Sam Varghese
Thursday, 05 June 2008 22:58
Opinion and Analysis
Page 1 of 2
Nothing warms the cockles of a Linux lover's heart more than to hear that X or Y big company/city is migrating its desktops to the free operating system. And nothing can evoke more bitter insults than the reversal of any such decision.
Why do large entities - be they companies or cities - decide to change operating systems? I'd like to think that, in the main, it is the cost factor that decides this - but that would not be correct. If that were true then we would be seeing mass migrations to Linux everywhere. No matter what the zealots say, in the long run, using Linux is much less of a strain on the purse than running Windows.
In every case, there has to be a mover/shaker - either a politician (in the case of a city) or an educated CTO/CIO in the case of a corporation - who brings up the idea at an opportune time. And that time is most often when a whole host of Microsoft licences need to be renewed or an upgrade needs to be undertaken.
Different reasons drive these people to suggest a move. In the case of a politician, it is always the popularity factor. And a pollie is always careful to suggest such a move to the right constituency.
Take the case of the Indian state of Kerala. Once a leftist administration came to power a few years ago, a decision was taken to move to free and open source software in toto. Linux has gained a massive foothold there since then and if the government serves another two terms, it is very likely that some of the changes will be irreversible.
But then, Kerala is one of two states in India (the other is West Bengal) which still elects a leftist government - something mostly unheard of in the rest of the world. The political ideas behind free software appeal to a sizeable portion of the public. Richard Stallman has found Kerala a fertile ground to sow his ideas and, indeed, the state lays out the red (pun intended) carpet for him whenever he decides to pay a visit.
A politician can sell the decision to migrate to FOSS by invoking the national interest - "why should we let a foreign company repatriate earnings abroad when the money can stay here?" Such a rallying cry would appeal to the constituency in Kerala and indeed to most of India. Many people have still not forgotten the last batch of colonial rulers. But it would not work in every country - most people in this world of ours have only self-interest at heart.
In India's case one factor that makes any such migration noteworthy is
the numbers involved - in Kerala, we are talking about 1.5 million students and 40,000 computers in 2832 high schools. Overseeing this are 60,000 trained teachers (who have been put through their paces by 86 private training institutes) and 5600 IT co-ordinators.
It is difficult to implement such change - and it is even more difficult to roll it back.
