←back to thread

597 points doener | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.191s | source
Show context
input_sh ◴[] No.46181911[source]
I hate when switches like these get advertised first and foremost as some huge cost-cutting measure, further solidifying open source ecosystem as some cheap knock-offs of their commercial alternatives.

How about instead you donate the same amount of money you would've paid to Microsoft anyways to fund open source projects you rely on? At least for one year, then drop it down to some arbitrary chosen percentage of that cost. That way you can still advertise it as a cost-cutting measure, and everyone would benefit.

replies(17): >>46181952 #>>46181960 #>>46181973 #>>46182002 #>>46182008 #>>46182025 #>>46182301 #>>46182376 #>>46182422 #>>46182426 #>>46182799 #>>46183031 #>>46183033 #>>46183171 #>>46183399 #>>46185220 #>>46189421 #
hanshenning ◴[] No.46182376[source]
You're not wrong, but this is actually what they're pursuing; the article just leaves it out.

> The goal is not only to save costs, but above all to gain digital sovereignty.

> [It's true] that open source is not necessarily cheaper, [..] it requires investment. But the money flows into internal infrastructure, into the further development of Nextcloud, LibreOffice, and other similar systems, instead of proprietary ones.

> Schleswig-Holstein pursues an "upstream-only strategy," meaning that developments flow directly back into international projects. The state does not want to maintain its own forks, but rather contribute all improvements directly to the main projects, thereby contributing to development for the benefit of the general public.[1]

On a side note, the real key to the project's success is that it's supported by a coalition of the conservative and green parties. They actually value digital sovereignty and longterm cost savings. Contrast that with Bavaria, where the MS lobbyist managed to get them to sign a longterm Office 365 contract…

[1]https://www-heise-de.translate.goog/hintergrund/Interview-Wi...

replies(2): >>46182729 #>>46182762 #
k1musab1 ◴[] No.46182729[source]
Thank you for providing this valuable context. I am hoping to advocate for OSS transition in my workplace and these examples go a long way to help make my case.
replies(3): >>46183568 #>>46184627 #>>46189794 #
kuerbel ◴[] No.46183568[source]
I am thinking about opening my own shop, distinguished by digitally sovereign offerings, for instance, Stormshield over Cisco, Proxmox over VMware, Matrix/Element over Microsoft Teams, Nextcloud over SharePoint...

I've been doing m365 and azure for more than three years by now and I just feel terrible. Especially regarding some of our customers, which are small gGmbH (kind of NGO). Instead of making a secure, privacy focused offering we just sell them the usual m365 package. We basically push them into the data industrial complex just to get some collab tools and mail.

replies(3): >>46184168 #>>46187059 #>>46189644 #
limagnolia ◴[] No.46187059[source]
What makes StormShield "digitally sovereign"? The other names you mention are open source- but from what I can tell, StormShield is not?
replies(1): >>46191508 #
1. w34 ◴[] No.46191508[source]
StormShield are a French company, and a subsidiary of Airbus.

So I guess "digitally sovereign" in the European Union could mean using a combination of GPL style free, open source (BSD and other similar licences), proprietary European "homegrown" products.

I guess Genua is another good contender in this market.