alt Hacker News>An org can now transition everything to Linux locally, and only be left with these fully functional blockers.
No. There is no vendor for this. Such a vendor would need to offer and support everything that MS is offering and supporting.
>And a vendor can easily integrate and ship that.
Integration is hard. It needs to work together. We all know that Linux has some rough edges (and so does Windows) and the vendor has to take care of it all and actually needs to fix it. A company like that has to suddenly do maintenance on many major open source projects.
Replies
> No. There is no vendor for this.
You seem stuck on this model and not at all open to those commentators who are saying the single product vendor model itself is the problem?
My observation is that, regardless the myriad solutions based on strongly enforced interoperability standards, no government has ever had the courage to directly go up against US technopoly. I can see that changing at last. And my goodness, what a long, long, dark time it's been coming.
There are many vendors. There are no vendors large enough to handle it at government scale, but there are many vendors. If someone was serious about wanting a vendor it wouldn't be hard to become the single vendor. It isn't hard to hire a bunch of technical people, training them on whatever new desktop and set them loose - it is just expensive.