Posted on 05/09/2005 9:25:23 AM PDT by TWohlford
Ditching Microsoft can save millions
PA News Published: 06 May 2005
Primary schools could cut their computer costs by nearly half if they stopped buying, operating and supporting products from the world’s largest software company, government research has found.
Secondaries could also slash their information technology overheads by a quarter if they moved away from Microsoft and other commercial programs, according to an analysis carried out by the British Educational Communications and Technology Association, the Government’s ICT agency.
The findings could undermine Microsoft’s hold on the education market, but they raise the prospect of millions of pounds of savings for British schools and colleges which spend around £1 billion a year on ICT.
In a report to be published next week, obtained by The TES, Becta will highlight schools which have turned to free software instead of the market leader’s products. Becta does not name Microsoft in its analysis. But almost all schools use some of the company’s products.
The association analysed costs at 33 schools which use paid-for software, and compared them with 15 which have pioneered the use of free programs, known as open source, and the pared-down hardware to run them.
Average costs, including software, hardware and support costs, were 24 per cent less per computer in secondaries using open source.
Find out how much open source software could save your school in this week's TES
In all fairness, I don't believe this article. M$ has done a great job, at least in the states, of providing educational discounts.
In addition, I've noticed that a fully-patched M$ server isn't nearly as vulnerable as it used to be.
If they ever get that AD thing right then they'll really have something. Fortunately, eDir runs just fine on W2K3 servers.
And, fortunately, there is Firefox....
Installation, integration and maintenance cost money. You pay for interoperability (and a consistent interface) when you buy Bill's stuff. It is MUCH better now than 10 years ago when there were many promises and not much delivery. I myself make use of the educational discount (I work in academia) and the $$ savings are substantial as you noted.
How good a deal are edu discounts if no upgrade is possible?
Strangely, in any conversation of standards-based software, M$ is always held up as the one breaking the standards. If you're content to use ALL of Bill's stuff, and nothing BUT his stuff, then you're okay.
However, God forbid you'd actually want to use something else...
"How good a deal are edu discounts if no upgrade is possible?"
Not sure what you mean here...
Your school is so broke that they can't afford anything new?
Point 1: Continually referred to Microsoft as "M$" immediately marks you in many people's minds as an anti-Microsoft bigot who's too prejudiced to be taken seriously. It's fine with me if you do it, but you're not doing yourself any favors, unless you intention is to show contempt for Microsoft rather that engage in real discussion.
Point 2: The numbers in studies like this always include a lot of subjectivity. Microsoft does theirs, and, surprise, surprise, their stuff comes out the winner on cost when extra support an interop costs are added in. I don't know that I believe either of them, but...
Point 3: The one thing that this study ignores, and that every pro-Open-Source study I've ever seen ignores, it the impact of innovation. It's always much faster and sooner in the commercial space. Right now, the big innovative factor in education is the Tablet PC. Until you've used one, you won't believe the difference they are going to make in education. And the technology behind it took a lot of money to develop. It will be a while before there is a viable Open Source alternative.
I think there are some scenarios in which Open Source is an obvious choice. Large numbers of very similar systems that do straightforward tasks (static content web serving, for example) gain few advantages from paying all those licences for commercial OSs (from Microsoft, Sun, or anybody else). But there are other scenarios in which commercial software is just as much an obvious choice.
Countdown to the infamous FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) assault. As in "You DO want your children to be well-versed in all the de facto business-standard software programs, don't you?"
I never had a problem with well made propietary architectures. See DEC and IBM for good examples of the same. As for using others, I do all the time. Yep there are some issues, but then I expect there to be. No different than adding your tweak to your car (e.g. like we used to do with high performance carbs, etc.). It weren't always easy, and I don't expect cooperation between competing vendors. Its my job to make it work if that is what I want.
It depends. Do you need all the latest features or are you content with a product? Me, I bought the tuned down version of Photoshop deliberately. I didn't need the stuff that added $400 to the price.
"[innovation] It's always much faster and sooner in the commercial space." Yep. Open source is great if all you want to do is surf the web and write an email or two. If your are content with a small set of features and don't need the latest wizbang - great - go for it.
Isn't Firefox free and open source?
I just love relying on anything that is "fully patched", my favorite is parachutes.
School don't exactly have a good history on selecting what computers to use.
