Toolkit
Story: Open source projects: Why it pays to keep quiet
Since 1997 I have deployed Linux in the workplace at two medium sized organizations.
At first Linux ( and for a while FreeBSD ) was used a replacement for dedicated NT fileservers, then in 2001 replacing the remaining NT Domain and print servers. Only one of the servers has Windows 2000 server installed and it is kept inactive a backup server ready to dual boot Linux.
Since late 2000 we also undertook a internal pilot program evaluating Linux as a desktop. The result is that since 2002 one organisation has deployed Redhat 9 based desktops in increasing numbers. Currently over 100 desktops, around 65% of the overall numbers of desktops, run Linux with remaining desktops run a mixture of Windows98se and Windows 2000 professional. All of the desktops now have the latest versions of Openoffice.org and Mozilla installed, with the Windows based desktops running Microsoft Office 2000.
In late 1998, after word got around that we were deploying Linux and SAMBA as a Fileserver, we had a visit from one of Microsoft sales reps demanding entry to our server room. The CIO ask why and even phoned the reps superior to check the reps identity. We were quite open back then and demonstrated by showing the log files how even back then that Linux + Samba has better performance and stability than NT. At the time the latter NT server required rebooting every morning, and was lucky if it made it though the week without crashing bringing the whole organization to a holt.
At each step the organisations have adopted alternatives to Microsoft's products ONLY when it provides them with a better solution.
Since that first visit, each of the CIO of the organization has had began to dread each contact by representatives of Microsoft. Firstly the CIO and then the CEOs where approached with everything from cajoling, promises of discounts, FUD with outright lies. and lastly carefully worded veiled threats. The latter threats motivated one organization in 1999 to preemptivly undertake a time consuming licence audit, not only counting the number of licenses overall, but also matching individual license ID to each machine, with purchase documentation when available. When the next Microsoft sales rep to visit raised the issue of licensing, the CIO picked up the large manila folder, dropping hard down on the desk in front of the rep and opened it. The rep left red faced very shortly afterwards.
Since 2000, I personally have been advocating the use of Linux and open source technology and publicly berating Microsoft for the lack of security in its applications. Under pressure from the management , I have had to agree to keep the identity of my current and past employers secret. I have had people, at least two of whom were phoning from inside Microsoft buildings, contact former employers ( who I worked for before the two organisations ) "demanding" everything from employment and personal information to my immediate dismissal ( even after they were informed that I do not work there anymore ).
Whether actions of the Microsoft reps were endorsed by Microsoft upper management is uncertain, but complaints to the local management has only ever resulted in a short term cessation to the same type of behavior from the local Microsoft reps. Evitably the same or similar shoddy tactics are used again in a few months time.
Full Talkback thread
Story: Open source projects: Why it pays to keep quiet
-
The real reason:
Teams are using open source becua... Anonymous -
A bit agree... Anonymous -
"One side people say it is free.... what... Anonymous -
Your reference to Ballmer's visit to Munich doesn'... Anonymous -
I recently project-managed a rollout of Linux to o... Anonymous -
[QUOTE]I recently project-managed a rollout o... Anonymous -
Since 1997 I have deployed Linux in the... Anonymous -
For many companies the cost of Micr... Jim McNeill -
What's strange ?
In russia, if traveller agency se... Anonymous


