You'll find that the laptops on offer through this scheme are pretty restrictive. For example there's only one Sony laptop specified. Some suppliers do specify the paid-for Sun version of Open Office, but of course many specify MS Office. As for an e-mail client, this is usually covered by MS Outlook or the bundles Sun Office equivalent. Outlook express also fits the specification. As for pricing, as far as I can tell this is fixed for the contract period which extends for a minimum of one year. I've yet to compare this 'like for like' with current pricing specified in up-to-date computer magazines. I'll let you know what I discover. David Bowles Education Support
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 21:14, Thomas Adam wrote:
--- garry saddington <garry@joydiv.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
Yes you could use the reverse argument but it is proprietary software that is entrenched and not free software. i don't use free software because of the reasons stated above and i am sure that all on this list don't either.
I use free software because I believe in the open-source ideals. I am a developer for a number of open-source projects and it is the thrill of helping others that I like.
This machine is running entirely free software and I guess I use it 90% of the time. The only thing I use Windows for these days is specialist schools applications (Complex Word documents) and picking up E-mail sent to my Learning Machine account -that's just laziness cos I could get it here. The Specialist Schools form is complicated and runs text boxes across pages which is a problem for OO.o at present but I dare say that this will get fixed before long and then I could be an entirely MS free zone. The only reason the rest of the company still use Windows is that the accounts system depends on it and they need something to practise on for fixing other people's stuff. I can't see us ever buying new products or upgrades from MS for work since there is nothing in the new stuff really that worth having and by the time it is, there will most likely be Linux alternatives. The way I look at it is that the more people that use FLOSS, the more it gets accepted so the more people use it etc. Its constantly improving and at worst forces costs down by providing competition for the proprietary monopolies. On that basis alone Government has a responsibility to promote a healthy FLOSS industry. I believe they are beginning to get the message but still a long way to go. At least BECTA are doing a bit of research - ok its 3 years after everyone else but come on, this is a government quango, you can't expect them to be innovative or quick off the mark ;-)
-- ian <ian.lynch2@ntlworld.com>