Overpriced Apple computers were the computer of choice for many years. The Apple computers were reasonably capable, but they were more expensive, which made them less common in the commercial world. This resulted in students learning on computers that didn't match what they would use once they graduated.
Microsoft provides huge educational discounts. Theirs is the software that students will most likely find themselves using once they graduate. Their software is also relatively easy for newer users to learn.
Linux has it's good points and bad points. It's a very good opperating system for more advanced users to learn more advanced computing skills. It can be set up so that it's easy to do basic computing. There are reasonably robust open source applications that students can learn to use.
However, where Linux falls short is in stability. Linux is constantly evolving and goes through a lot of growing pains along the way. Applications that work with one kernel version may break when the kernel is updated to a new minor revision. Device drivers often need to be recompiled against configured kernel sources for the kernel that is being used.
Microsoft makes software that is good for people wanting to learn to use the computer to accomplish office tasks. You can also learn programming on Windows reasonably well.
Learning Linux well will teach you more about how an opperating system works. You'll learn more about security. You'likely develop better programming skills. However you're learning them because with Linux you'll need those skills.
I think it would be beneficial is students could be exposed to Linux. However, for mainstream educational purposes, I think Microsoft is still the better choice.
"Overpriced Apple computers were the computer of choice for many years. The Apple computers were reasonably capable, but they were more expensive, which made them less common in the commercial world. This resulted in students learning on computers that didn't match what they would use once they graduated."
... and we have FUD lift off.
Even firfox is now having problems. I got this from techtree.
Firefox Develops Security Holes
Techtree.com ^ | May 09, 2005 | Techtree News Staff
Posted on 05/09/2005 7:00:15 AM PDT by holymoly
Firefox seems to be heading Internet Explorer's way with security research company Secunia stating on its website that two vulnerabilities found in the popular browser can be exploited to conduct cross-site scripting attacks and compromise a user's system.
The Mozilla Foundation is aware of the two potentially critical Firefox security vulnerabilities. They maintain that there are currently no known active exploits of these vulnerabilities though a "proof of concept" has been reported.
Mozilla stated that it is aggressively working to provide a more comprehensive solution to these potential vulnerabilities and will provide that solution in a forthcoming security update. Users can further protect themselves by temporarily disabling JavaScript.
According to Secunia the problem is that "IFRAME" JavaScript URLs are not properly protected from being executed in context of another URL in the history list. This can be exploited to execute arbitrary HTML and script code in a user's browser session in context of an arbitrary site.
It seems that input passed to the "IconURL" parameter in "InstallTrigger.install" is not properly verified before being used. This can be exploited to execute arbitrary JavaScript code with escalated privileges via a specially crafted JavaScript URL.
A combination of the vulnerabilities can be exploited to execute arbitrary code.
Secunia also claims that the exploit code is publicly available. So far the vulnerabilities have been confirmed in version 1.0.3. Other versions may also be affected.
A temporary solution has been added to the sites "update.mozilla.org" and "addons.mozilla.org" where requests are redirected to "do-not-add.mozilla.org". This will stop the publicly available exploit code using a combination of the vulnerabilities to execute arbitrary code in the default settings of Firefox.
I wouldn't call it FUD after what I see in the classrooms at my kids schools. The fact is that Apple was overpriced for what it delivered. Its better now because of competition.
HUH?
Puhleeeeeeeeeeezzz...
Agree, all statistics show what you gain in purchase price is lost in support and training. M$ is bad but the alternative is worse. Plus the kids need to train on what they will use.
"Point 1: Continually referred to Microsoft as "M$" immediately marks you in many people's minds as an anti-Microsoft bigot who's too prejudiced to be taken seriously."
I've found that the "M$" has become shorthand in the techie world that is well-known. Given their past and current business practices I'd be hard pressed to say that they don't deserve it. And, it's a far better shorthand than "the darkside" (ducking).
"I think there are some scenarios in which Open Source is an obvious choice."
Let's face it...
Linux desktops aren't nearly as nice as Windows. Even the CEO of Novell (SuSE)said that last March. This isn't a problem if you're doing one task, and never get out beyond your app.
On the other hand, in the server room it's a different matter. Linux is very much competitive, and that's where MS, er, M$ sees the biggest threat. That's also the reason my IBM and Novell have cast their lots with Linux.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.