<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_04_1416226</id>
	<title>A Public Funded "Microsoft Shop?"</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1267718940000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"I work at a public hospital in the computer / technical department and (amongst others) was recently outraged by an email that was sent around our department: '(XXXX) District Health Board &mdash; Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy. I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.' We have also been told to remove Firefox found on anyone's computer unless they have specific authorisation from management to have it installed under special circumstances. Now, I could somewhat understand this if I was working in a company that sold and promoted the use of Microsoft software for financial gain, but I work in the publicly / government funded health system. Several of the IT big-wigs at the DHB are seemingly blindly pro-Microsoft and seem all too quick to shrug off other, perhaps more efficient alternatives. As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently. I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from Microsoft's infrastructure, but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run. I would very much like to hear Slashdot's ideas / opinions on this 'Strategic Direction' and the silencing of our technical opinions."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " I work at a public hospital in the computer / technical department and ( amongst others ) was recently outraged by an email that was sent around our department : ' ( XXXX ) District Health Board    Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy .
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems .
' We have also been told to remove Firefox found on anyone 's computer unless they have specific authorisation from management to have it installed under special circumstances .
Now , I could somewhat understand this if I was working in a company that sold and promoted the use of Microsoft software for financial gain , but I work in the publicly / government funded health system .
Several of the IT big-wigs at the DHB are seemingly blindly pro-Microsoft and seem all too quick to shrug off other , perhaps more efficient alternatives .
As a taxpayer , I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently .
I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from Microsoft 's infrastructure , but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft 's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system , we would be far better off in the long run .
I would very much like to hear Slashdot 's ideas / opinions on this 'Strategic Direction ' and the silencing of our technical opinions .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "I work at a public hospital in the computer / technical department and (amongst others) was recently outraged by an email that was sent around our department: '(XXXX) District Health Board — Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy.
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.
' We have also been told to remove Firefox found on anyone's computer unless they have specific authorisation from management to have it installed under special circumstances.
Now, I could somewhat understand this if I was working in a company that sold and promoted the use of Microsoft software for financial gain, but I work in the publicly / government funded health system.
Several of the IT big-wigs at the DHB are seemingly blindly pro-Microsoft and seem all too quick to shrug off other, perhaps more efficient alternatives.
As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently.
I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from Microsoft's infrastructure, but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run.
I would very much like to hear Slashdot's ideas / opinions on this 'Strategic Direction' and the silencing of our technical opinions.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358954</id>
	<title>On the take...</title>
	<author>alexborges</author>
	<datestamp>1267723500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Im sick and tired of this. It replicates along the whole industry and spans countries, crosses the barrier between private and public sectors: some IT managers, the more blindly promicrosoft the more likely, are on the take.</p><p>INVESTIGATE NOW.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Im sick and tired of this .
It replicates along the whole industry and spans countries , crosses the barrier between private and public sectors : some IT managers , the more blindly promicrosoft the more likely , are on the take.INVESTIGATE NOW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Im sick and tired of this.
It replicates along the whole industry and spans countries, crosses the barrier between private and public sectors: some IT managers, the more blindly promicrosoft the more likely, are on the take.INVESTIGATE NOW.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359278</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>umghhh</author>
	<datestamp>1267724820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are a lot of factors that can influence whether a change is viable. One could be whether you can move all or majority of your systems to another vendor without bothering too much, the other one is education and general willingness to try. I personally see the later the major obstacle not only to linux adoption but also to a reform in any other branch of life esp. when more than small group (me and my brother-in-low) is affected, say national health system, tax system etc. It is always the same story - people refuse to change because the old shit is the shit they know, and new shit could be dangerous or even cause SPD (soft penis disease) . Now whether actually linux would be cheaper is an open question. As far as I can tell Germans are good at counting beans so I would expect that they counted it all well enough. The city of Muenchen switched (I think the process is still not quite complete) to Linux some time ago and what the guy responsible for it claimed this change to be cost neutral.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a lot of factors that can influence whether a change is viable .
One could be whether you can move all or majority of your systems to another vendor without bothering too much , the other one is education and general willingness to try .
I personally see the later the major obstacle not only to linux adoption but also to a reform in any other branch of life esp .
when more than small group ( me and my brother-in-low ) is affected , say national health system , tax system etc .
It is always the same story - people refuse to change because the old shit is the shit they know , and new shit could be dangerous or even cause SPD ( soft penis disease ) .
Now whether actually linux would be cheaper is an open question .
As far as I can tell Germans are good at counting beans so I would expect that they counted it all well enough .
The city of Muenchen switched ( I think the process is still not quite complete ) to Linux some time ago and what the guy responsible for it claimed this change to be cost neutral .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a lot of factors that can influence whether a change is viable.
One could be whether you can move all or majority of your systems to another vendor without bothering too much, the other one is education and general willingness to try.
I personally see the later the major obstacle not only to linux adoption but also to a reform in any other branch of life esp.
when more than small group (me and my brother-in-low) is affected, say national health system, tax system etc.
It is always the same story - people refuse to change because the old shit is the shit they know, and new shit could be dangerous or even cause SPD (soft penis disease) .
Now whether actually linux would be cheaper is an open question.
As far as I can tell Germans are good at counting beans so I would expect that they counted it all well enough.
The city of Muenchen switched (I think the process is still not quite complete) to Linux some time ago and what the guy responsible for it claimed this change to be cost neutral.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359264</id>
	<title>Hobgoblin11</title>
	<author>Hobgoblin11</author>
	<datestamp>1267724760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the submitter needs an explanation for why this is.. he shouldnt be working in IT. I know many of you have a venemous hatred for Microsoft and its products.. but considering that ANY user can be quickly and cheaply trained on using their products and when set up properly have little downtime.. going to some arcane, obtuse open source alternative (because thats EXACTLY how they would see it) would be astronomically expensive in not only man hours of training and frustration but also back end administrative costs. You fucking dorks cant see the forest through the trees. IF open source was a viable alternative.. especially considering the up front costs are "free" (LMFAO!) it would have a much bigger place in the market after all these years. But being the typical anti social retards who could give a fuck about the end user experience.. you all just fail miserably to see it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the submitter needs an explanation for why this is.. he shouldnt be working in IT .
I know many of you have a venemous hatred for Microsoft and its products.. but considering that ANY user can be quickly and cheaply trained on using their products and when set up properly have little downtime.. going to some arcane , obtuse open source alternative ( because thats EXACTLY how they would see it ) would be astronomically expensive in not only man hours of training and frustration but also back end administrative costs .
You fucking dorks cant see the forest through the trees .
IF open source was a viable alternative.. especially considering the up front costs are " free " ( LMFAO !
) it would have a much bigger place in the market after all these years .
But being the typical anti social retards who could give a fuck about the end user experience.. you all just fail miserably to see it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the submitter needs an explanation for why this is.. he shouldnt be working in IT.
I know many of you have a venemous hatred for Microsoft and its products.. but considering that ANY user can be quickly and cheaply trained on using their products and when set up properly have little downtime.. going to some arcane, obtuse open source alternative (because thats EXACTLY how they would see it) would be astronomically expensive in not only man hours of training and frustration but also back end administrative costs.
You fucking dorks cant see the forest through the trees.
IF open source was a viable alternative.. especially considering the up front costs are "free" (LMFAO!
) it would have a much bigger place in the market after all these years.
But being the typical anti social retards who could give a fuck about the end user experience.. you all just fail miserably to see it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359784</id>
	<title>Balancing act</title>
	<author>plcurechax</author>
	<datestamp>1267726740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The CIO <b>should</b> be balancing the cost efficiencies, and "consistent user experience" of standardization. That said, department standardization or unrestricted defaulting to a single vendor generally may run afoul of Single / Sole Sourcing rules in government <a href="http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/dpa-ppd-eng.html" title="tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca">procurement policies</a> [tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca]. Contacts or formal "deals" may exist in some cases, but not as offer as people expect.</p><p>Blatant abuse can be reported to the auditors of the approximate level of government (state/ province, <a href="http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/" title="oag-bvg.gc.ca">federal</a> [oag-bvg.gc.ca], etc.).  But first, you'll need to know the general rules applicable in your case.</p><p>Successful <i>Skunkworks</i> style project with your immediate supervisor's approval (convince them it will a) work, b) make them look good) is the best way to introduce chance. But making it a obvious <i>fight</i> is a losing approach. Try the stepping stones approach, of Open Source / Free Software on Windows, before trying to encourage a wholesale conversion. Servers are about the only exception I've seen work.</p><p>And license fees are moot - they are often seen as a "computer tax" and just the cost of doing business, they are perceived as a small cost in the overall total cost of ownership (TCO) which includes hardware lifecycling, training, and helpdesk / support. Having an adequate pool of trained or "qualified" staff in the public service can be seen meaning whatever is "popular" and "common" ("industry standard"), at low wages compared to private sector.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The CIO should be balancing the cost efficiencies , and " consistent user experience " of standardization .
That said , department standardization or unrestricted defaulting to a single vendor generally may run afoul of Single / Sole Sourcing rules in government procurement policies [ tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca ] .
Contacts or formal " deals " may exist in some cases , but not as offer as people expect.Blatant abuse can be reported to the auditors of the approximate level of government ( state/ province , federal [ oag-bvg.gc.ca ] , etc. ) .
But first , you 'll need to know the general rules applicable in your case.Successful Skunkworks style project with your immediate supervisor 's approval ( convince them it will a ) work , b ) make them look good ) is the best way to introduce chance .
But making it a obvious fight is a losing approach .
Try the stepping stones approach , of Open Source / Free Software on Windows , before trying to encourage a wholesale conversion .
Servers are about the only exception I 've seen work.And license fees are moot - they are often seen as a " computer tax " and just the cost of doing business , they are perceived as a small cost in the overall total cost of ownership ( TCO ) which includes hardware lifecycling , training , and helpdesk / support .
Having an adequate pool of trained or " qualified " staff in the public service can be seen meaning whatever is " popular " and " common " ( " industry standard " ) , at low wages compared to private sector .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The CIO should be balancing the cost efficiencies, and "consistent user experience" of standardization.
That said, department standardization or unrestricted defaulting to a single vendor generally may run afoul of Single / Sole Sourcing rules in government procurement policies [tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca].
Contacts or formal "deals" may exist in some cases, but not as offer as people expect.Blatant abuse can be reported to the auditors of the approximate level of government (state/ province, federal [oag-bvg.gc.ca], etc.).
But first, you'll need to know the general rules applicable in your case.Successful Skunkworks style project with your immediate supervisor's approval (convince them it will a) work, b) make them look good) is the best way to introduce chance.
But making it a obvious fight is a losing approach.
Try the stepping stones approach, of Open Source / Free Software on Windows, before trying to encourage a wholesale conversion.
Servers are about the only exception I've seen work.And license fees are moot - they are often seen as a "computer tax" and just the cost of doing business, they are perceived as a small cost in the overall total cost of ownership (TCO) which includes hardware lifecycling, training, and helpdesk / support.
Having an adequate pool of trained or "qualified" staff in the public service can be seen meaning whatever is "popular" and "common" ("industry standard"), at low wages compared to private sector.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358974</id>
	<title>So much HATE and FUD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot has become nothing but a hub of Microsoft haters and fear mongering. You all have become what you once hated FUD monkeys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot has become nothing but a hub of Microsoft haters and fear mongering .
You all have become what you once hated FUD monkeys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot has become nothing but a hub of Microsoft haters and fear mongering.
You all have become what you once hated FUD monkeys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359700</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1267726380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much as your idea makes sense, the chances are his superiors will refuse because it's against policy or it will be seen as insubordination if the higher-ups become aware. They can easily claim that despite his local cost savings he is obstructing the architectural and strategic plans and increasing long term costs. A very expensive consultant report will agree with what the higher-ups want and that'll be the end of that and possibly his career. The only real moral leverage he has is that this is public money, a private company could do whatever the hell they like and it'd be nobody's business how deep they're in bed with Microsoft. But that doesn't mean that it's some employee-run collective that is managed differently from any other company, if he wants to use that he has to awaken the public and force them to reconsider at the policy level. Otherwise he'll just be as any other employee in the private sector ignoring management decisions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as your idea makes sense , the chances are his superiors will refuse because it 's against policy or it will be seen as insubordination if the higher-ups become aware .
They can easily claim that despite his local cost savings he is obstructing the architectural and strategic plans and increasing long term costs .
A very expensive consultant report will agree with what the higher-ups want and that 'll be the end of that and possibly his career .
The only real moral leverage he has is that this is public money , a private company could do whatever the hell they like and it 'd be nobody 's business how deep they 're in bed with Microsoft .
But that does n't mean that it 's some employee-run collective that is managed differently from any other company , if he wants to use that he has to awaken the public and force them to reconsider at the policy level .
Otherwise he 'll just be as any other employee in the private sector ignoring management decisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as your idea makes sense, the chances are his superiors will refuse because it's against policy or it will be seen as insubordination if the higher-ups become aware.
They can easily claim that despite his local cost savings he is obstructing the architectural and strategic plans and increasing long term costs.
A very expensive consultant report will agree with what the higher-ups want and that'll be the end of that and possibly his career.
The only real moral leverage he has is that this is public money, a private company could do whatever the hell they like and it'd be nobody's business how deep they're in bed with Microsoft.
But that doesn't mean that it's some employee-run collective that is managed differently from any other company, if he wants to use that he has to awaken the public and force them to reconsider at the policy level.
Otherwise he'll just be as any other employee in the private sector ignoring management decisions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359522</id>
	<title>Before I would comment I'd have to know</title>
	<author>mikefocke</author>
	<datestamp>1267725780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a lot more about what the hospital is using computers for, what custom or pre-packaged software they use, what hardware exists, what proportion of the users are Office users and to what level of expertise, are online patients records involved, etc.</p><p>It isn't just the OS...it is the whole cost of purchasing the software to run the hospital, the paths future upgrades in response to private and government demands will take, the enforcement of privacy protections, etc. All in the midst of a rapidly changing medical funding environment when everyone is making demands to change...in one direction or another.</p><p>When you have a total understanding of the implications of every line in the IT department's budget, who the stakeholders are and the politics of what software they use (doctor driven, insurance company driven, medicare driven etc) then you'll be in a position to discuss what OS they could use in business terms. Once you have compared your hospital's budget for IT against a similar sized and functions hospital using another solution and you present that comparison, I'd bet OS costs are a triviality compared to the other IT costs. What is the cost of eliminating the expertise of all the rest of the IT support staff in terms of patient care, doctor functioning, etc? People resist change..they are scared of it. Not sure they can measure up...no matter how smart they are.</p><p>When you make an argument on the basis of a better OS, you just show to the higher-ups you don't understand their real problems...you are just one of those techies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a lot more about what the hospital is using computers for , what custom or pre-packaged software they use , what hardware exists , what proportion of the users are Office users and to what level of expertise , are online patients records involved , etc.It is n't just the OS...it is the whole cost of purchasing the software to run the hospital , the paths future upgrades in response to private and government demands will take , the enforcement of privacy protections , etc .
All in the midst of a rapidly changing medical funding environment when everyone is making demands to change...in one direction or another.When you have a total understanding of the implications of every line in the IT department 's budget , who the stakeholders are and the politics of what software they use ( doctor driven , insurance company driven , medicare driven etc ) then you 'll be in a position to discuss what OS they could use in business terms .
Once you have compared your hospital 's budget for IT against a similar sized and functions hospital using another solution and you present that comparison , I 'd bet OS costs are a triviality compared to the other IT costs .
What is the cost of eliminating the expertise of all the rest of the IT support staff in terms of patient care , doctor functioning , etc ?
People resist change..they are scared of it .
Not sure they can measure up...no matter how smart they are.When you make an argument on the basis of a better OS , you just show to the higher-ups you do n't understand their real problems...you are just one of those techies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a lot more about what the hospital is using computers for, what custom or pre-packaged software they use, what hardware exists, what proportion of the users are Office users and to what level of expertise, are online patients records involved, etc.It isn't just the OS...it is the whole cost of purchasing the software to run the hospital, the paths future upgrades in response to private and government demands will take, the enforcement of privacy protections, etc.
All in the midst of a rapidly changing medical funding environment when everyone is making demands to change...in one direction or another.When you have a total understanding of the implications of every line in the IT department's budget, who the stakeholders are and the politics of what software they use (doctor driven, insurance company driven, medicare driven etc) then you'll be in a position to discuss what OS they could use in business terms.
Once you have compared your hospital's budget for IT against a similar sized and functions hospital using another solution and you present that comparison, I'd bet OS costs are a triviality compared to the other IT costs.
What is the cost of eliminating the expertise of all the rest of the IT support staff in terms of patient care, doctor functioning, etc?
People resist change..they are scared of it.
Not sure they can measure up...no matter how smart they are.When you make an argument on the basis of a better OS, you just show to the higher-ups you don't understand their real problems...you are just one of those techies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359112</id>
	<title>Re:Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Without question, a *current* version of IE which is *properly patched* is superior (security-wise) to a 6 month old, unpatched version of Firefox.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/quote?</p><p>Sorry, gonna have to call BS on that one.  A cursory visit through Secunia advisories will make it painfully obvious that your current, properly patched IE is roughly equivalent to the alternative you propose.  that is to say, not especially secure.  Also, standardization and centralization of group policy doesn't need to be sacrificed by a few scripts (or systems management software) to keep non-MS applications up to date.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Without question , a * current * version of IE which is * properly patched * is superior ( security-wise ) to a 6 month old , unpatched version of Firefox .
/quote ? Sorry , gon na have to call BS on that one .
A cursory visit through Secunia advisories will make it painfully obvious that your current , properly patched IE is roughly equivalent to the alternative you propose .
that is to say , not especially secure .
Also , standardization and centralization of group policy does n't need to be sacrificed by a few scripts ( or systems management software ) to keep non-MS applications up to date .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without question, a *current* version of IE which is *properly patched* is superior (security-wise) to a 6 month old, unpatched version of Firefox.
/quote?Sorry, gonna have to call BS on that one.
A cursory visit through Secunia advisories will make it painfully obvious that your current, properly patched IE is roughly equivalent to the alternative you propose.
that is to say, not especially secure.
Also, standardization and centralization of group policy doesn't need to be sacrificed by a few scripts (or systems management software) to keep non-MS applications up to date.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359042</id>
	<title>Re:Your management</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1267723860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; but IE alone will be easier to support than IE+FF.</p><p>No it won't. The people choosing a better product for the sake of their own efficiency will be invisible in terms of "support cost". They are supporting themselves. They are supporting themselves because they are sick of centralized IT not addressing their real needs. This is just a replay of the whole rise of PCs.</p><p>Individuals may circumvent centralized IT management when it becomes more of a hinderance than help.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; but IE alone will be easier to support than IE + FF.No it wo n't .
The people choosing a better product for the sake of their own efficiency will be invisible in terms of " support cost " .
They are supporting themselves .
They are supporting themselves because they are sick of centralized IT not addressing their real needs .
This is just a replay of the whole rise of PCs.Individuals may circumvent centralized IT management when it becomes more of a hinderance than help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; but IE alone will be easier to support than IE+FF.No it won't.
The people choosing a better product for the sake of their own efficiency will be invisible in terms of "support cost".
They are supporting themselves.
They are supporting themselves because they are sick of centralized IT not addressing their real needs.
This is just a replay of the whole rise of PCs.Individuals may circumvent centralized IT management when it becomes more of a hinderance than help.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359192</id>
	<title>Policy isn't your job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a front-lines IT grunt, it's your job to implement policy.  It isn't your job to mouth off about it throughout the company outside your management chain to try and get it changed.  That would be insubordination.</p><p>Feel more than welcome to complain internally within your group.  But when talking to customers (end customers, and the other, non-IT staff in the organization) it is reasonable to expect you, employee (in your capacity as such), not to publicly disparage the policies of your employer.  It's not professional, and I'm pretty sure it's sufficient grounds to fire you unless you are protected from such by some other arrangement (civil service laws, union, etc.)</p><p>You can talk to whatever legislative body pays the bills and ask them to encourage open source, you can talk to the media as a private citizen, you can do a lot of things.  But you can't necessarily do those things at work, and you can't do them in your capacity as an employee.  This goes for any employer.</p><p>SirWired</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a front-lines IT grunt , it 's your job to implement policy .
It is n't your job to mouth off about it throughout the company outside your management chain to try and get it changed .
That would be insubordination.Feel more than welcome to complain internally within your group .
But when talking to customers ( end customers , and the other , non-IT staff in the organization ) it is reasonable to expect you , employee ( in your capacity as such ) , not to publicly disparage the policies of your employer .
It 's not professional , and I 'm pretty sure it 's sufficient grounds to fire you unless you are protected from such by some other arrangement ( civil service laws , union , etc .
) You can talk to whatever legislative body pays the bills and ask them to encourage open source , you can talk to the media as a private citizen , you can do a lot of things .
But you ca n't necessarily do those things at work , and you ca n't do them in your capacity as an employee .
This goes for any employer.SirWired</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a front-lines IT grunt, it's your job to implement policy.
It isn't your job to mouth off about it throughout the company outside your management chain to try and get it changed.
That would be insubordination.Feel more than welcome to complain internally within your group.
But when talking to customers (end customers, and the other, non-IT staff in the organization) it is reasonable to expect you, employee (in your capacity as such), not to publicly disparage the policies of your employer.
It's not professional, and I'm pretty sure it's sufficient grounds to fire you unless you are protected from such by some other arrangement (civil service laws, union, etc.
)You can talk to whatever legislative body pays the bills and ask them to encourage open source, you can talk to the media as a private citizen, you can do a lot of things.
But you can't necessarily do those things at work, and you can't do them in your capacity as an employee.
This goes for any employer.SirWired</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358838</id>
	<title>Bossy Overlords</title>
	<author>dreadlord76</author>
	<datestamp>1267723200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt;&gt; I would very much like to hear Slashdot's ideas / opinions on this 'Strategic Direction' and the silencing of our technical opinions."
<br>
Let see, this is slashdot.  <br>
<br>
What do we have here:<br>
Bossy overlords<br>
Bossy overlords against Free Software<br>
Bossy overlords against Free Software and Pro Microsoft<br>
Bossy overlords against Free Software, Pro Microsoft, and wasting public funds<br>
Bossy overlords against Free Software, Pro Microsoft, and wasting public funds<br>
The underdog who wants to challenge the Bossy overlords against Free Software, Pro Microsoft, and wasting public funds<br>
The underdog who wants to challenge the Bossy overlords against Free Software, Pro Microsoft, and wasting public funds, and censoring the underdog<br>
<br>
Multiple choice opinions:<br>
1. "Just do your job!"<br>
2. "We hate Microsoft!"<br>
3. "You da Man!"<br>
4. "Profit!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; I would very much like to hear Slashdot 's ideas / opinions on this 'Strategic Direction ' and the silencing of our technical opinions .
" Let see , this is slashdot .
What do we have here : Bossy overlords Bossy overlords against Free Software Bossy overlords against Free Software and Pro Microsoft Bossy overlords against Free Software , Pro Microsoft , and wasting public funds Bossy overlords against Free Software , Pro Microsoft , and wasting public funds The underdog who wants to challenge the Bossy overlords against Free Software , Pro Microsoft , and wasting public funds The underdog who wants to challenge the Bossy overlords against Free Software , Pro Microsoft , and wasting public funds , and censoring the underdog Multiple choice opinions : 1 .
" Just do your job !
" 2 .
" We hate Microsoft !
" 3 .
" You da Man !
" 4 .
" Profit ! "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; I would very much like to hear Slashdot's ideas / opinions on this 'Strategic Direction' and the silencing of our technical opinions.
"

