing millions would gladly pay > a contribution toward development costs as the price for such a product. There are already standard Linux specifications (Linux Standard Base) for example. In any case, diversity is far better than a monoculture (smaller attack vectors) and if the market is there the vendors will come. In any case, most users of Open Standards are still going to use Windows; they just won't have to stump up monopoly prices. > Reflecting on the recent 'consultation', there is something > intrinsically wrong about the 'our' government using our collective > buying power to negotiate bulk-buy licences and then keeping the > benefit just for themselves while leaving citizens citizens and > business to pay much higher licence fees. A petition calling for the > UK government to negotiate a bulk-buy price for the entire nation (who > they purport to represent and who pay for the entire operation and > their wages!) instead of negotiating just for themselves would > indicate that they are 'our government' and really do have our best > interest at heart. You think that Microsoft would fall for that? An who is going to provide the capital needed to buy the millions of licences needed, until the great British Public stump up the costs? > Meantime, keep a watch on farm animals for any sign of pigs preparing to > fly. One day... -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-05-01 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.o
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Importantly as a result of :http://digital.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/2012/04/26/open-standards-consultation- important-update/ the time limit for responses for the Cabinet Office Open Standards Consultation has now been extended to 4th June 2012. I was at one of the Cabinet Office Consultations on Open Standards on Friday (27/04/12) and was told the whole meeting was being recorded and will be available shortly to the Public and that the weighting being given to the meetings on Open Standards in the consultation period was no less and no more than that given to the online responses. Therefore the assumption is that the meetings are important. I would also say that the meeting on Friday, which included discussing FRAND, was not dominated by the views of pro-FRAND advocates. Mark Elkins Chair OSSG -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday 2012-05-01 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
Hi, Remember the Open Standards Consultation that took place in the Spring? Part of the discussion is below. Well the Consultation worked! The new Government Policy on Open Standards has been published and FSFE is *very* impressed! See: http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20121101-02.en.html On Sunday 29 Apr 2012 08:58:07 you wrote: On Saturday 31 Mar 2012 12:31:12 Terry Coles wrote: > On Tuesday 27 Mar 2012 11:10:27 c...@pampru.org wrote: > > This 'Consultation' will support the lobbing giants as I am sure it is > > designed to do. I am keeping my eyes, and hopes, on developing Open > > Source offerings. > > You could be right > > http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/03/microsoft-redeploy > s- ooxml-in-o.html Well you were right: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/27/microsoft-government- consultation. Basically, it turns out that one of the public consultation meetings was facilitated by a consultant who was also being paid by Microsoft to 'advise on issues arising'. He never divulged the relationship and the results of his meeting has now had to be dropped. To give you a flavour of his results (in case you thought this might be co-incidence): 'he wrote that the "gut feel" among the majority of the 16 attendees was that open standards would be "detrimental" to innovation and competition.' If you visit the consultation website and follow the links to the questions, you will see that most of the respondents to the web consultation were very pro Open and in some cases openly anti Microsoft, so his findings are completely at odds with the real world. Elsewhere in the article, it is suggested that Microsoft are paying lawyers to stack the meetings. This is straight out of Microsoft's play book and exactly how they got OOXML through ISO. The story about Microsoft's dirty tricks was started by Glyn Moody. His blog is at: http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2012/04/how-microsoft- lobbied-against-true-open-standards-i/index.htm and here is the Government announcement: http://digital.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/2012/04/26/open-standards-consultation- important-update/ -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday, 2012-11-06 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On 03/11/2012 08:20, Terry Coles wrote: > Remember the Open Standards Consultation that took place in the Spring? Part > of the discussion is below. > > Well the Consultation worked! The new Government Policy on Open Standards > has > been published and FSFE is *very* impressed! See: > http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20121101-02.en.html Excellent - thanks for the update Terry.Had a quick scan through and the principles seem sound although somewhat pre-emptive defensive to a cynic like me ;-) regards, Simon -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday, 2012-11-06 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Monday 05 Nov 2012 14:28:39 Simon P Smith wrote: > On 03/11/2012 08:20, Terry Coles wrote: > > Remember the Open Standards Consultation that took place in the Spring? > > Part of the discussion is below. > > > > Well the Consultation worked! The new Government Policy on Open Standards > > has been published and FSFE is *very* impressed! See: > > http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20121101-02.en.html > > Excellent - thanks for the update Terry.Had a quick scan through and > the principles seem > sound although somewhat pre-emptive defensive to a cynic like me ;-) Well since I posted that there have been some rumbles that the Policy doesn't apply to COTS software, implying that Government Depts can continue to buy software from Microsoft, Oracle, etc. However, this: http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/public-sector/2012/11/uk-insists-open- standards-orde.html seems to dispute that. Like all things, we'll have to wait and see how it works. -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday, 2012-11-06 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:46:13 +, d-...@hadrian-way.co.uk said: > Well since I posted that there have been some rumbles that the Policy > doesn't apply to COTS software By "COTS", do you mean "commercial off the shelf"? If so, where did you hear that? -- We're looking for smart Linux people: http://www.tiger-computing.co.uk/jobs -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday, 2012-11-06 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
Re: [Dorset] OT: Cabinet Office Ditches Open Standards in IT
On Monday 05 Nov 2012 19:31:56 Keith Edmunds wrote: > On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:46:13 +, d-...@hadrian-way.co.uk said: > > Well since I posted that there have been some rumbles that the Policy > > doesn't apply to COTS software > > By "COTS", do you mean "commercial off the shelf"? If so, where did you > hear that? Yes. That is the meaning of COTS. I initially heard it on a Guardian Blog on Saturday, but the full story is in the link I gave in my earlier post. -- Terry Coles 64 bit computing with Kubuntu Linux -- Next meeting: Bournemouth, Tuesday, 2012-11-06 20:00 Meets, Mailing list, IRC, LinkedIn, ... http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ New thread on mailing list: mailto:dorset@mailman.lug.org.uk How to Report Bugs Effectively: http://goo.gl/4Xue
