No standard, no custom government specific distro designed for the use case and ensuring stability and consistency… every department can choose their own.
So similar fragmentation that underpins the issues Linux has with consumer confusion when trying to switch. There are too many options all with weird quirks that isn’t an issue for technical people, but is impossible for the average person to wade through to find good options for them.
Maybe they’ll specify more in the future, but at the moment it looking more like expecting each large government department to make fundamental decisions on their core IT infrastructure on their own, as opposed to a dedicated and specialized team with experience.
Linux, being the Linux Foundation, a US company, would make it a weird choice for “we need to be less dependent on the US” but, Western Europe being a load rather than a prime mover is nothing new.
As a trade association, the Linux Foundation is not itself a for-profit business, but they have a lot to do with for-profit businesses. Maintaining the world’s most popular kernel is chief among them.
No standard, no custom government specific distro designed for the use case and ensuring stability and consistency… every department can choose their own.
So similar fragmentation that underpins the issues Linux has with consumer confusion when trying to switch. There are too many options all with weird quirks that isn’t an issue for technical people, but is impossible for the average person to wade through to find good options for them.
Maybe they’ll specify more in the future, but at the moment it looking more like expecting each large government department to make fundamental decisions on their core IT infrastructure on their own, as opposed to a dedicated and specialized team with experience.
I’ll bet money they’ll either chose Fedora, Ubuntu, or some custom distro.
Fedora makes the most sense to me. But I can see how a cautious bunch might go for the perceived safety of Ubuntu.
Fedora being IBM, a US company, would make it a weird choice for “we need to be less dependant on US”…
Linux, being the Linux Foundation, a US company, would make it a weird choice for “we need to be less dependent on the US” but, Western Europe being a load rather than a prime mover is nothing new.
I thought the Linux foundation was not a company… My bad, in the us , everything is business, isn’t it ?
Per Wikipedia:
“Company” is a vague almost meaningless term, like “animal.”
The Linux Foundation is a 501©6 non-profit corporation. Americans are more likely to be familiar with 501©3, which covers charity organizations, such as the American Red Cross and St. Judes Children’s Research Hospital. 501©6 covers trade associations, like the American Medical Association, the American Bar Association, the National Association of Realtors and the US Chamber of Commerce.
As a trade association, the Linux Foundation is not itself a for-profit business, but they have a lot to do with for-profit businesses. Maintaining the world’s most popular kernel is chief among them.
Would a government choose Fedora rather than Red Hat?
Or SUSE Enterprise, considering it’s based in Luxembourg.
@captain_aggravated @chunkystyles
Would a government choose Fedora rather than Red Hat?
Better neither, The Red hat owner IBM has given trump millions and bowed to anti DEI policys.
Debian or Debian based is a far better choice.
This makes total sense, since not ever department has the same needs.
Also these are work computers, there is no “consumer confusion”- you get what everyone uses, that’s also one of the reasons windows is everywhere.
Lastly, if rolling out different distros is a core decision in your IT you lack Linux experience in my opinion.