Let see, this is slashdot.
What do we have here:
Bossy overlords
Bossy overlords against Free Software
Bossy overlords against Free Software and Pro Microsoft
Bossy overlords against Free Software, Pro Microsoft, and wasting public funds
Bossy overlords against Free Software, Pro Microsoft, and wasting public funds
The underdog who wants to challenge the Bossy overlords against Free Software, Pro Microsoft, and wasting public funds
The underdog who wants to challenge the Bossy overlords against Free Software, Pro Microsoft, and wasting public funds, and censoring the underdog

Multiple choice opinions:
1.
"Just do your job!
"
2.
"We hate Microsoft!
"
3.
"You da Man!
"
4.
"Profit!"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361234</id>
	<title>We just fired someone just like you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267733880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My employer is 99\% Microsoft shop, and just cut loose our web developer. He was, *by far*, the brightest of all the candidates we interviewed.</p><p>Being a LAMP guy who used a Mac, he just couldn't bring himself to be a team player in a place that is 99\% Microsoft.</p><p>He thought he could come in and change the culture, and he was wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My employer is 99 \ % Microsoft shop , and just cut loose our web developer .
He was , * by far * , the brightest of all the candidates we interviewed.Being a LAMP guy who used a Mac , he just could n't bring himself to be a team player in a place that is 99 \ % Microsoft.He thought he could come in and change the culture , and he was wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My employer is 99\% Microsoft shop, and just cut loose our web developer.
He was, *by far*, the brightest of all the candidates we interviewed.Being a LAMP guy who used a Mac, he just couldn't bring himself to be a team player in a place that is 99\% Microsoft.He thought he could come in and change the culture, and he was wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360760</id>
	<title>Re:Your management</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1267731480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not even about "support."  In a lot of cases, it's about bandwidth.  IE patches from within Windows, and can be directed at a local in-house server.  FF patches by checking a web site when you open it.  Imaging 15,000 users coming in an a Monday and between 7:30 and 9AM all of them hit the web with FF to download a several tens of megs update...  Add plug-ins, Java, Flash, and half a dozen other apps that do the same thing, and you have a shit-load of traffic to manage...</p><p>Sure, this can be handled through image management, Config Managers (system center, etc), firewall blocking of updates, and more, but that's a cost too, and IE has none of it.</p><p>it may totally suck as a browser, but it's one that's enterprise manageable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not even about " support .
" In a lot of cases , it 's about bandwidth .
IE patches from within Windows , and can be directed at a local in-house server .
FF patches by checking a web site when you open it .
Imaging 15,000 users coming in an a Monday and between 7 : 30 and 9AM all of them hit the web with FF to download a several tens of megs update... Add plug-ins , Java , Flash , and half a dozen other apps that do the same thing , and you have a shit-load of traffic to manage...Sure , this can be handled through image management , Config Managers ( system center , etc ) , firewall blocking of updates , and more , but that 's a cost too , and IE has none of it.it may totally suck as a browser , but it 's one that 's enterprise manageable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not even about "support.
"  In a lot of cases, it's about bandwidth.
IE patches from within Windows, and can be directed at a local in-house server.
FF patches by checking a web site when you open it.
Imaging 15,000 users coming in an a Monday and between 7:30 and 9AM all of them hit the web with FF to download a several tens of megs update...  Add plug-ins, Java, Flash, and half a dozen other apps that do the same thing, and you have a shit-load of traffic to manage...Sure, this can be handled through image management, Config Managers (system center, etc), firewall blocking of updates, and more, but that's a cost too, and IE has none of it.it may totally suck as a browser, but it's one that's enterprise manageable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734</id>
	<title>hmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's entirely possible that your hospital signed a deal with Microsoft...by exclusively using their products, they would get a discount.</p><p>It certainly wouldn't be the first time...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's entirely possible that your hospital signed a deal with Microsoft...by exclusively using their products , they would get a discount.It certainly would n't be the first time.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's entirely possible that your hospital signed a deal with Microsoft...by exclusively using their products, they would get a discount.It certainly wouldn't be the first time...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358730</id>
	<title>Bill Gates is Jesus Christ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He just wants us to have more sick people so he can heal them with his glowing palms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He just wants us to have more sick people so he can heal them with his glowing palms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He just wants us to have more sick people so he can heal them with his glowing palms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358938</id>
	<title>Lack of control.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are those who want to get their pay without working -- even if this mean sabotaging their employer or, worse, sabotaging and doing it while betraying the public (whom they should serve).</p><p>This is particularly vicious because, in promoting formats like OOXML instead of the more interoperable ODF, they turned really into M$ shops -- in the sense they now obey M$... kinda like hatching eggs for another species. It's not just a matter of this or that OS, it's a problem of lack of control.</p><p>In such a scenario, either high management has been taken over -- or middle has been, rendering the high part insulated.</p><p>Politicians allowing all that are in for later persecution when an opposing party enters office.</p><p>IMHO those at high positions who accept private interference in government are unfit for new positions in future elections. Let's vote them out of history.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are those who want to get their pay without working -- even if this mean sabotaging their employer or , worse , sabotaging and doing it while betraying the public ( whom they should serve ) .This is particularly vicious because , in promoting formats like OOXML instead of the more interoperable ODF , they turned really into M $ shops -- in the sense they now obey M $ ... kinda like hatching eggs for another species .
It 's not just a matter of this or that OS , it 's a problem of lack of control.In such a scenario , either high management has been taken over -- or middle has been , rendering the high part insulated.Politicians allowing all that are in for later persecution when an opposing party enters office.IMHO those at high positions who accept private interference in government are unfit for new positions in future elections .
Let 's vote them out of history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are those who want to get their pay without working -- even if this mean sabotaging their employer or, worse, sabotaging and doing it while betraying the public (whom they should serve).This is particularly vicious because, in promoting formats like OOXML instead of the more interoperable ODF, they turned really into M$ shops -- in the sense they now obey M$... kinda like hatching eggs for another species.
It's not just a matter of this or that OS, it's a problem of lack of control.In such a scenario, either high management has been taken over -- or middle has been, rendering the high part insulated.Politicians allowing all that are in for later persecution when an opposing party enters office.IMHO those at high positions who accept private interference in government are unfit for new positions in future elections.
Let's vote them out of history.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360210</id>
	<title>I was in the same position</title>
	<author>Merc248</author>
	<datestamp>1267728600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Though I was working in a private high school, there were a lot of factors that came into the ultimate decision to switch the entire system from Novell NetWare + SuSE (for backend services) + Windows to an entire Windows shop.  For one, there were a lot of high powered donors who we couldn't really question, since some of them really WERE shills for Microsoft and basically gave us free licenses for all of our server operating systems.  Second, we brought in consultants, including a consulting project manager who was playing it safe (he was also heavily promoting Microsoft and proprietary products over anything else we could draft up as a solution; I kept hearing "best practices" when talking about Microsoft products, and "not best practice" for any OSS software.)  Third, I was the sole person in the department (out of four) who was comfortable with the UNIX command line interface.  Finally, fourth, I had a direct superior who had just taken over as IT Director and didn't want to rock the boat too much.</p><p>I riled a lot of people up before I left, and I admit, I fucked up in my politicking.  After fighting with the project manager (and on a much smaller level, with my direct boss), I was able to get a grand total of two FreeBSD boxes and one Debian backup box (out of twenty servers.)  When I decided to leave, the fate of all three were in question, despite them providing internal services that we simply didn't have (network/host monitoring, centralized syslog, backup.)</p><p>I tried to suck it up, though what ultimately made me leave was the irrationality of possibly dismantling services for no reason other than the fact that other people didn't understand UNIX (I made the business case of all three servers and didn't implement them simply because they were FOSS.)</p><p>So I think you have three options:</p><p>1) Play it safe.<br>2) Try to rock the boat and see how far you get.<br>3) Leave ASAP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Though I was working in a private high school , there were a lot of factors that came into the ultimate decision to switch the entire system from Novell NetWare + SuSE ( for backend services ) + Windows to an entire Windows shop .
For one , there were a lot of high powered donors who we could n't really question , since some of them really WERE shills for Microsoft and basically gave us free licenses for all of our server operating systems .
Second , we brought in consultants , including a consulting project manager who was playing it safe ( he was also heavily promoting Microsoft and proprietary products over anything else we could draft up as a solution ; I kept hearing " best practices " when talking about Microsoft products , and " not best practice " for any OSS software .
) Third , I was the sole person in the department ( out of four ) who was comfortable with the UNIX command line interface .
Finally , fourth , I had a direct superior who had just taken over as IT Director and did n't want to rock the boat too much.I riled a lot of people up before I left , and I admit , I fucked up in my politicking .
After fighting with the project manager ( and on a much smaller level , with my direct boss ) , I was able to get a grand total of two FreeBSD boxes and one Debian backup box ( out of twenty servers .
) When I decided to leave , the fate of all three were in question , despite them providing internal services that we simply did n't have ( network/host monitoring , centralized syslog , backup .
) I tried to suck it up , though what ultimately made me leave was the irrationality of possibly dismantling services for no reason other than the fact that other people did n't understand UNIX ( I made the business case of all three servers and did n't implement them simply because they were FOSS .
) So I think you have three options : 1 ) Play it safe.2 ) Try to rock the boat and see how far you get.3 ) Leave ASAP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though I was working in a private high school, there were a lot of factors that came into the ultimate decision to switch the entire system from Novell NetWare + SuSE (for backend services) + Windows to an entire Windows shop.
For one, there were a lot of high powered donors who we couldn't really question, since some of them really WERE shills for Microsoft and basically gave us free licenses for all of our server operating systems.
Second, we brought in consultants, including a consulting project manager who was playing it safe (he was also heavily promoting Microsoft and proprietary products over anything else we could draft up as a solution; I kept hearing "best practices" when talking about Microsoft products, and "not best practice" for any OSS software.
)  Third, I was the sole person in the department (out of four) who was comfortable with the UNIX command line interface.
Finally, fourth, I had a direct superior who had just taken over as IT Director and didn't want to rock the boat too much.I riled a lot of people up before I left, and I admit, I fucked up in my politicking.
After fighting with the project manager (and on a much smaller level, with my direct boss), I was able to get a grand total of two FreeBSD boxes and one Debian backup box (out of twenty servers.
)  When I decided to leave, the fate of all three were in question, despite them providing internal services that we simply didn't have (network/host monitoring, centralized syslog, backup.
)I tried to suck it up, though what ultimately made me leave was the irrationality of possibly dismantling services for no reason other than the fact that other people didn't understand UNIX (I made the business case of all three servers and didn't implement them simply because they were FOSS.
)So I think you have three options:1) Play it safe.2) Try to rock the boat and see how far you get.3) Leave ASAP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359222</id>
	<title>Quit your Job, go OpenSource</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you should quit your job and go OpenSource!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you should quit your job and go OpenSource !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you should quit your job and go OpenSource!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360794</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267731600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What? I'm not sure what going to a website has to do with handling PHI.HIPAA doesn't have any restrictions on which sites you can or cannot go to. There may be sites that are considered threats (e.g. virus, trojans, worms), that's what you have anti-virus software for. Then if you want to go through the added step you force all outgoing traffic through something like Iron Port or SurfControl, and Tumbleweed for e-mail. Or even more strictly set up a whitelist or modify the hosts file for the default spin. Sure you can muck around in IE's "trusted" websites garbage, but is it really worth maintaining at that level and then risk that someone has a CD or thumb drive with portable apps on it or they figure out how to hack some entry and get by your policy settings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What ?
I 'm not sure what going to a website has to do with handling PHI.HIPAA does n't have any restrictions on which sites you can or can not go to .
There may be sites that are considered threats ( e.g .
virus , trojans , worms ) , that 's what you have anti-virus software for .
Then if you want to go through the added step you force all outgoing traffic through something like Iron Port or SurfControl , and Tumbleweed for e-mail .
Or even more strictly set up a whitelist or modify the hosts file for the default spin .
Sure you can muck around in IE 's " trusted " websites garbage , but is it really worth maintaining at that level and then risk that someone has a CD or thumb drive with portable apps on it or they figure out how to hack some entry and get by your policy settings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What?
I'm not sure what going to a website has to do with handling PHI.HIPAA doesn't have any restrictions on which sites you can or cannot go to.
There may be sites that are considered threats (e.g.
virus, trojans, worms), that's what you have anti-virus software for.
Then if you want to go through the added step you force all outgoing traffic through something like Iron Port or SurfControl, and Tumbleweed for e-mail.
Or even more strictly set up a whitelist or modify the hosts file for the default spin.
Sure you can muck around in IE's "trusted" websites garbage, but is it really worth maintaining at that level and then risk that someone has a CD or thumb drive with portable apps on it or they figure out how to hack some entry and get by your policy settings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359912</id>
	<title>Bring up the DHA and US fear of terrrrists.</title>
	<author>Nitage</author>
	<datestamp>1267727220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Blanket email the entire company pointing out that the Department of Homeland Security recommends against using Internet Explorer for reasons of National Security.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Blanket email the entire company pointing out that the Department of Homeland Security recommends against using Internet Explorer for reasons of National Security .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blanket email the entire company pointing out that the Department of Homeland Security recommends against using Internet Explorer for reasons of National Security.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31364038</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1267703160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the only way you can truely restrict IE is via proxy, everything else is more like a speed bump.</p><p>The proxy will block equally well for all browsers, you simply require use of the proxy in order to browse, problem solved from that respect.</p><p>HIPAA doesn't really work like that though, HIPAA says things like 'behind 3 methods of access control', which could mean anything from lock box to office door.  For instance compliance with the above rule is as simple as locking things in a desk draw, in a locked office, inside a locked building.  But hooking that up to the network then requires all of the above and 3 access control methods on the PC, or more common for high priority data (think databases of HIV infected people that health departments maintain) it simply can't be connected to a network.  Ever, for any reason unless it has been anonymized and aggregated into oblivion to insure no one finds out any personal information about people.</p><p>HIPAA isn't nearly as good about protecting data as you think it is though, its more along the lines of keeping you in control of your data by requiring organizations to meet certain requirements to your benefit.  The 'protection' parts are more based on preventing your data from being sold to someone else OR doctors selling you your medical info if you try to go to another one.  Its all about preventing douche bag employes and companies from willingly doing bad things with your data, and much less about the black hatters who are trying to hack the hospital databases from Nigeria.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the only way you can truely restrict IE is via proxy , everything else is more like a speed bump.The proxy will block equally well for all browsers , you simply require use of the proxy in order to browse , problem solved from that respect.HIPAA does n't really work like that though , HIPAA says things like 'behind 3 methods of access control ' , which could mean anything from lock box to office door .
For instance compliance with the above rule is as simple as locking things in a desk draw , in a locked office , inside a locked building .
But hooking that up to the network then requires all of the above and 3 access control methods on the PC , or more common for high priority data ( think databases of HIV infected people that health departments maintain ) it simply ca n't be connected to a network .
Ever , for any reason unless it has been anonymized and aggregated into oblivion to insure no one finds out any personal information about people.HIPAA is n't nearly as good about protecting data as you think it is though , its more along the lines of keeping you in control of your data by requiring organizations to meet certain requirements to your benefit .
The 'protection ' parts are more based on preventing your data from being sold to someone else OR doctors selling you your medical info if you try to go to another one .
Its all about preventing douche bag employes and companies from willingly doing bad things with your data , and much less about the black hatters who are trying to hack the hospital databases from Nigeria .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the only way you can truely restrict IE is via proxy, everything else is more like a speed bump.The proxy will block equally well for all browsers, you simply require use of the proxy in order to browse, problem solved from that respect.HIPAA doesn't really work like that though, HIPAA says things like 'behind 3 methods of access control', which could mean anything from lock box to office door.
For instance compliance with the above rule is as simple as locking things in a desk draw, in a locked office, inside a locked building.
But hooking that up to the network then requires all of the above and 3 access control methods on the PC, or more common for high priority data (think databases of HIV infected people that health departments maintain) it simply can't be connected to a network.
Ever, for any reason unless it has been anonymized and aggregated into oblivion to insure no one finds out any personal information about people.HIPAA isn't nearly as good about protecting data as you think it is though, its more along the lines of keeping you in control of your data by requiring organizations to meet certain requirements to your benefit.
The 'protection' parts are more based on preventing your data from being sold to someone else OR doctors selling you your medical info if you try to go to another one.
Its all about preventing douche bag employes and companies from willingly doing bad things with your data, and much less about the black hatters who are trying to hack the hospital databases from Nigeria.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359326</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267725000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Being a "microsoft shop" one thing. obnoxiously pushing it to the exclusion of all else is another. This situation also seems to go a bit beyond just an internal standard and also seems to include evangelism and active hostility to anything else. It's Taliban vs. Amish.</p></div><p>I agree. Its perfectly normal to see a organization that says "We run windows workstations/servers" , its extremely odd why they would forcibly remove Firefox, and etc.</p><p>I'd guess theres a completely incompetent and foolish manager somewhere who is way in over his head?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a " microsoft shop " one thing .
obnoxiously pushing it to the exclusion of all else is another .
This situation also seems to go a bit beyond just an internal standard and also seems to include evangelism and active hostility to anything else .
It 's Taliban vs. Amish.I agree .
Its perfectly normal to see a organization that says " We run windows workstations/servers " , its extremely odd why they would forcibly remove Firefox , and etc.I 'd guess theres a completely incompetent and foolish manager somewhere who is way in over his head ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a "microsoft shop" one thing.
obnoxiously pushing it to the exclusion of all else is another.
This situation also seems to go a bit beyond just an internal standard and also seems to include evangelism and active hostility to anything else.
It's Taliban vs. Amish.I agree.
Its perfectly normal to see a organization that says "We run windows workstations/servers" , its extremely odd why they would forcibly remove Firefox, and etc.I'd guess theres a completely incompetent and foolish manager somewhere who is way in over his head?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360034</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New Zealand, which it sounds like the OP might be in, has had a number of controversies with this recently.  And the end result has been that basically, if you're employed in the public sector, making a public submission to a select committee (or similar) is likely to cost you your job.</p><p>It's something complicated, like while as a citizen, you're free to engage in politics, but as a public sector employee, you mustn't appear to be in any way partisan, as you're required to implement whatever the decision makers instruct you to, and they must have faith in your ability to do so.  Being politicians, the concept of "professionalism" is clearly alien to them.</p><p>It's kind of ridiculous, and hopefully it will change, but we have a fairly large chunk of the population who are effectively barred from engaging in political debate (ironically, the chunk that is often most knowledgeable about that area).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New Zealand , which it sounds like the OP might be in , has had a number of controversies with this recently .
And the end result has been that basically , if you 're employed in the public sector , making a public submission to a select committee ( or similar ) is likely to cost you your job.It 's something complicated , like while as a citizen , you 're free to engage in politics , but as a public sector employee , you must n't appear to be in any way partisan , as you 're required to implement whatever the decision makers instruct you to , and they must have faith in your ability to do so .
Being politicians , the concept of " professionalism " is clearly alien to them.It 's kind of ridiculous , and hopefully it will change , but we have a fairly large chunk of the population who are effectively barred from engaging in political debate ( ironically , the chunk that is often most knowledgeable about that area ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New Zealand, which it sounds like the OP might be in, has had a number of controversies with this recently.
And the end result has been that basically, if you're employed in the public sector, making a public submission to a select committee (or similar) is likely to cost you your job.It's something complicated, like while as a citizen, you're free to engage in politics, but as a public sector employee, you mustn't appear to be in any way partisan, as you're required to implement whatever the decision makers instruct you to, and they must have faith in your ability to do so.
Being politicians, the concept of "professionalism" is clearly alien to them.It's kind of ridiculous, and hopefully it will change, but we have a fairly large chunk of the population who are effectively barred from engaging in political debate (ironically, the chunk that is often most knowledgeable about that area).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363508</id>
	<title>I'm picturing an armband</title>
	<author>david.emery</author>
	<datestamp>1267700700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With the Windows Logo on it, required to be worn by all the IT staff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the Windows Logo on it , required to be worn by all the IT staff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the Windows Logo on it, required to be worn by all the IT staff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360962</id>
	<title>Re:Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267732380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with this, working for an out source oragnisation with a government client I understand why DHB's (Sounds like New Zealand)have decided to go the microsoft way.  I support OSS however I did an exercise that showed if you want support for your Linux Distro and OSS apps (which Enterprises do) it was going to cost more the the M$ licence.  There is 101 reason to use or not to use OSS  it comes down to the choice of the organisation.  And if it is an NZ DHB then anything that was offer to the CIO etc needs to be declared</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with this , working for an out source oragnisation with a government client I understand why DHB 's ( Sounds like New Zealand ) have decided to go the microsoft way .
I support OSS however I did an exercise that showed if you want support for your Linux Distro and OSS apps ( which Enterprises do ) it was going to cost more the the M $ licence .
There is 101 reason to use or not to use OSS it comes down to the choice of the organisation .
And if it is an NZ DHB then anything that was offer to the CIO etc needs to be declared</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with this, working for an out source oragnisation with a government client I understand why DHB's (Sounds like New Zealand)have decided to go the microsoft way.
I support OSS however I did an exercise that showed if you want support for your Linux Distro and OSS apps (which Enterprises do) it was going to cost more the the M$ licence.
There is 101 reason to use or not to use OSS  it comes down to the choice of the organisation.
And if it is an NZ DHB then anything that was offer to the CIO etc needs to be declared</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361552</id>
	<title>Re:Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>sammcj</author>
	<datestamp>1267735320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I should have worded my brief better,
I wasn't really intending this to turn into a browser war.
It was more the fact that even the developer / tech computers are supposed to be 'clean of Firefox' purely because it's not Micro$oft.
