UK Gov tells 600,000 staff to dump windopws and do Linux
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: School budgets cut, but what about making genuine savings with open source?
Next: Dual-boot of Ubuntu 10.4 and Fedora 13
From: Chris Davies on 13 Jul 2010 06:51 Adrian C <email(a)here.invalid> wrote: > OK, show me end user CBT for Linux. The company at which I work has CBT courses provided by a Third Party. They are web browser based applications mostly built using some flavour of flash, but some are now using dhtml. They work well on my linux laptop. I suspect that many web-centric CBT systems would now work reasonably well on any browser that could support flash and dhtml, but I have no statistics to back this up. > And, oh, as it's Linux. Show me it available for free. Personally, I don't subscribe to the "it's available on Linux so software *must* be free" paradigm. I do recognise the "it's available on Linux so there may also be FOSS available for a similar task" line, though. Just my pennyworth Chris
From: Simon Brooke on 14 Jul 2010 09:26 On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 11:24:23 +0100, jasee wrote: > Network > cards don't wear out, of course hard disks do, but also cpu have a > limited life Uhhh???!? I have CPUs in this house which date back to 1979, and are still working just fine. In fact of the 19 pre-1986 machines in my collection, all still work perfectly, including the one MS-DOS machine (an Apricot). Limited life? Well, probably. I suspect some of them will die before I do. But not very limited! -- ;; Semper in faecibus sumus, sole profundam variat
From: Simon Brooke on 14 Jul 2010 09:35 On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 21:48:35 -0400, The Hooded Plumber wrote: > Migration costs are huge. > Training costs are huge. This is true. But the migration/training cost from MS Office 2003 to OpenOffice 3.0 is less than the migration/training cost from MS Office 2003 to MS Office 2007. Microsoft needs to produce things which are different in order to people to buy new copies of perfectly good software they already own. Open Source doesn't need to do that, so you don't get change for the sake of change. So you don't have to retrain all your administrative staff to use 'ribbon' user interfaces (or whatever the Great New Innovation will be which Microsoft brings out to persuade you that you must buy Office 2012). -- ;; Semper in faecibus sumus, sole profundam variat
From: Dave Wade on 14 Jul 2010 17:39 "Simon Brooke" <stillyet+nntp(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:8a5sonF5ajU5(a)mid.individual.net... > On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 21:48:35 -0400, The Hooded Plumber wrote: > >> Migration costs are huge. >> Training costs are huge. > > This is true. But the migration/training cost from MS Office 2003 to > OpenOffice 3.0 is less than the migration/training cost from MS Office > 2003 to MS Office 2007. > I doubt there is much different. > Microsoft needs to produce things which are different in order to people > to buy new copies of perfectly good software they already own. Open > Source doesn't need to do that, so you don't get change for the sake of > change. No Open source does change to keep the open source developers interested. New releases of Linux seem to appear weekly. Every other time I use Firefox it wants to update its self, and a recent update to Open Office broke the PDF import tool and I had to roll it back... > So you don't have to retrain all your administrative staff to use > 'ribbon' user interfaces (or whatever the Great New Innovation will be > which Microsoft brings out to persuade you that you must buy Office 2012). > Where I work we have "upgrade advantage" so have paid for all updates until 2012 .... > -- > > ;; Semper in faecibus sumus, sole profundam variat >
From: jasee on 15 Jul 2010 02:22
"Simon Brooke" <stillyet+nntp(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:8a5s8aF5ajU4(a)mid.individual.net... > On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 11:24:23 +0100, jasee wrote: > >> Network >> cards don't wear out, of course hard disks do, but also cpu have a >> limited life > > Uhhh???!? > > I have CPUs in this house which date back to 1979, and are still working > just fine. In fact of the 19 pre-1986 machines in my collection, all > still work perfectly, including the one MS-DOS machine (an Apricot). > > Limited life? Well, probably. I suspect some of them will die before I > do. But not very limited! > No, probably not, but I'm talking about newer machines where the cpus (usually laptops) and graphic cpus are secured by silver solder balls |