[Info-vax] New CEO of VMS Software

[Dan Cross]

In article <und163$qmhu$2 at dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D'Oliveiro  <ldo at nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 20:31:08 -0500, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>> On 1/6/2024 12:22 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 00:10:26 -0500, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>
>>>> Some like to blame MS for what happened. But the project execution
>>>> does not seem attractive to follow.
>>> 
>>> It saved money over all. That was one of the main points of the
>>> exercise.
>> 
>> The bottom line was that the chosen Linux & OOo/LO strategy had 11
>> million Euro lower cost than the Windows & MSO strategy.
>
>That is what "saving money" means, does it not.

Not if your development and support costs are 4 times what you
save over a 10 year period.  The development of WollMux itself
was probably around a million euros.

>> But the assumption was that staff and end user training cost was the
>> same for doing the switch as for just upgrading the MS solution.
>
>Given the major, disruptive changes that tend to happen between versions 
>of Microsoft's software, that kind of thing sounds entirely reasonable. 

Hogwosh.  You seem to have no end of speculation and assumption,
but practically no data or evidence to back up your claims.

>Particularly since you have more control over UI changes on the Linux 
>side. They created their own "LiMux" distro, as I recall, as part of the 
>implementation.

Another added cost.

>> And the software creation including the approx. 65000 lines of code
>> (mostly Java) for WollMux is set to zero.
>
>Again, presumably just equivalent to similar software development that 
>would have had to be done on Windows anyway. And with inferior Windows 
>tools, to boot.

Apparently it was to recreate functionality that already existed
in Office.

	- Dan C.