I am in favor of the standard client machines having a single browser (even if it is IE *shudder*).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I should have worded my brief better , I was n't really intending this to turn into a browser war .
It was more the fact that even the developer / tech computers are supposed to be 'clean of Firefox ' purely because it 's not Micro $ oft .
I am in favor of the standard client machines having a single browser ( even if it is IE * shudder * ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I should have worded my brief better,
I wasn't really intending this to turn into a browser war.
It was more the fact that even the developer / tech computers are supposed to be 'clean of Firefox' purely because it's not Micro$oft.
I am in favor of the standard client machines having a single browser (even if it is IE *shudder*).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361490</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>Znork</author>
	<datestamp>1267735020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>By going to MS only, you can cover most(if not all) of your bases while only requiring one skillset to maintain them.</i></p><p>Until that sentence I was really wondering which way you were going to go, and was leaning towards 'So we've found that using MS only products is a great way to keep employment up, constantly being able to attend education for new incompatible software and getting the opportunity to start from scratch every few years.'</p><p>I can only assume you're fairly new to the IT business, as the Microsoft franchise pretty much is the poster boy for 'flavour of the month'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By going to MS only , you can cover most ( if not all ) of your bases while only requiring one skillset to maintain them.Until that sentence I was really wondering which way you were going to go , and was leaning towards 'So we 've found that using MS only products is a great way to keep employment up , constantly being able to attend education for new incompatible software and getting the opportunity to start from scratch every few years .
'I can only assume you 're fairly new to the IT business , as the Microsoft franchise pretty much is the poster boy for 'flavour of the month' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By going to MS only, you can cover most(if not all) of your bases while only requiring one skillset to maintain them.Until that sentence I was really wondering which way you were going to go, and was leaning towards 'So we've found that using MS only products is a great way to keep employment up, constantly being able to attend education for new incompatible software and getting the opportunity to start from scratch every few years.
'I can only assume you're fairly new to the IT business, as the Microsoft franchise pretty much is the poster boy for 'flavour of the month'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</id>
	<title>Guess what</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft is cheaper.</p><p>Sorry, but it's true. You can either spend thousands of hours managing Linux and it's terrible interfaces, or get Microsoft that does it already for you.</p><p>There's a reason why Linux doesn't succeed when it's free: it costs more in the long run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft is cheaper.Sorry , but it 's true .
You can either spend thousands of hours managing Linux and it 's terrible interfaces , or get Microsoft that does it already for you.There 's a reason why Linux does n't succeed when it 's free : it costs more in the long run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft is cheaper.Sorry, but it's true.
You can either spend thousands of hours managing Linux and it's terrible interfaces, or get Microsoft that does it already for you.There's a reason why Linux doesn't succeed when it's free: it costs more in the long run.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360032</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>digitalunity</author>
	<datestamp>1267727760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a reason for professional support services in the Linux sector. That can buy you back-porting, bug fixes, a whole host of other services that allow an organization to standardize on a single linux distribution for years. No sane company using Linux to their benefit is using "the flavor of the month". They weigh their needs, their budget, the pros and cons of each distribution that meets their criteria, pick a version and test rigorously. Then you don't fuck with it or upgrade for a few years.</p><p>Linux can only be successful in an organization that is open to change and this is very much culture dependent. Your example of tools that are put together hodge-podge that nobody knows about happens plenty in Windows also. The most egregious example of this is managers who think they can write VB applications in Microsoft Office. They can bastardize code and make something work on their computer, but the code is often so poorly written that it won't work across MS Office versions and crashes on the next upgrade.</p><p>Bad practices aren't limited to any one operating system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a reason for professional support services in the Linux sector .
That can buy you back-porting , bug fixes , a whole host of other services that allow an organization to standardize on a single linux distribution for years .
No sane company using Linux to their benefit is using " the flavor of the month " .
They weigh their needs , their budget , the pros and cons of each distribution that meets their criteria , pick a version and test rigorously .
Then you do n't fuck with it or upgrade for a few years.Linux can only be successful in an organization that is open to change and this is very much culture dependent .
Your example of tools that are put together hodge-podge that nobody knows about happens plenty in Windows also .
The most egregious example of this is managers who think they can write VB applications in Microsoft Office .
They can bastardize code and make something work on their computer , but the code is often so poorly written that it wo n't work across MS Office versions and crashes on the next upgrade.Bad practices are n't limited to any one operating system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a reason for professional support services in the Linux sector.
That can buy you back-porting, bug fixes, a whole host of other services that allow an organization to standardize on a single linux distribution for years.
No sane company using Linux to their benefit is using "the flavor of the month".
They weigh their needs, their budget, the pros and cons of each distribution that meets their criteria, pick a version and test rigorously.
Then you don't fuck with it or upgrade for a few years.Linux can only be successful in an organization that is open to change and this is very much culture dependent.
Your example of tools that are put together hodge-podge that nobody knows about happens plenty in Windows also.
The most egregious example of this is managers who think they can write VB applications in Microsoft Office.
They can bastardize code and make something work on their computer, but the code is often so poorly written that it won't work across MS Office versions and crashes on the next upgrade.Bad practices aren't limited to any one operating system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359480</id>
	<title>Microsoft is a national champion</title>
	<author>uassholes</author>
	<datestamp>1267725660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This directive came from above the head of the sender of the memo.   Microsoft owns the US government.   Supporting the software company with the most number of employees is simply good politics.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This directive came from above the head of the sender of the memo .
Microsoft owns the US government .
Supporting the software company with the most number of employees is simply good politics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This directive came from above the head of the sender of the memo.
Microsoft owns the US government.
Supporting the software company with the most number of employees is simply good politics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359178</id>
	<title>Whiny System/Network Admins</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They've probably heard, ad nauseum, from bitchy admins go on and on and on about how "Microsoft sucks and we want to move to Linux."</p><p>It's entirely possible that they got tired of hearing the bitching and decided to just head it off at the pass by saying "we're a Microsoft shop, period."  If you don't agree with the decision, make a case for switching over, complete with cost analysis. If you complain without offering a viable solution, you're just part of the problem. Another alternative is to work someplace else. Yet another alternative is to accept the decision, become more of a team player and add Microsoft certifications to your repertoire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've probably heard , ad nauseum , from bitchy admins go on and on and on about how " Microsoft sucks and we want to move to Linux .
" It 's entirely possible that they got tired of hearing the bitching and decided to just head it off at the pass by saying " we 're a Microsoft shop , period .
" If you do n't agree with the decision , make a case for switching over , complete with cost analysis .
If you complain without offering a viable solution , you 're just part of the problem .
Another alternative is to work someplace else .
Yet another alternative is to accept the decision , become more of a team player and add Microsoft certifications to your repertoire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've probably heard, ad nauseum, from bitchy admins go on and on and on about how "Microsoft sucks and we want to move to Linux.
"It's entirely possible that they got tired of hearing the bitching and decided to just head it off at the pass by saying "we're a Microsoft shop, period.
"  If you don't agree with the decision, make a case for switching over, complete with cost analysis.
If you complain without offering a viable solution, you're just part of the problem.
Another alternative is to work someplace else.
Yet another alternative is to accept the decision, become more of a team player and add Microsoft certifications to your repertoire.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361198</id>
	<title>You really aren't that knowledgeable, newb.</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1267733580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The cost of purchasing MS software is trivial in your budget I assure you.  It may seem like a lot of money, but the salaries of the people using the MS software probably eclipse your entire software budget in less than 2 weeks.  The cost is nothing.</p><p>Training is not just a financial cost, this is a ignorant view point and shows very little connection with the reality that is the job of those people you support.</p><p>Open source will likely cost more overall.  You'll have more difficulty integrating with proprietary systems in use, because those private systems have no urge to deal with Linux, its not worth their effort to hit a target that moves daily.  Then you have to deal with all the incompatibilities of whatever other OSS supporting software you add in, like OO.org and how those documents deal with other organizations the hospital has to deal with.  You'll lose more the first year in time because of people sending documents in the wrong document format (OO native instead of MS compatible) than you'll save on the price of Office.</p><p>The problem with your post is typical with the FLOSS community.  The problem is the misconception that the cost of purchasing software is the expensive part.  You couldnt' be more wrong.  Software cost is in day to day operations and maintenance, which FLOSS offers no advantages to and several disadvantages.  You can argue that 'fast patching' is an advantage, but to most IT departments its not.  Its FAR more difficult to deal with breakage from randomly updated packages for your distro than once a month patch tuesdays.  Any sane IT department isn't tracking patches as they come out anyway, they're going to QA them in their environment first, so they are going to establish some sort of schedule for this sort of thing thats effectively going to put them on a once a month or less often cycle anyway.  FLOSS offers the promise of open access to your data, but no one cares how open it is from a technical point of view if every time they send it to someone else, the other people can't view it.  It is in fact for all intents and purposes less open with OO.org in native format than DOCX as far as the normal user is concerned.</p><p>Training people to switch from Windows to Linux is not as cheap as you think, you can't just send them to a couple classes and everything will be dandy and they'll be just as productive as they always were.  They won't, it will take years for them to return to that level of productivity<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... because<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... they've been using the system they already use for years.  You can't replace it and expect to return to the same level of productivity any time soon.  And regardless of how much you think each version of windows or office is different than the past versions, the switch to something like Linux/KDE or Gnome and OO.org are FAR FAR greater transitions than going from Office 95 to 2007, you just don't realize it because you're constantly dealing with software that is unlike the rest of the software on the system<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Linux users are used to no consistency.  These users work with Windows and Office everyday on their own, at home.  They know how Windows works for them and the subtle differences are the ones that waste most of the time.  The obvious difference people get used to quickly, the little quirks that you respond to subconsciously take YEARS to retrain yourself for.</p><p>The cost for YOU to switch to Linux from  MS software may be less since you already use both.  The cost for your desk workers who do not work on computers as their primary job function on the other hand is much much higher and you're ignoring it completely.</p><p>You might want to consider that those people making the choices above you might<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... maybe<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... have just a little more experience managing than you do.  I realize this is hard to see from your perspective and you may think they are morons but they have a different view of the organization than you do and are privy to a lot of information to whi</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The cost of purchasing MS software is trivial in your budget I assure you .
It may seem like a lot of money , but the salaries of the people using the MS software probably eclipse your entire software budget in less than 2 weeks .
The cost is nothing.Training is not just a financial cost , this is a ignorant view point and shows very little connection with the reality that is the job of those people you support.Open source will likely cost more overall .
You 'll have more difficulty integrating with proprietary systems in use , because those private systems have no urge to deal with Linux , its not worth their effort to hit a target that moves daily .
Then you have to deal with all the incompatibilities of whatever other OSS supporting software you add in , like OO.org and how those documents deal with other organizations the hospital has to deal with .
You 'll lose more the first year in time because of people sending documents in the wrong document format ( OO native instead of MS compatible ) than you 'll save on the price of Office.The problem with your post is typical with the FLOSS community .
The problem is the misconception that the cost of purchasing software is the expensive part .
You couldnt ' be more wrong .
Software cost is in day to day operations and maintenance , which FLOSS offers no advantages to and several disadvantages .
You can argue that 'fast patching ' is an advantage , but to most IT departments its not .
Its FAR more difficult to deal with breakage from randomly updated packages for your distro than once a month patch tuesdays .
Any sane IT department is n't tracking patches as they come out anyway , they 're going to QA them in their environment first , so they are going to establish some sort of schedule for this sort of thing thats effectively going to put them on a once a month or less often cycle anyway .
FLOSS offers the promise of open access to your data , but no one cares how open it is from a technical point of view if every time they send it to someone else , the other people ca n't view it .
It is in fact for all intents and purposes less open with OO.org in native format than DOCX as far as the normal user is concerned.Training people to switch from Windows to Linux is not as cheap as you think , you ca n't just send them to a couple classes and everything will be dandy and they 'll be just as productive as they always were .
They wo n't , it will take years for them to return to that level of productivity ... because ... they 've been using the system they already use for years .
You ca n't replace it and expect to return to the same level of productivity any time soon .
And regardless of how much you think each version of windows or office is different than the past versions , the switch to something like Linux/KDE or Gnome and OO.org are FAR FAR greater transitions than going from Office 95 to 2007 , you just do n't realize it because you 're constantly dealing with software that is unlike the rest of the software on the system ... Linux users are used to no consistency .
These users work with Windows and Office everyday on their own , at home .
They know how Windows works for them and the subtle differences are the ones that waste most of the time .
The obvious difference people get used to quickly , the little quirks that you respond to subconsciously take YEARS to retrain yourself for.The cost for YOU to switch to Linux from MS software may be less since you already use both .
The cost for your desk workers who do not work on computers as their primary job function on the other hand is much much higher and you 're ignoring it completely.You might want to consider that those people making the choices above you might ... maybe ... have just a little more experience managing than you do .
I realize this is hard to see from your perspective and you may think they are morons but they have a different view of the organization than you do and are privy to a lot of information to whi</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cost of purchasing MS software is trivial in your budget I assure you.
It may seem like a lot of money, but the salaries of the people using the MS software probably eclipse your entire software budget in less than 2 weeks.
The cost is nothing.Training is not just a financial cost, this is a ignorant view point and shows very little connection with the reality that is the job of those people you support.Open source will likely cost more overall.
You'll have more difficulty integrating with proprietary systems in use, because those private systems have no urge to deal with Linux, its not worth their effort to hit a target that moves daily.
Then you have to deal with all the incompatibilities of whatever other OSS supporting software you add in, like OO.org and how those documents deal with other organizations the hospital has to deal with.
You'll lose more the first year in time because of people sending documents in the wrong document format (OO native instead of MS compatible) than you'll save on the price of Office.The problem with your post is typical with the FLOSS community.
The problem is the misconception that the cost of purchasing software is the expensive part.
You couldnt' be more wrong.
Software cost is in day to day operations and maintenance, which FLOSS offers no advantages to and several disadvantages.
You can argue that 'fast patching' is an advantage, but to most IT departments its not.
Its FAR more difficult to deal with breakage from randomly updated packages for your distro than once a month patch tuesdays.
Any sane IT department isn't tracking patches as they come out anyway, they're going to QA them in their environment first, so they are going to establish some sort of schedule for this sort of thing thats effectively going to put them on a once a month or less often cycle anyway.
FLOSS offers the promise of open access to your data, but no one cares how open it is from a technical point of view if every time they send it to someone else, the other people can't view it.
It is in fact for all intents and purposes less open with OO.org in native format than DOCX as far as the normal user is concerned.Training people to switch from Windows to Linux is not as cheap as you think, you can't just send them to a couple classes and everything will be dandy and they'll be just as productive as they always were.
They won't, it will take years for them to return to that level of productivity ... because ... they've been using the system they already use for years.
You can't replace it and expect to return to the same level of productivity any time soon.
And regardless of how much you think each version of windows or office is different than the past versions, the switch to something like Linux/KDE or Gnome and OO.org are FAR FAR greater transitions than going from Office 95 to 2007, you just don't realize it because you're constantly dealing with software that is unlike the rest of the software on the system ... Linux users are used to no consistency.
These users work with Windows and Office everyday on their own, at home.
They know how Windows works for them and the subtle differences are the ones that waste most of the time.
The obvious difference people get used to quickly, the little quirks that you respond to subconsciously take YEARS to retrain yourself for.The cost for YOU to switch to Linux from  MS software may be less since you already use both.
The cost for your desk workers who do not work on computers as their primary job function on the other hand is much much higher and you're ignoring it completely.You might want to consider that those people making the choices above you might ... maybe ... have just a little more experience managing than you do.
I realize this is hard to see from your perspective and you may think they are morons but they have a different view of the organization than you do and are privy to a lot of information to whi</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359436</id>
	<title>Re:So much HATE and FUD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267725420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its because in real life, average people don't give a fuck about Linux or Open Source. They need a place to vent and let out some nerd-rage. Ofcource, leaving a comment on a website is pointless, and I imagine even the strongest anti-ms troll realizes that. So, I guess I don't mind the colorful flamebaity trollish comments because most sane people already know that slashdot is filled with MS haters. If you already know someones bias, then their comments aren't that annoying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its because in real life , average people do n't give a fuck about Linux or Open Source .
They need a place to vent and let out some nerd-rage .
Ofcource , leaving a comment on a website is pointless , and I imagine even the strongest anti-ms troll realizes that .
So , I guess I do n't mind the colorful flamebaity trollish comments because most sane people already know that slashdot is filled with MS haters .
If you already know someones bias , then their comments are n't that annoying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its because in real life, average people don't give a fuck about Linux or Open Source.
They need a place to vent and let out some nerd-rage.
Ofcource, leaving a comment on a website is pointless, and I imagine even the strongest anti-ms troll realizes that.
So, I guess I don't mind the colorful flamebaity trollish comments because most sane people already know that slashdot is filled with MS haters.
If you already know someones bias, then their comments aren't that annoying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363756</id>
	<title>So Why?</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1267701960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm able to control my IE deployments down to a microscopic level, all from a single scree (and tied in to many of my other deployed applications). I'm not able to do that with Firefox.</p></div><p>So why can't this kind of management be created for Firefox?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm able to control my IE deployments down to a microscopic level , all from a single scree ( and tied in to many of my other deployed applications ) .
I 'm not able to do that with Firefox.So why ca n't this kind of management be created for Firefox ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm able to control my IE deployments down to a microscopic level, all from a single scree (and tied in to many of my other deployed applications).
I'm not able to do that with Firefox.So why can't this kind of management be created for Firefox?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358874</id>
	<title>Look</title>
	<author>jayhawk88</author>
	<datestamp>1267723260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free/Open software is fine, and I won't argue the point that it's short-sighted for an IT shop to stick their head in the MS sand, but there are other, very good reasons for wanting to promote a unified network/front, especially when dealing with users. Ease of management is of course the biggie, but in general, you don't want users trying to install every piece of software their brother-in-law tells them about. If you say, "Oh yeah, throw Firefox on, whatever", then they're may assume you have the same cavalier attitude towards, say, Limewire, or AntiSpyware 2010.</p><p>If you want your company to explore/promote Free/Open software, then this needs to be done from within, with the support of management, in a controlled manner. Not by telling users they should just install Ubuntu on their laptop over the weekend.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free/Open software is fine , and I wo n't argue the point that it 's short-sighted for an IT shop to stick their head in the MS sand , but there are other , very good reasons for wanting to promote a unified network/front , especially when dealing with users .
Ease of management is of course the biggie , but in general , you do n't want users trying to install every piece of software their brother-in-law tells them about .
If you say , " Oh yeah , throw Firefox on , whatever " , then they 're may assume you have the same cavalier attitude towards , say , Limewire , or AntiSpyware 2010.If you want your company to explore/promote Free/Open software , then this needs to be done from within , with the support of management , in a controlled manner .
Not by telling users they should just install Ubuntu on their laptop over the weekend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free/Open software is fine, and I won't argue the point that it's short-sighted for an IT shop to stick their head in the MS sand, but there are other, very good reasons for wanting to promote a unified network/front, especially when dealing with users.
Ease of management is of course the biggie, but in general, you don't want users trying to install every piece of software their brother-in-law tells them about.
If you say, "Oh yeah, throw Firefox on, whatever", then they're may assume you have the same cavalier attitude towards, say, Limewire, or AntiSpyware 2010.If you want your company to explore/promote Free/Open software, then this needs to be done from within, with the support of management, in a controlled manner.
Not by telling users they should just install Ubuntu on their laptop over the weekend.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359024</id>
	<title>You can't always get what you want...</title>
	<author>Peter Simpson</author>
	<datestamp>1267723800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Comments like this  (FTFA): " I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems" trigger my orneriness response.</p><p>It's a hospital, not a software store.  What operating system the employees chose to advocate has nothing to do with the operation of the place.  If I worked there, I think I'd be likely to start carrying my lunch in one of these: <a href="http://shop.canonical.com/product\_info.php?products\_id=123" title="canonical.com" rel="nofollow">http://shop.canonical.com/product\_info.php?products\_id=123</a> [canonical.com]<br>and my coffee cup would be one of these: <a href="http://shop.canonical.com/product\_info.php?products\_id=203" title="canonical.com" rel="nofollow">http://shop.canonical.com/product\_info.php?products\_id=203</a> [canonical.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Comments like this ( FTFA ) : " I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems " trigger my orneriness response.It 's a hospital , not a software store .
What operating system the employees chose to advocate has nothing to do with the operation of the place .
If I worked there , I think I 'd be likely to start carrying my lunch in one of these : http : //shop.canonical.com/product \ _info.php ? products \ _id = 123 [ canonical.com ] and my coffee cup would be one of these : http : //shop.canonical.com/product \ _info.php ? products \ _id = 203 [ canonical.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Comments like this  (FTFA): " I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems" trigger my orneriness response.It's a hospital, not a software store.
What operating system the employees chose to advocate has nothing to do with the operation of the place.
If I worked there, I think I'd be likely to start carrying my lunch in one of these: http://shop.canonical.com/product\_info.php?products\_id=123 [canonical.com]and my coffee cup would be one of these: http://shop.canonical.com/product\_info.php?products\_id=203 [canonical.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361020</id>
	<title>OP Here: M$ Cost Per Client.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267732620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OP Here
---
FYI Microsoft makes the hospital pay PER COMPUTER (around):

