LiMux The Penguin: Deep into Munich’s Linux F/OSS migration

Munich's Linux migration has been a publicity frenzy, a software patent poster child, and the subject of a debate on the role of government in technology mandates. Now it's a real-life IT project, and the key to success is training, management, and replacing 170 non-Linux applications.

By Tom Henderson, LinuxWorld.com, 11/06/06

 Start a discussion    Print article

 Comments (1)    Print article

The city of Munich got more media attention than respect after it decided on a migration to Linux and open source software on the desktop. After a careful and deliberately open movement towards deciding its IT future, Munich was slammed in the media, then became a target for Microsoft negotiators and a project at risk from a proposed European move to US-style software patents.

A city council concerned with rising IT costs reviewed the black and white of TCO in a myriad of ways. Now, after enormous criticism and a nearly complete halt, it’s becoming a successful migration if for very important reasons: it’s going well, quietly, and on plan.

Munich has made a mark for itself by embracing Linux and open source development for up to 80% of the city's 16,000 desktops. The remaining user desktops will use Microsoft Windows XP for apps that have no open source equivalent, including AutoCad). Mac OS currently has no future in the city’s IT plans. Although seemingly controversial, city officials claim that the arduous process that led to the decision to migrate to Linux was actually based on Microsoft’s policies on Windows NT, and a subsequent study to determine the best course of action pursuant to the unexpectedly short life support cycle for NT.

Microsoft announced an end-of-life support plan for NT that would prevent the operating system from surviving through the life cycle than the IT officials in Munich had anticipated. Faced with new, unanticipated licensing costs, the Munich City Council then commissioned a study of returns based on operating systems and applications product cost, life cycle of deployment, and usability for user desktops. The city already ran server applications on Unix, on a Siemens mainframe and Sun equipment, and many of these might need to be changed, too.

The decision could have swayed towards Microsoft infrastructure — operating system and Office apps — if the view were taken on a short-term deployment life cycle, said Florian Schießl of Munich’s Projekt LiMux. When the long-term benefits were weighed in, open source was more cost-effective. That’s what swayed Munich’s city council: a medium- and long-term value and TCO assessment.

Featured Whitepapers

Enterprise Linux: How Oracle Support Differentiates Itself in a Commodity Market

What's new in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5

The Next Generation of Configuration Management

An Automated Approach to Vista Deployments

Novell(r) ZENworks(r) Configuration Management

LinuxCast Listen to the latest Linux news.

About Us | Contact Us | Advertising Info | Terms of Service/Privacy

Copyright, 2006-2007 Network World, Inc. All rights reserved.