NZ$250~ for the OS and client access software.
+
NZ$470~ for the MS Office license.

=$720NZD ($500~ USD) Per Computer.
And that's just on the client side.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OP Here --- FYI Microsoft makes the hospital pay PER COMPUTER ( around ) : NZ $ 250 ~ for the OS and client access software .
+ NZ $ 470 ~ for the MS Office license .
= $ 720NZD ( $ 500 ~ USD ) Per Computer .
And that 's just on the client side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OP Here
---
FYI Microsoft makes the hospital pay PER COMPUTER (around):

NZ$250~ for the OS and client access software.
+
NZ$470~ for the MS Office license.
=$720NZD ($500~ USD) Per Computer.
And that's just on the client side.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359570</id>
	<title>Re:The Gamble</title>
	<author>mellon</author>
	<datestamp>1267725900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flying spaghetti monster, grant me the courage to change what can be changed, the grace to accept what cannot, and the wisdom to know the difference.   And can I have romano cheese instead of parmesan?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flying spaghetti monster , grant me the courage to change what can be changed , the grace to accept what can not , and the wisdom to know the difference .
And can I have romano cheese instead of parmesan ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flying spaghetti monster, grant me the courage to change what can be changed, the grace to accept what cannot, and the wisdom to know the difference.
And can I have romano cheese instead of parmesan?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360420</id>
	<title>Employee or Citizen?  Being both is hard</title>
	<author>IgnacioB</author>
	<datestamp>1267729860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless your title is something like "CIO" or you're also wearing a hat as a policymaker for this institution...then it seems to me you're overstepping your bounds as an employee.  If it's a public institution then you absolutely have a right to bring it up at the next public meeting (most have boards of directors or elected representatives) and you can say anything you want as a citizen.  If you believe in it then use that forum.

But as an employee it seems like you're in a pissing match with your boss and that rarely goes well for the person farther from the top of the org. chart.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)

Could the Firefox element also be that they don't want to support multiple applications or have to try and maintain them for security purposes.  I know where we're at there was a recent Firefox vulnerability that has made different Federal authorities take notice recently and since it's not an official standard we removed it from our network...leaving what is only IE as a standard.  Corporate and government networks are increasingly shifting from the policy of letting users install what they want as long as it's not a threat (blacklisting)....to presuming it's a threat and only allowing it if it's a recognized standard and managed (white listing).

I've found Microsoft is often the default product line certainly, but it's only because somebody hasn't presented a compelling business case to switch or to spend the money to support multiple standards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless your title is something like " CIO " or you 're also wearing a hat as a policymaker for this institution...then it seems to me you 're overstepping your bounds as an employee .
If it 's a public institution then you absolutely have a right to bring it up at the next public meeting ( most have boards of directors or elected representatives ) and you can say anything you want as a citizen .
If you believe in it then use that forum .
But as an employee it seems like you 're in a pissing match with your boss and that rarely goes well for the person farther from the top of the org .
chart. ; ) Could the Firefox element also be that they do n't want to support multiple applications or have to try and maintain them for security purposes .
I know where we 're at there was a recent Firefox vulnerability that has made different Federal authorities take notice recently and since it 's not an official standard we removed it from our network...leaving what is only IE as a standard .
Corporate and government networks are increasingly shifting from the policy of letting users install what they want as long as it 's not a threat ( blacklisting ) ....to presuming it 's a threat and only allowing it if it 's a recognized standard and managed ( white listing ) .
I 've found Microsoft is often the default product line certainly , but it 's only because somebody has n't presented a compelling business case to switch or to spend the money to support multiple standards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless your title is something like "CIO" or you're also wearing a hat as a policymaker for this institution...then it seems to me you're overstepping your bounds as an employee.
If it's a public institution then you absolutely have a right to bring it up at the next public meeting (most have boards of directors or elected representatives) and you can say anything you want as a citizen.
If you believe in it then use that forum.
But as an employee it seems like you're in a pissing match with your boss and that rarely goes well for the person farther from the top of the org.
chart. ;)

Could the Firefox element also be that they don't want to support multiple applications or have to try and maintain them for security purposes.
I know where we're at there was a recent Firefox vulnerability that has made different Federal authorities take notice recently and since it's not an official standard we removed it from our network...leaving what is only IE as a standard.
Corporate and government networks are increasingly shifting from the policy of letting users install what they want as long as it's not a threat (blacklisting)....to presuming it's a threat and only allowing it if it's a recognized standard and managed (white listing).
I've found Microsoft is often the default product line certainly, but it's only because somebody hasn't presented a compelling business case to switch or to spend the money to support multiple standards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363486</id>
	<title>You Are SOL</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1267700640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Several of the IT big-wigs at the DHB are seemingly blindly pro-Microsoft and seem all too quick to shrug off other, perhaps more efficient alternatives.</p></div><p>And the people over them have no clue and must rely on the advice from the "IT big-wigs". Even if there is a massive IT failure that has its roots exclusively in the Microsoft OS environment, that culture has developed many ways of shifting blame to outside villains and the cure is always newer MS software (along with updated licenses) and additional hardware and software for "better protection". That's all just to protect their jobs and their little empires. Professionally, they're simply too lazy to learn different technology in order to make better decisions. The result is that you (and FOSS) lose to these professional pinheads every time.</p><p>I've always found it amusing that one of the most frequent excuses for not adopting FOSS is that supposedly intelligent MCSE admins are not capable of ever learning anything about UNIX administration.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Several of the IT big-wigs at the DHB are seemingly blindly pro-Microsoft and seem all too quick to shrug off other , perhaps more efficient alternatives.And the people over them have no clue and must rely on the advice from the " IT big-wigs " .
Even if there is a massive IT failure that has its roots exclusively in the Microsoft OS environment , that culture has developed many ways of shifting blame to outside villains and the cure is always newer MS software ( along with updated licenses ) and additional hardware and software for " better protection " .
That 's all just to protect their jobs and their little empires .
Professionally , they 're simply too lazy to learn different technology in order to make better decisions .
The result is that you ( and FOSS ) lose to these professional pinheads every time.I 've always found it amusing that one of the most frequent excuses for not adopting FOSS is that supposedly intelligent MCSE admins are not capable of ever learning anything about UNIX administration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Several of the IT big-wigs at the DHB are seemingly blindly pro-Microsoft and seem all too quick to shrug off other, perhaps more efficient alternatives.And the people over them have no clue and must rely on the advice from the "IT big-wigs".
Even if there is a massive IT failure that has its roots exclusively in the Microsoft OS environment, that culture has developed many ways of shifting blame to outside villains and the cure is always newer MS software (along with updated licenses) and additional hardware and software for "better protection".
That's all just to protect their jobs and their little empires.
Professionally, they're simply too lazy to learn different technology in order to make better decisions.
The result is that you (and FOSS) lose to these professional pinheads every time.I've always found it amusing that one of the most frequent excuses for not adopting FOSS is that supposedly intelligent MCSE admins are not capable of ever learning anything about UNIX administration.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362180</id>
	<title>Say ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267695120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"No comment. I've been asked to keep my personal opinion to myself by hospital IT management while I work here."</p><p>Having multiple browsers can cause tracking issues when your other technologies assume only Microsoft stuff is being used. This means policies and possibly government contracts cannot be properly completed when other technologies are deployed. Some firewalls and proxy server authentication mechanisms are tied to MS authentication methods.</p><p>BTW, I work in a 100\% non-Microsoft server company, but even we still use mostly MS-Windows on the desktops (it pains me to say).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" No comment .
I 've been asked to keep my personal opinion to myself by hospital IT management while I work here .
" Having multiple browsers can cause tracking issues when your other technologies assume only Microsoft stuff is being used .
This means policies and possibly government contracts can not be properly completed when other technologies are deployed .
Some firewalls and proxy server authentication mechanisms are tied to MS authentication methods.BTW , I work in a 100 \ % non-Microsoft server company , but even we still use mostly MS-Windows on the desktops ( it pains me to say ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"No comment.
I've been asked to keep my personal opinion to myself by hospital IT management while I work here.
"Having multiple browsers can cause tracking issues when your other technologies assume only Microsoft stuff is being used.
This means policies and possibly government contracts cannot be properly completed when other technologies are deployed.
Some firewalls and proxy server authentication mechanisms are tied to MS authentication methods.BTW, I work in a 100\% non-Microsoft server company, but even we still use mostly MS-Windows on the desktops (it pains me to say).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360444</id>
	<title>I was fired for this...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267729980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Back a couple of years ago, I was IT coordinator at a public school district.  At the time, we were aggressively rolling out new computers, and we had a mixed environment of Macs and PCs.  I had always used Open Source software on my personal computer, and on my office computers at work.  Being a poorly-funded school district, which had just spent a considerable ammount of our budget on the new machines, I advocated the use of Free Open Source software as a way to bring functionality to the users while keeping costs down.  Prior to this, I had been making sure OpenOffice.org was installed on all of our machines, alongside MS Office (even though we didn't have enough licenses for MS Office as it was, Management told me to "shut up and install it anyway, not like they are going to audit our little district").  I started a pilot project in the Elementary school where I only made available OpenOffice on computer lab machines, and provided teachers with basic training on how to use it.  It worked fine, and there were few complaints.  I did this with approval from Administration.  After a successful school year running an OpenOffice-only Elementary school, I decided that I had sufficient data, cost/benefit analysis, etc, to make the push to do the same at the High School.  I was given go-ahead from the Administration to make both Office suites available, and to encourage use of OpenOffice.  I did not anticipate what would happen next... students and teachers started to complain about the new Office software, and that the district was being "cheap" and that "no one in the real world uses OpenOffice".  Despite me pointing out the advantages of the new software, and pointing out other instances of Governments and Businesses using the software, it didn't matter.  I was even providing free CDs with the OpenOffice software on it for students to take home and install, and there were several students who were grateful for this.  It increased their ability to do homework - at home!  Alas despite my best efforts, with the best interests of the students and taxpayers in mind, the Administration reversed their decision.
They announced that starting immediately, we would only be using Microsoft Office software, and that they would be diverting funds to purchase enough licenses to install it on every computer in the whole district, including our successful Elementary school implementation.  I protested that this was a waste of funds, especially in the Elementary school, where we had no problems, and that it wouldn't be good for the users there to change ships in the middle of the school year.  So I was told that I was to immediately begin installing Office 2007 on all district computers, and removing any OpenOffice software.
Guess what?  A few weeks later I was fired.  My grounds for dismissal?  Insubordination.  Installing un-approved OpenOffice software on district computers.  Failure to remove OpenOffice software from district computers.  I protested and said that I didn't have enough time to make the requested changes, as we have over 500 computers, and I'm the sole IT person.  I explained that I have to make new computer images, and test, and deploy those images, and that can't be done overnight (although I usually did my ghosting overnight when no one was there<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/pun).  Alas, they wanted me out of the door, because I dared to think differently, and because "the Open Source software you installed was not good for the school."
And the funny thing is, this is the same Administration that adopted an official policy (with little input from me) that all school computers must run Firefox.  To this day at that school, users aren't allowed to run IE.  At all.  I believe that started from people complaining that our Google Apps and Google Email systems didn't work well with IE.  No one complains about Firefox, everyone loves it, and that seems to be what drives the school board.  They don't respond well to people complaining, and unfortunately, the people complaining about the OpenOffice software were outnumbering the people co</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back a couple of years ago , I was IT coordinator at a public school district .
At the time , we were aggressively rolling out new computers , and we had a mixed environment of Macs and PCs .
I had always used Open Source software on my personal computer , and on my office computers at work .
Being a poorly-funded school district , which had just spent a considerable ammount of our budget on the new machines , I advocated the use of Free Open Source software as a way to bring functionality to the users while keeping costs down .
Prior to this , I had been making sure OpenOffice.org was installed on all of our machines , alongside MS Office ( even though we did n't have enough licenses for MS Office as it was , Management told me to " shut up and install it anyway , not like they are going to audit our little district " ) .
I started a pilot project in the Elementary school where I only made available OpenOffice on computer lab machines , and provided teachers with basic training on how to use it .
It worked fine , and there were few complaints .
I did this with approval from Administration .
After a successful school year running an OpenOffice-only Elementary school , I decided that I had sufficient data , cost/benefit analysis , etc , to make the push to do the same at the High School .
I was given go-ahead from the Administration to make both Office suites available , and to encourage use of OpenOffice .
I did not anticipate what would happen next... students and teachers started to complain about the new Office software , and that the district was being " cheap " and that " no one in the real world uses OpenOffice " .
Despite me pointing out the advantages of the new software , and pointing out other instances of Governments and Businesses using the software , it did n't matter .
I was even providing free CDs with the OpenOffice software on it for students to take home and install , and there were several students who were grateful for this .
It increased their ability to do homework - at home !
Alas despite my best efforts , with the best interests of the students and taxpayers in mind , the Administration reversed their decision .
They announced that starting immediately , we would only be using Microsoft Office software , and that they would be diverting funds to purchase enough licenses to install it on every computer in the whole district , including our successful Elementary school implementation .
I protested that this was a waste of funds , especially in the Elementary school , where we had no problems , and that it would n't be good for the users there to change ships in the middle of the school year .
So I was told that I was to immediately begin installing Office 2007 on all district computers , and removing any OpenOffice software .
Guess what ?
A few weeks later I was fired .
My grounds for dismissal ?
Insubordination. Installing un-approved OpenOffice software on district computers .
Failure to remove OpenOffice software from district computers .
I protested and said that I did n't have enough time to make the requested changes , as we have over 500 computers , and I 'm the sole IT person .
I explained that I have to make new computer images , and test , and deploy those images , and that ca n't be done overnight ( although I usually did my ghosting overnight when no one was there /pun ) .
Alas , they wanted me out of the door , because I dared to think differently , and because " the Open Source software you installed was not good for the school .
" And the funny thing is , this is the same Administration that adopted an official policy ( with little input from me ) that all school computers must run Firefox .
To this day at that school , users are n't allowed to run IE .
At all .
I believe that started from people complaining that our Google Apps and Google Email systems did n't work well with IE .
No one complains about Firefox , everyone loves it , and that seems to be what drives the school board .
They do n't respond well to people complaining , and unfortunately , the people complaining about the OpenOffice software were outnumbering the people co</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back a couple of years ago, I was IT coordinator at a public school district.
At the time, we were aggressively rolling out new computers, and we had a mixed environment of Macs and PCs.
I had always used Open Source software on my personal computer, and on my office computers at work.
Being a poorly-funded school district, which had just spent a considerable ammount of our budget on the new machines, I advocated the use of Free Open Source software as a way to bring functionality to the users while keeping costs down.
Prior to this, I had been making sure OpenOffice.org was installed on all of our machines, alongside MS Office (even though we didn't have enough licenses for MS Office as it was, Management told me to "shut up and install it anyway, not like they are going to audit our little district").
I started a pilot project in the Elementary school where I only made available OpenOffice on computer lab machines, and provided teachers with basic training on how to use it.
It worked fine, and there were few complaints.
I did this with approval from Administration.
After a successful school year running an OpenOffice-only Elementary school, I decided that I had sufficient data, cost/benefit analysis, etc, to make the push to do the same at the High School.
I was given go-ahead from the Administration to make both Office suites available, and to encourage use of OpenOffice.
I did not anticipate what would happen next... students and teachers started to complain about the new Office software, and that the district was being "cheap" and that "no one in the real world uses OpenOffice".
Despite me pointing out the advantages of the new software, and pointing out other instances of Governments and Businesses using the software, it didn't matter.
I was even providing free CDs with the OpenOffice software on it for students to take home and install, and there were several students who were grateful for this.
It increased their ability to do homework - at home!
Alas despite my best efforts, with the best interests of the students and taxpayers in mind, the Administration reversed their decision.
They announced that starting immediately, we would only be using Microsoft Office software, and that they would be diverting funds to purchase enough licenses to install it on every computer in the whole district, including our successful Elementary school implementation.
I protested that this was a waste of funds, especially in the Elementary school, where we had no problems, and that it wouldn't be good for the users there to change ships in the middle of the school year.
So I was told that I was to immediately begin installing Office 2007 on all district computers, and removing any OpenOffice software.
Guess what?
A few weeks later I was fired.
My grounds for dismissal?
Insubordination.  Installing un-approved OpenOffice software on district computers.
Failure to remove OpenOffice software from district computers.
I protested and said that I didn't have enough time to make the requested changes, as we have over 500 computers, and I'm the sole IT person.
I explained that I have to make new computer images, and test, and deploy those images, and that can't be done overnight (although I usually did my ghosting overnight when no one was there /pun).
Alas, they wanted me out of the door, because I dared to think differently, and because "the Open Source software you installed was not good for the school.
"
And the funny thing is, this is the same Administration that adopted an official policy (with little input from me) that all school computers must run Firefox.
To this day at that school, users aren't allowed to run IE.
At all.
I believe that started from people complaining that our Google Apps and Google Email systems didn't work well with IE.
No one complains about Firefox, everyone loves it, and that seems to be what drives the school board.
They don't respond well to people complaining, and unfortunately, the people complaining about the OpenOffice software were outnumbering the people co</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359218</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>MadCow42</author>
	<datestamp>1267724520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting comparison you make:</p><p>&gt;&gt; <i>The command line is a fine interface, and if you're not a jackass, it's much quicker than hunting through any set of menus.</i></p><p>However, you're comparing someone that has memorized all the command line commands, syntaxes, and switches to someone that has no idea where in the menus each option is.  "hunting" through the menus isn't necessary if you have even a basic understanding of their layout.  However, without a thorough understanding of the command line, there's no hope in hell of being able to use it at ALL.</p><p>Don't get me wrong - I love the command line... but your statement is not even close to being realistic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting comparison you make : &gt; &gt; The command line is a fine interface , and if you 're not a jackass , it 's much quicker than hunting through any set of menus.However , you 're comparing someone that has memorized all the command line commands , syntaxes , and switches to someone that has no idea where in the menus each option is .
" hunting " through the menus is n't necessary if you have even a basic understanding of their layout .
However , without a thorough understanding of the command line , there 's no hope in hell of being able to use it at ALL.Do n't get me wrong - I love the command line... but your statement is not even close to being realistic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting comparison you make:&gt;&gt; The command line is a fine interface, and if you're not a jackass, it's much quicker than hunting through any set of menus.However, you're comparing someone that has memorized all the command line commands, syntaxes, and switches to someone that has no idea where in the menus each option is.
"hunting" through the menus isn't necessary if you have even a basic understanding of their layout.
However, without a thorough understanding of the command line, there's no hope in hell of being able to use it at ALL.Don't get me wrong - I love the command line... but your statement is not even close to being realistic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360698</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267731180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or if he owns too much MS stock...</p><p>Misappropriation of public funds for personal financial gain could mean prison.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or if he owns too much MS stock...Misappropriation of public funds for personal financial gain could mean prison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or if he owns too much MS stock...Misappropriation of public funds for personal financial gain could mean prison.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359726</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>BeanThere</author>
	<datestamp>1267726500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You might have the right to do this; but consider the consequences; i.e. is it worth potentially losing your job or getting shunted aside?</p></div><p>Depends how good you think you are. If you're any good, you'll find another job, possibly one where you have a voice. If you're just average, and you think it will be hard to find another job, then toe the line.</p><p>I would silence my own purely technical opinion. If management disagrees, that's their prerogative, but it's also your prerogative to give impartial technical opinions. If I was the submitter, I would write up a report detailing his "recommendations", outlining why he thinks they would save money, and include a plan for implementation so that it all sounds workable. Submit the report to management and/or the board as e.g. "technical opinion and recommendation on IT solutions for the organisation" or whatever.</p><p>It's always better to get your case/viewpoint in writing, even if it goes nowhere. That way, if crap hits the fan (e.g. say it turns out some corruption was involved, for example) it will be clear you were never part of it.</p><p>If you are a 'true' technical person, you will always stand by your technical *opinions*. Now *actions* are another thing; as an employee on someone's payroll, you have to follow their orders, end of story, even if you disagree with them. But you don't have to do it quietly. Nor do you have to be happy with it; ultimately, if you think your management are fools, you are better off dusting off your resume and starting to look around for an employer that fits your own views better.</p><p>The alternative, if you're so inclined, is to learn to play the political game, climb the ladder, and once you're at the top, change the "strategy". Not for me thanks. Or what I ultimately did, start my own business.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You might have the right to do this ; but consider the consequences ; i.e .
is it worth potentially losing your job or getting shunted aside ? Depends how good you think you are .
If you 're any good , you 'll find another job , possibly one where you have a voice .
If you 're just average , and you think it will be hard to find another job , then toe the line.I would silence my own purely technical opinion .
If management disagrees , that 's their prerogative , but it 's also your prerogative to give impartial technical opinions .
If I was the submitter , I would write up a report detailing his " recommendations " , outlining why he thinks they would save money , and include a plan for implementation so that it all sounds workable .
Submit the report to management and/or the board as e.g .
" technical opinion and recommendation on IT solutions for the organisation " or whatever.It 's always better to get your case/viewpoint in writing , even if it goes nowhere .
That way , if crap hits the fan ( e.g .
say it turns out some corruption was involved , for example ) it will be clear you were never part of it.If you are a 'true ' technical person , you will always stand by your technical * opinions * .
Now * actions * are another thing ; as an employee on someone 's payroll , you have to follow their orders , end of story , even if you disagree with them .
But you do n't have to do it quietly .
Nor do you have to be happy with it ; ultimately , if you think your management are fools , you are better off dusting off your resume and starting to look around for an employer that fits your own views better.The alternative , if you 're so inclined , is to learn to play the political game , climb the ladder , and once you 're at the top , change the " strategy " .
Not for me thanks .
Or what I ultimately did , start my own business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might have the right to do this; but consider the consequences; i.e.
is it worth potentially losing your job or getting shunted aside?Depends how good you think you are.
If you're any good, you'll find another job, possibly one where you have a voice.
If you're just average, and you think it will be hard to find another job, then toe the line.I would silence my own purely technical opinion.
If management disagrees, that's their prerogative, but it's also your prerogative to give impartial technical opinions.
If I was the submitter, I would write up a report detailing his "recommendations", outlining why he thinks they would save money, and include a plan for implementation so that it all sounds workable.
Submit the report to management and/or the board as e.g.
"technical opinion and recommendation on IT solutions for the organisation" or whatever.It's always better to get your case/viewpoint in writing, even if it goes nowhere.
That way, if crap hits the fan (e.g.
say it turns out some corruption was involved, for example) it will be clear you were never part of it.If you are a 'true' technical person, you will always stand by your technical *opinions*.
Now *actions* are another thing; as an employee on someone's payroll, you have to follow their orders, end of story, even if you disagree with them.
But you don't have to do it quietly.
Nor do you have to be happy with it; ultimately, if you think your management are fools, you are better off dusting off your resume and starting to look around for an employer that fits your own views better.The alternative, if you're so inclined, is to learn to play the political game, climb the ladder, and once you're at the top, change the "strategy".
Not for me thanks.
Or what I ultimately did, start my own business.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being a "microsoft shop" one thing. obnoxiously pushing it to the exclusion of all else is another. This situation also seems to go a bit beyond just an internal standard and also seems to include evangelism and active hostility to anything else. It's Taliban vs. Amish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a " microsoft shop " one thing .
obnoxiously pushing it to the exclusion of all else is another .
This situation also seems to go a bit beyond just an internal standard and also seems to include evangelism and active hostility to anything else .
It 's Taliban vs. Amish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a "microsoft shop" one thing.
obnoxiously pushing it to the exclusion of all else is another.
This situation also seems to go a bit beyond just an internal standard and also seems to include evangelism and active hostility to anything else.
It's Taliban vs. Amish.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358902</id>
	<title>Efficiency</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>it is funny you say that... Efficiency.<br>Open Source is great and it has its place in the world, but if you are looking for an efficient work place where IT only has one set tools to maintain and support, then mixing your OS's, software, browsers, etc., it not the way to go.<br> <br>
I work at Government Lab and I am in charge of a number of Enterprise Level systems.  While Mac and Linux are used exclusively in my personal life and home business, Windows is what is used at the office.  Not because of my love for Microsoft, but because we can globally control the desktops, the applications used on the desktops, who has access to the systems, etc.  It makes our lives easier and we are more efficient at our jobs.  Need all 2000 desktops patched? Fire up SMS and have it installed tonight.  Need to yank access for a terminated employee?  Disable their account in AD and their access to the Domain and email are now gone.  Is it perfect?  HELL NO!  But it is a lot easier than when we had to support the minority systems of 5 flavors of Linux and 3 Mac OS's along side the Windows desktops.</htmltext>
<tokenext>it is funny you say that... Efficiency.Open Source is great and it has its place in the world , but if you are looking for an efficient work place where IT only has one set tools to maintain and support , then mixing your OS 's , software , browsers , etc. , it not the way to go .
I work at Government Lab and I am in charge of a number of Enterprise Level systems .
While Mac and Linux are used exclusively in my personal life and home business , Windows is what is used at the office .
Not because of my love for Microsoft , but because we can globally control the desktops , the applications used on the desktops , who has access to the systems , etc .
It makes our lives easier and we are more efficient at our jobs .
Need all 2000 desktops patched ?
Fire up SMS and have it installed tonight .
Need to yank access for a terminated employee ?
Disable their account in AD and their access to the Domain and email are now gone .
Is it perfect ?
HELL NO !
But it is a lot easier than when we had to support the minority systems of 5 flavors of Linux and 3 Mac OS 's along side the Windows desktops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is funny you say that... Efficiency.Open Source is great and it has its place in the world, but if you are looking for an efficient work place where IT only has one set tools to maintain and support, then mixing your OS's, software, browsers, etc., it not the way to go.
I work at Government Lab and I am in charge of a number of Enterprise Level systems.
While Mac and Linux are used exclusively in my personal life and home business, Windows is what is used at the office.
Not because of my love for Microsoft, but because we can globally control the desktops, the applications used on the desktops, who has access to the systems, etc.
It makes our lives easier and we are more efficient at our jobs.
Need all 2000 desktops patched?
Fire up SMS and have it installed tonight.
Need to yank access for a terminated employee?
Disable their account in AD and their access to the Domain and email are now gone.
Is it perfect?
HELL NO!
But it is a lot easier than when we had to support the minority systems of 5 flavors of Linux and 3 Mac OS's along side the Windows desktops.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361158</id>
	<title>Re:Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>pla</author>
	<datestamp>1267733340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>As an IT Director (who came up through a 17 year career as an IT support person), I'm increasingly
frustrated by IT admins who just don't see the big picture.</i> <br>
<br>
Except, who here has really missed the big picture?<br>
<br>
Great, you have absolute control over your users desktop environments, every program they can run, and every web site
they can get to.  To what end?  Boosting sales of iPhones?<br>
<br>
Your admins fight with you because they know things you don't.  You users will just move on to the easiest way to get
what they want done, whether for work or recreation.  At most companies, this has little consequence; At a hospital,
it means that because you didn't want to deal with FireFox, you have confidential patient information sitting on Yahoo's
servers in plaintext emails.  Congrats, you have a bigger dick than your admins, see you in court.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As an IT Director ( who came up through a 17 year career as an IT support person ) , I 'm increasingly frustrated by IT admins who just do n't see the big picture .
Except , who here has really missed the big picture ?
Great , you have absolute control over your users desktop environments , every program they can run , and every web site they can get to .
To what end ?
Boosting sales of iPhones ?
Your admins fight with you because they know things you do n't .
You users will just move on to the easiest way to get what they want done , whether for work or recreation .
At most companies , this has little consequence ; At a hospital , it means that because you did n't want to deal with FireFox , you have confidential patient information sitting on Yahoo 's servers in plaintext emails .
Congrats , you have a bigger dick than your admins , see you in court .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an IT Director (who came up through a 17 year career as an IT support person), I'm increasingly
frustrated by IT admins who just don't see the big picture.
Except, who here has really missed the big picture?
Great, you have absolute control over your users desktop environments, every program they can run, and every web site
they can get to.
To what end?
Boosting sales of iPhones?
Your admins fight with you because they know things you don't.
You users will just move on to the easiest way to get
what they want done, whether for work or recreation.
At most companies, this has little consequence; At a hospital,
it means that because you didn't want to deal with FireFox, you have confidential patient information sitting on Yahoo's
servers in plaintext emails.
Congrats, you have a bigger dick than your admins, see you in court.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</id>
	<title>Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an IT Director (who came up through a 17 year career as an IT support person), I'm increasingly frustrated by IT admins who just don't see the big picture.</p><p>Using the Firefox example:</p><p>YES, it is absolutely true that Firefox is superior to IE on a user-by-user basis, in 90\% of the cases.</p><p>YES, most exploits are written to take advantage of IE (or, rather, its various bloat that accumulates).</p><p>NO, the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.</p><p>Without question, a *current* version of IE which is *properly patched* is superior (security-wise) to a 6 month old, unpatched version of Firefox.</p><p>I'm able to control my IE deployments down to a microscopic level, all from a single scree (and tied in to many of my other deployed applications). I'm not able to do that with Firefox. I'll gut it out and take my chances with the IE that I can control (including to blackhole communications at a moments notice if there's a problem), rather than Firefox which I cannot.</p><p>The first 8 years of my life were spend as a CAD systems admin (Unix systems). I run Squid. I love open source. But don't even begin to tell me that because you're looking at "what browser is superior for Joe's computer" that you can plan a corporate infrastructure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an IT Director ( who came up through a 17 year career as an IT support person ) , I 'm increasingly frustrated by IT admins who just do n't see the big picture.Using the Firefox example : YES , it is absolutely true that Firefox is superior to IE on a user-by-user basis , in 90 \ % of the cases.YES , most exploits are written to take advantage of IE ( or , rather , its various bloat that accumulates ) .NO , the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.Without question , a * current * version of IE which is * properly patched * is superior ( security-wise ) to a 6 month old , unpatched version of Firefox.I 'm able to control my IE deployments down to a microscopic level , all from a single scree ( and tied in to many of my other deployed applications ) .
I 'm not able to do that with Firefox .
I 'll gut it out and take my chances with the IE that I can control ( including to blackhole communications at a moments notice if there 's a problem ) , rather than Firefox which I can not.The first 8 years of my life were spend as a CAD systems admin ( Unix systems ) .
I run Squid .
I love open source .
But do n't even begin to tell me that because you 're looking at " what browser is superior for Joe 's computer " that you can plan a corporate infrastructure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an IT Director (who came up through a 17 year career as an IT support person), I'm increasingly frustrated by IT admins who just don't see the big picture.Using the Firefox example:YES, it is absolutely true that Firefox is superior to IE on a user-by-user basis, in 90\% of the cases.YES, most exploits are written to take advantage of IE (or, rather, its various bloat that accumulates).NO, the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.Without question, a *current* version of IE which is *properly patched* is superior (security-wise) to a 6 month old, unpatched version of Firefox.I'm able to control my IE deployments down to a microscopic level, all from a single scree (and tied in to many of my other deployed applications).
I'm not able to do that with Firefox.
I'll gut it out and take my chances with the IE that I can control (including to blackhole communications at a moments notice if there's a problem), rather than Firefox which I cannot.The first 8 years of my life were spend as a CAD systems admin (Unix systems).
I run Squid.
I love open source.
But don't even begin to tell me that because you're looking at "what browser is superior for Joe's computer" that you can plan a corporate infrastructure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360374</id>
	<title>From the IT Guy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267729560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hold on there. I am one of the hospital IT guys you're talking about. It has less to do with desire, and much more to do with supportability and the lives of the patients we care for.</p><p>There are several best-of-breed products out there for hospitals, such as McKesson Horizon Patient Folders, Horizon Medical Imaging, Horizon Emergency Care, and a few others that DO NOT have support for any other browser than IE. Installing Firefox or other alternative browsers can result in programs that are required for our staff to not work.</p><p>This is a serious risk, not only for our ability as an IT department to support the software, but it can even impact patient care directly! Nobody wants to see a patient suffer because you can't get the order for their pain meds to the pharmacy in a timely manner. Nobody wants to watch their doctor/nurse flail around with the computer they are documenting your care on. No end user wants to have to call IT every time they upgrade a non-standard browser and need to reset the default browser back to IE.</p><p>Locking down systems to a single configuration that simply works with the software they use is not draconian, it literally is a life-saving measure.</p><p>Of course, this applies more to patient care areas, and less to administrative functions - but the principle is applicable to both. IT departments at hospitals, like most other businesses are an expense and often support resources are outsourced, meaning there's nobody there to just "run down" and fix a system that some user installed their preferred browser on when it breaks things like their reporting tools.</p><p>I agree that MS is not really the best for all cases, but you're leaning too hard the other way, given the current state of development in the Healthcare industry.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and stop deleting my posts please.  Posting anon is because I can't reveal my employer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hold on there .
I am one of the hospital IT guys you 're talking about .
It has less to do with desire , and much more to do with supportability and the lives of the patients we care for.There are several best-of-breed products out there for hospitals , such as McKesson Horizon Patient Folders , Horizon Medical Imaging , Horizon Emergency Care , and a few others that DO NOT have support for any other browser than IE .
Installing Firefox or other alternative browsers can result in programs that are required for our staff to not work.This is a serious risk , not only for our ability as an IT department to support the software , but it can even impact patient care directly !
Nobody wants to see a patient suffer because you ca n't get the order for their pain meds to the pharmacy in a timely manner .
Nobody wants to watch their doctor/nurse flail around with the computer they are documenting your care on .
No end user wants to have to call IT every time they upgrade a non-standard browser and need to reset the default browser back to IE.Locking down systems to a single configuration that simply works with the software they use is not draconian , it literally is a life-saving measure.Of course , this applies more to patient care areas , and less to administrative functions - but the principle is applicable to both .
IT departments at hospitals , like most other businesses are an expense and often support resources are outsourced , meaning there 's nobody there to just " run down " and fix a system that some user installed their preferred browser on when it breaks things like their reporting tools.I agree that MS is not really the best for all cases , but you 're leaning too hard the other way , given the current state of development in the Healthcare industry .
...and stop deleting my posts please .
Posting anon is because I ca n't reveal my employer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hold on there.
I am one of the hospital IT guys you're talking about.
It has less to do with desire, and much more to do with supportability and the lives of the patients we care for.There are several best-of-breed products out there for hospitals, such as McKesson Horizon Patient Folders, Horizon Medical Imaging, Horizon Emergency Care, and a few others that DO NOT have support for any other browser than IE.
Installing Firefox or other alternative browsers can result in programs that are required for our staff to not work.This is a serious risk, not only for our ability as an IT department to support the software, but it can even impact patient care directly!
Nobody wants to see a patient suffer because you can't get the order for their pain meds to the pharmacy in a timely manner.
Nobody wants to watch their doctor/nurse flail around with the computer they are documenting your care on.
No end user wants to have to call IT every time they upgrade a non-standard browser and need to reset the default browser back to IE.Locking down systems to a single configuration that simply works with the software they use is not draconian, it literally is a life-saving measure.Of course, this applies more to patient care areas, and less to administrative functions - but the principle is applicable to both.
IT departments at hospitals, like most other businesses are an expense and often support resources are outsourced, meaning there's nobody there to just "run down" and fix a system that some user installed their preferred browser on when it breaks things like their reporting tools.I agree that MS is not really the best for all cases, but you're leaning too hard the other way, given the current state of development in the Healthcare industry.
...and stop deleting my posts please.
Posting anon is because I can't reveal my employer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359642</id>
	<title>Haven't you ever read Dilbert?</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1267726140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bosses often do things that don't make any sense to their subordinates. Sometimes you just don't have all the facts to understand it and other times he's just nuts.</p><p>Either way, you're likely to encounter this sort of scenario for your entire career unless you work for yourself (in which case your customers will drive you crazy instead).</p><p>Just make sure you don't lose your job over Slashdotters' version of political correctness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bosses often do things that do n't make any sense to their subordinates .
Sometimes you just do n't have all the facts to understand it and other times he 's just nuts.Either way , you 're likely to encounter this sort of scenario for your entire career unless you work for yourself ( in which case your customers will drive you crazy instead ) .Just make sure you do n't lose your job over Slashdotters ' version of political correctness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bosses often do things that don't make any sense to their subordinates.
Sometimes you just don't have all the facts to understand it and other times he's just nuts.Either way, you're likely to encounter this sort of scenario for your entire career unless you work for yourself (in which case your customers will drive you crazy instead).Just make sure you don't lose your job over Slashdotters' version of political correctness.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361534</id>
	<title>There's Public, and then there's Public...</title>
	<author>AmazingChicken</author>
	<datestamp>1267735260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dude, you have a job.  Why is it an issue for you whether the management supports their microsoft stock by making you use it?

You might want to consider also that as a 'public' operation they may get the licenses on the cheap.  Are you using the latest and greatest M$ releases?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , you have a job .
Why is it an issue for you whether the management supports their microsoft stock by making you use it ?
You might want to consider also that as a 'public ' operation they may get the licenses on the cheap .
Are you using the latest and greatest M $ releases ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, you have a job.
Why is it an issue for you whether the management supports their microsoft stock by making you use it?
You might want to consider also that as a 'public' operation they may get the licenses on the cheap.
Are you using the latest and greatest M$ releases?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366104</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267715280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I deal with HIPAA but not users that I need to dictate policy too. What sites would you block? Unless you enforce a strict whitelist (which is better done on a forced proxy), they'll still be able to leak data somewhere if they want to. If you're preventing unintentional data leaks, wouldn't enforcing better security standards be the way to go?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I deal with HIPAA but not users that I need to dictate policy too .
What sites would you block ?
Unless you enforce a strict whitelist ( which is better done on a forced proxy ) , they 'll still be able to leak data somewhere if they want to .
If you 're preventing unintentional data leaks , would n't enforcing better security standards be the way to go ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I deal with HIPAA but not users that I need to dictate policy too.
What sites would you block?
Unless you enforce a strict whitelist (which is better done on a forced proxy), they'll still be able to leak data somewhere if they want to.
If you're preventing unintentional data leaks, wouldn't enforcing better security standards be the way to go?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360876</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1267731960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Sorry, but it's true. You can either spend thousands of hours managing Linux and it's terrible interfaces, or get Microsoft that does it already for you.<br></i><br>2004's Mandriva+KDE's interface was superior to today's Windows 7's interfaces; it didn't get in the way of what you wented or needed to do. The layouts were logical. Microsoft's are seemingly random. What's more, Windows' interface changes from release to release so you virtually have to learn how to use a computer all over again, as I found out yet again yesterday when I bought a new netbook with Windows 7 on it. Gad, but I hate Windows 7, it's the worst version of Windows I've used yet.</p><p>Even back in 2004 I'd install Mandriva dual-boot in computer-illiterate friends' computers when I got sick of cleaning out their malware, and I'd disable networking in Windows. None of them had any problem whatever doing anything on it after that, and all of them loved Mandriva. What's more, I spent a hell of a lot less time supporting their machines.</p><p>Now tell me, Mr. Troll, why is it that when I tried to connect to the wifi at the local bar it would connect to the network, but not the internet*, gave me the reason of it couldn't find the DNS server without giving me any way of supplying the server's address (I know the owner so could have easily gotten it), yet a woman there with an iPhone was able to connect to the internet via wifi with no problem at all?</p><p>You, sir, are abysmally ignorant.</p><p>*I found out later in the evening there was a problem with the bar's wifi router, but it didn't get in Apple's way and I'd bet it wouldn't get in Linux's way, either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , but it 's true .
You can either spend thousands of hours managing Linux and it 's terrible interfaces , or get Microsoft that does it already for you.2004 's Mandriva + KDE 's interface was superior to today 's Windows 7 's interfaces ; it did n't get in the way of what you wented or needed to do .
The layouts were logical .
Microsoft 's are seemingly random .
What 's more , Windows ' interface changes from release to release so you virtually have to learn how to use a computer all over again , as I found out yet again yesterday when I bought a new netbook with Windows 7 on it .
Gad , but I hate Windows 7 , it 's the worst version of Windows I 've used yet.Even back in 2004 I 'd install Mandriva dual-boot in computer-illiterate friends ' computers when I got sick of cleaning out their malware , and I 'd disable networking in Windows .
None of them had any problem whatever doing anything on it after that , and all of them loved Mandriva .
What 's more , I spent a hell of a lot less time supporting their machines.Now tell me , Mr. Troll , why is it that when I tried to connect to the wifi at the local bar it would connect to the network , but not the internet * , gave me the reason of it could n't find the DNS server without giving me any way of supplying the server 's address ( I know the owner so could have easily gotten it ) , yet a woman there with an iPhone was able to connect to the internet via wifi with no problem at all ? You , sir , are abysmally ignorant .
* I found out later in the evening there was a problem with the bar 's wifi router , but it did n't get in Apple 's way and I 'd bet it would n't get in Linux 's way , either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, but it's true.
You can either spend thousands of hours managing Linux and it's terrible interfaces, or get Microsoft that does it already for you.2004's Mandriva+KDE's interface was superior to today's Windows 7's interfaces; it didn't get in the way of what you wented or needed to do.
The layouts were logical.
Microsoft's are seemingly random.
What's more, Windows' interface changes from release to release so you virtually have to learn how to use a computer all over again, as I found out yet again yesterday when I bought a new netbook with Windows 7 on it.
Gad, but I hate Windows 7, it's the worst version of Windows I've used yet.Even back in 2004 I'd install Mandriva dual-boot in computer-illiterate friends' computers when I got sick of cleaning out their malware, and I'd disable networking in Windows.
None of them had any problem whatever doing anything on it after that, and all of them loved Mandriva.
What's more, I spent a hell of a lot less time supporting their machines.Now tell me, Mr. Troll, why is it that when I tried to connect to the wifi at the local bar it would connect to the network, but not the internet*, gave me the reason of it couldn't find the DNS server without giving me any way of supplying the server's address (I know the owner so could have easily gotten it), yet a woman there with an iPhone was able to connect to the internet via wifi with no problem at all?You, sir, are abysmally ignorant.
*I found out later in the evening there was a problem with the bar's wifi router, but it didn't get in Apple's way and I'd bet it wouldn't get in Linux's way, either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358756</id>
	<title>Make noise politically</title>
	<author>jaymz2k4</author>
	<datestamp>1267722840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently.</p></div></blockquote><p>

This is the sort of thing that should be raised with your senator or congressman. Assuming they're not in the pocket of MS already. People need to get governments round to the idea that open source is <em>good</em> for them. In Europe we're a bit more keen to run with such strategies and I would imagine someone ending up fired for that sort of email.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a taxpayer , I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently .
This is the sort of thing that should be raised with your senator or congressman .
Assuming they 're not in the pocket of MS already .
People need to get governments round to the idea that open source is good for them .
In Europe we 're a bit more keen to run with such strategies and I would imagine someone ending up fired for that sort of email .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently.
This is the sort of thing that should be raised with your senator or congressman.
Assuming they're not in the pocket of MS already.
People need to get governments round to the idea that open source is good for them.
In Europe we're a bit more keen to run with such strategies and I would imagine someone ending up fired for that sort of email.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358994</id>
	<title>See it all the time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see this all the time as I do consulting. I've never heard/seen proof anyone has a contractual relationship.</p><p>Way back in the 80's there was a saying: "No one ever got fired for buying IBM"</p><p>It's a similar idea. As a CTO or IT Director, unless you want to spend all your days doing analysis on each type of software you might need, you need to come up with rules on selection and support.</p><p>And no one is ever going to get fired for sticking with MS products by default.</p><p>The problem with this, of course, is that MS doesn't have best of breed products in many cases.</p><p>Some things they do work pretty well (Windows, IIS, SQL Server, Office).</p><p>While other MS technologies suck (Frontpage, Visual SourceSafe, Visual Studio, Zune, Windows Mobile).</p><p>If you are forced to use the sucky technology simply because someone wants to stick with their overly simple rule, you can fight it, but it's going to be an uphill battle.</p><p>You're better off picking one or two battles and trying to win those. Then wait for your CTO or IT Director gets replaced, 'cause they probably don't know what they are doing.</p><p>(By the way, this is my opinion. Feel free to express your opinion, but simply telling me my opinion is wrong doesn't add anything to the conversation.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see this all the time as I do consulting .
I 've never heard/seen proof anyone has a contractual relationship.Way back in the 80 's there was a saying : " No one ever got fired for buying IBM " It 's a similar idea .
As a CTO or IT Director , unless you want to spend all your days doing analysis on each type of software you might need , you need to come up with rules on selection and support.And no one is ever going to get fired for sticking with MS products by default.The problem with this , of course , is that MS does n't have best of breed products in many cases.Some things they do work pretty well ( Windows , IIS , SQL Server , Office ) .While other MS technologies suck ( Frontpage , Visual SourceSafe , Visual Studio , Zune , Windows Mobile ) .If you are forced to use the sucky technology simply because someone wants to stick with their overly simple rule , you can fight it , but it 's going to be an uphill battle.You 're better off picking one or two battles and trying to win those .
Then wait for your CTO or IT Director gets replaced , 'cause they probably do n't know what they are doing .
( By the way , this is my opinion .
Feel free to express your opinion , but simply telling me my opinion is wrong does n't add anything to the conversation .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see this all the time as I do consulting.
I've never heard/seen proof anyone has a contractual relationship.Way back in the 80's there was a saying: "No one ever got fired for buying IBM"It's a similar idea.
As a CTO or IT Director, unless you want to spend all your days doing analysis on each type of software you might need, you need to come up with rules on selection and support.And no one is ever going to get fired for sticking with MS products by default.The problem with this, of course, is that MS doesn't have best of breed products in many cases.Some things they do work pretty well (Windows, IIS, SQL Server, Office).While other MS technologies suck (Frontpage, Visual SourceSafe, Visual Studio, Zune, Windows Mobile).If you are forced to use the sucky technology simply because someone wants to stick with their overly simple rule, you can fight it, but it's going to be an uphill battle.You're better off picking one or two battles and trying to win those.
Then wait for your CTO or IT Director gets replaced, 'cause they probably don't know what they are doing.
(By the way, this is my opinion.
Feel free to express your opinion, but simply telling me my opinion is wrong doesn't add anything to the conversation.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359052</id>
	<title>Name them</title>
	<author>waa</author>
	<datestamp>1267723860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I say name them.<br>

Call them out on it. Let the taxpayers know that their money is being wasted.<br>

How about an anonymous "letter to the editor" of your local newspaper?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I say name them .
Call them out on it .
Let the taxpayers know that their money is being wasted .
How about an anonymous " letter to the editor " of your local newspaper ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I say name them.
Call them out on it.
Let the taxpayers know that their money is being wasted.
How about an anonymous "letter to the editor" of your local newspaper?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358848</id>
	<title>Champion Team vs Team of Champions</title>
	<author>craznar</author>
	<datestamp>1267723200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>In large scale companies or departments - everyone using the wrong thing is more efficient that everyone using a different thing.

Standard operating environments can suck<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but in the end save money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In large scale companies or departments - everyone using the wrong thing is more efficient that everyone using a different thing .
Standard operating environments can suck ... but in the end save money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In large scale companies or departments - everyone using the wrong thing is more efficient that everyone using a different thing.
Standard operating environments can suck ... but in the end save money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360070</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1267727880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The command line is a fine interface.  Graphical interfaces are fine too.  Haven't we all learned by now that there isn't one UI that is absolutely superior to all others, but rather it depends on the user, what the user is trying to accomplish, and the context?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The command line is a fine interface .
Graphical interfaces are fine too .
Have n't we all learned by now that there is n't one UI that is absolutely superior to all others , but rather it depends on the user , what the user is trying to accomplish , and the context ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The command line is a fine interface.
Graphical interfaces are fine too.
Haven't we all learned by now that there isn't one UI that is absolutely superior to all others, but rather it depends on the user, what the user is trying to accomplish, and the context?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359146</id>
	<title>A problem with the OPs thinking</title>
	<author>DaveV1.0</author>
	<datestamp>1267724340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently. </p><p> The OP is not working for the "DHB" as a taxpayer. He is not even a a decision maker in the IT department of the DHB. If he does not like the situation, he can publicize it (and probably get a yawn from most everyone). His technical opinion is to be expressed to his boss, but it is the boss' technical opinion that matters.</p><p>Like so many people, the OP has forgotten that a business is a voluntary dictatorship. The boss' set the business' direction and if the employee doesn't like it, the employee can voice his objections to the boss and possibly be fired or the employee can quit.</p><p>Once the OP is no longer an employee, he is free to pursue his desires as a taxpayer, but will probably meet with much the same level of success.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a taxpayer , I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently .
The OP is not working for the " DHB " as a taxpayer .
He is not even a a decision maker in the IT department of the DHB .
If he does not like the situation , he can publicize it ( and probably get a yawn from most everyone ) .
His technical opinion is to be expressed to his boss , but it is the boss ' technical opinion that matters.Like so many people , the OP has forgotten that a business is a voluntary dictatorship .
The boss ' set the business ' direction and if the employee does n't like it , the employee can voice his objections to the boss and possibly be fired or the employee can quit.Once the OP is no longer an employee , he is free to pursue his desires as a taxpayer , but will probably meet with much the same level of success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently.
The OP is not working for the "DHB" as a taxpayer.
He is not even a a decision maker in the IT department of the DHB.
If he does not like the situation, he can publicize it (and probably get a yawn from most everyone).
His technical opinion is to be expressed to his boss, but it is the boss' technical opinion that matters.Like so many people, the OP has forgotten that a business is a voluntary dictatorship.
The boss' set the business' direction and if the employee doesn't like it, the employee can voice his objections to the boss and possibly be fired or the employee can quit.Once the OP is no longer an employee, he is free to pursue his desires as a taxpayer, but will probably meet with much the same level of success.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359810</id>
	<title>IDES requires Windows and IE to file Claims</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Illinois Department of Employment Services (unemployment Office) requires Windows and IE to file claims online.  It brings up a page if you attempt to access with anything else and informs you of this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Illinois Department of Employment Services ( unemployment Office ) requires Windows and IE to file claims online .
It brings up a page if you attempt to access with anything else and informs you of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Illinois Department of Employment Services (unemployment Office) requires Windows and IE to file claims online.
It brings up a page if you attempt to access with anything else and informs you of this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359744</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>KevMar</author>
	<datestamp>1267726560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many other factors come into play.</p><p>We are rolling out Windows 7 where we are now.  One of the smoothest OS roll outs I have ever done.  Our largest problem was user training. These users had all the shortcuts they ever needed on the desktop before. With a new computer they had to make those shortcuts again and they forgot basic windows stuff.  We had to show people the start menu and how to get to network drives (that were already mapped).  I will never get these users over to Linux.</p><p>Others that had Windows 7 (or Vista) at home picked it up and ran with it.  No training required when they teach themselves. That is huge for any company.</p><p>Our migration is a slow roll out.  It is going so smooth that any problems we have with XP machines that are not quick config changes, we just replace them with a Windows 7 computer. I'm not saying that a Linux deployment would not be that smooth, but I don't know how to do it.  I do a lot of things with Group Policy for Windows 7 easily that I would not know how to do in Linux.  For that same reason we do not support Mac.</p><p>Digital Imaging support was our big question in moving forward with Windows 7. I expect the same considerations would be in place if Linux was on the table.  Digital X-Ray is the big thing now where I am.  We have a huge variety of digital scan units and sensors and readers that all support Windows.  Some of these units are portable so every clinic machine needs to support them. Clinic software is the other limiting factor.  I expect there are some talented Linux pros that can pull this off even with out vendor support, but in some cases you have to have that support.</p><p>In some cases there are contract or legal or cost reasons.  We have one system for email that someone paid way too much for and we are stuck with it because of it.  That is one part of our infrastructure we don't control. We hate that we can't change is but we love that we don't have to manage it.</p><p>And it is very nice to have a consistent environment.  All of our computers are from one manufacturer and we buy batches of the same model number when we can.  We know our Windows 7 computer image will work with every computer and only have to update the image with new drives when we add a new model number (and only then if the drivers change).</p><p>Every situation is different in every company.  A friend looking for an IT job saw one posting that he had to share with me.  One requirement was to be able to implement the technology they use and not question it.  Sometimes the part about being a good employee is doing what you are told.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many other factors come into play.We are rolling out Windows 7 where we are now .
One of the smoothest OS roll outs I have ever done .
Our largest problem was user training .
These users had all the shortcuts they ever needed on the desktop before .
With a new computer they had to make those shortcuts again and they forgot basic windows stuff .
We had to show people the start menu and how to get to network drives ( that were already mapped ) .
I will never get these users over to Linux.Others that had Windows 7 ( or Vista ) at home picked it up and ran with it .
No training required when they teach themselves .
That is huge for any company.Our migration is a slow roll out .
It is going so smooth that any problems we have with XP machines that are not quick config changes , we just replace them with a Windows 7 computer .
I 'm not saying that a Linux deployment would not be that smooth , but I do n't know how to do it .
I do a lot of things with Group Policy for Windows 7 easily that I would not know how to do in Linux .
For that same reason we do not support Mac.Digital Imaging support was our big question in moving forward with Windows 7 .
I expect the same considerations would be in place if Linux was on the table .
Digital X-Ray is the big thing now where I am .
We have a huge variety of digital scan units and sensors and readers that all support Windows .
Some of these units are portable so every clinic machine needs to support them .
Clinic software is the other limiting factor .
I expect there are some talented Linux pros that can pull this off even with out vendor support , but in some cases you have to have that support.In some cases there are contract or legal or cost reasons .
We have one system for email that someone paid way too much for and we are stuck with it because of it .
That is one part of our infrastructure we do n't control .
We hate that we ca n't change is but we love that we do n't have to manage it.And it is very nice to have a consistent environment .
All of our computers are from one manufacturer and we buy batches of the same model number when we can .
We know our Windows 7 computer image will work with every computer and only have to update the image with new drives when we add a new model number ( and only then if the drivers change ) .Every situation is different in every company .
A friend looking for an IT job saw one posting that he had to share with me .
One requirement was to be able to implement the technology they use and not question it .
Sometimes the part about being a good employee is doing what you are told .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many other factors come into play.We are rolling out Windows 7 where we are now.
One of the smoothest OS roll outs I have ever done.
Our largest problem was user training.
These users had all the shortcuts they ever needed on the desktop before.
With a new computer they had to make those shortcuts again and they forgot basic windows stuff.
We had to show people the start menu and how to get to network drives (that were already mapped).
I will never get these users over to Linux.Others that had Windows 7 (or Vista) at home picked it up and ran with it.
No training required when they teach themselves.
That is huge for any company.Our migration is a slow roll out.
It is going so smooth that any problems we have with XP machines that are not quick config changes, we just replace them with a Windows 7 computer.
I'm not saying that a Linux deployment would not be that smooth, but I don't know how to do it.
I do a lot of things with Group Policy for Windows 7 easily that I would not know how to do in Linux.
For that same reason we do not support Mac.Digital Imaging support was our big question in moving forward with Windows 7.
I expect the same considerations would be in place if Linux was on the table.
Digital X-Ray is the big thing now where I am.
We have a huge variety of digital scan units and sensors and readers that all support Windows.
Some of these units are portable so every clinic machine needs to support them.
Clinic software is the other limiting factor.
I expect there are some talented Linux pros that can pull this off even with out vendor support, but in some cases you have to have that support.In some cases there are contract or legal or cost reasons.
We have one system for email that someone paid way too much for and we are stuck with it because of it.
That is one part of our infrastructure we don't control.
We hate that we can't change is but we love that we don't have to manage it.And it is very nice to have a consistent environment.
All of our computers are from one manufacturer and we buy batches of the same model number when we can.
We know our Windows 7 computer image will work with every computer and only have to update the image with new drives when we add a new model number (and only then if the drivers change).Every situation is different in every company.
A friend looking for an IT job saw one posting that he had to share with me.
One requirement was to be able to implement the technology they use and not question it.
Sometimes the part about being a good employee is doing what you are told.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359132</id>
	<title>Two words...</title>
	<author>wzinc</author>
	<datestamp>1267724220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Run.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Run .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Run.
:-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360498</id>
	<title>There's still the Bozo factor to contend with</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267730160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>NO, the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.</p></div><p>That's debatable.</p><p>If admins really did all these things, there wouldn't be bozos in the corporate world there still using IE6.</p><p>I know, I just had to twist a lazy bozos arm to do the upgrade, since it was never actually pushed out to him.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NO , the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.That 's debatable.If admins really did all these things , there would n't be bozos in the corporate world there still using IE6.I know , I just had to twist a lazy bozos arm to do the upgrade , since it was never actually pushed out to him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NO, the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.That's debatable.If admins really did all these things, there wouldn't be bozos in the corporate world there still using IE6.I know, I just had to twist a lazy bozos arm to do the upgrade, since it was never actually pushed out to him.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359072</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>fotoguzzi</author>
	<datestamp>1267723980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>M$ has DOS emulation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>M $ has DOS emulation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>M$ has DOS emulation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359834</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>srleffler</author>
	<datestamp>1267727040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately, the majority of computer users <em>are</em> jackasses, and do better with the menus.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , the majority of computer users are jackasses , and do better with the menus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, the majority of computer users are jackasses, and do better with the menus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358934</id>
	<title>Ethics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Approach this from an ethics point of view. While I've never worked in the public sector, my understanding is that they have much stricter policies and laws governing conflicts of interest, fair bidding practices, vendor selection, etc.
</p><p>In private businesses, I've heard people come out and say they prefer one product over another based upon the receipt of stock options from their favorite vendor. But its my understanding that in a public entity this could lead to jail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Approach this from an ethics point of view .
While I 've never worked in the public sector , my understanding is that they have much stricter policies and laws governing conflicts of interest , fair bidding practices , vendor selection , etc .
In private businesses , I 've heard people come out and say they prefer one product over another based upon the receipt of stock options from their favorite vendor .
But its my understanding that in a public entity this could lead to jail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Approach this from an ethics point of view.
While I've never worked in the public sector, my understanding is that they have much stricter policies and laws governing conflicts of interest, fair bidding practices, vendor selection, etc.
In private businesses, I've heard people come out and say they prefer one product over another based upon the receipt of stock options from their favorite vendor.
But its my understanding that in a public entity this could lead to jail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359754</id>
	<title>Public Funding</title>
	<author>hercubus</author>
	<datestamp>1267726620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We're also publicly funded around here and very Microsoft-centric.  In a perfect world we could mix and match MS products, Linux environments, and FOSS applications according to needs and preferences.
<p>
Unfortunately, the reality is that our IT support folks have little experience outside of MS products.  Getting them training and experience would not be without cost.  Any interoperability issues that came up would not be without cost.  Those "extra" costs are going to be frowned on in a publicly funded organization - we're supposed to be frugal with the taxpayer's money<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
</p><p>
Bottom line, everybody here is going to have an MS desktop.  Most of the servers are going to be running MS.  It would be difficult for our management to compare the cost of paying MS licenses versus the cost of any disruptions that might come up from switching over to FOSS.  They're going to push their thumb down hard on the scale when it comes to weighing disruptions.  As in any bureaucracy in the USA, the slightest hint of "trouble" is like throwing a bucket of chum into the shark-tank.  Can you really blame someone for not wanting to chum the waters and then dive right in?
</p><p>
On a positive note, we do have a couple of Linux servers for databases and web servers.  The IT folks are getting used to them - they don't have to patch, reboot or otherwise fiddle with them as much as they do the MS servers.  As others have pointed out, that kind of organic growth is productive over the long term.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're also publicly funded around here and very Microsoft-centric .
In a perfect world we could mix and match MS products , Linux environments , and FOSS applications according to needs and preferences .
Unfortunately , the reality is that our IT support folks have little experience outside of MS products .
Getting them training and experience would not be without cost .
Any interoperability issues that came up would not be without cost .
Those " extra " costs are going to be frowned on in a publicly funded organization - we 're supposed to be frugal with the taxpayer 's money : ) Bottom line , everybody here is going to have an MS desktop .
Most of the servers are going to be running MS. It would be difficult for our management to compare the cost of paying MS licenses versus the cost of any disruptions that might come up from switching over to FOSS .
They 're going to push their thumb down hard on the scale when it comes to weighing disruptions .
As in any bureaucracy in the USA , the slightest hint of " trouble " is like throwing a bucket of chum into the shark-tank .
Can you really blame someone for not wanting to chum the waters and then dive right in ?
On a positive note , we do have a couple of Linux servers for databases and web servers .
The IT folks are getting used to them - they do n't have to patch , reboot or otherwise fiddle with them as much as they do the MS servers .
As others have pointed out , that kind of organic growth is productive over the long term .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're also publicly funded around here and very Microsoft-centric.
In a perfect world we could mix and match MS products, Linux environments, and FOSS applications according to needs and preferences.
Unfortunately, the reality is that our IT support folks have little experience outside of MS products.
Getting them training and experience would not be without cost.
Any interoperability issues that came up would not be without cost.
Those "extra" costs are going to be frowned on in a publicly funded organization - we're supposed to be frugal with the taxpayer's money :)

Bottom line, everybody here is going to have an MS desktop.
Most of the servers are going to be running MS.  It would be difficult for our management to compare the cost of paying MS licenses versus the cost of any disruptions that might come up from switching over to FOSS.
They're going to push their thumb down hard on the scale when it comes to weighing disruptions.
As in any bureaucracy in the USA, the slightest hint of "trouble" is like throwing a bucket of chum into the shark-tank.
Can you really blame someone for not wanting to chum the waters and then dive right in?
On a positive note, we do have a couple of Linux servers for databases and web servers.
The IT folks are getting used to them - they don't have to patch, reboot or otherwise fiddle with them as much as they do the MS servers.
As others have pointed out, that kind of organic growth is productive over the long term.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359016</id>
	<title>Do Your Job</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1267723740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do your job. Do it well. Advance. Get into a position of influence and authority. Change the policies.<br> <br>
This isn't a war worth waging. You have to ask yourself if this is something worth losing your job over because that is what is possible if you stir things up. Sure, they may not fire you for "recommending non-Microsoft software" but, if you piss off and annoy enough people (or just the wrong person), they'll find a reason to let you go ("not being a team player", for example).<br> <br>
There are things worth stirring the pot over but this just isn't one of them. I agree with your general stance - government agencies being locked into Microsoft strikes me as a very bad idea - but it's not worth the fight. Just do your job and do it well, get promoted into a position of influence, and try to change policy when you're in a position to do so. Until then, pick your battles.<br> <br>
And, if you knew me, you'd find it hysterical that \_I\_ am suggesting not starting a fight over something...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do your job .
Do it well .
Advance. Get into a position of influence and authority .
Change the policies .
This is n't a war worth waging .
You have to ask yourself if this is something worth losing your job over because that is what is possible if you stir things up .
Sure , they may not fire you for " recommending non-Microsoft software " but , if you piss off and annoy enough people ( or just the wrong person ) , they 'll find a reason to let you go ( " not being a team player " , for example ) .
There are things worth stirring the pot over but this just is n't one of them .
I agree with your general stance - government agencies being locked into Microsoft strikes me as a very bad idea - but it 's not worth the fight .
Just do your job and do it well , get promoted into a position of influence , and try to change policy when you 're in a position to do so .
Until then , pick your battles .
And , if you knew me , you 'd find it hysterical that \ _I \ _ am suggesting not starting a fight over something... : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do your job.
Do it well.
Advance. Get into a position of influence and authority.
Change the policies.
This isn't a war worth waging.
You have to ask yourself if this is something worth losing your job over because that is what is possible if you stir things up.
Sure, they may not fire you for "recommending non-Microsoft software" but, if you piss off and annoy enough people (or just the wrong person), they'll find a reason to let you go ("not being a team player", for example).
There are things worth stirring the pot over but this just isn't one of them.
I agree with your general stance - government agencies being locked into Microsoft strikes me as a very bad idea - but it's not worth the fight.
Just do your job and do it well, get promoted into a position of influence, and try to change policy when you're in a position to do so.
Until then, pick your battles.
And, if you knew me, you'd find it hysterical that \_I\_ am suggesting not starting a fight over something... :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359830</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't you get it, anyone with any degree of intelligence will dedicate his life to memorizing arcane horseshit that some "hacker" in the 70s thought was a clever joke.  That's how computers are supposed to be.  This focus on usability is for sheeple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you get it , anyone with any degree of intelligence will dedicate his life to memorizing arcane horseshit that some " hacker " in the 70s thought was a clever joke .
That 's how computers are supposed to be .
This focus on usability is for sheeple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you get it, anyone with any degree of intelligence will dedicate his life to memorizing arcane horseshit that some "hacker" in the 70s thought was a clever joke.
That's how computers are supposed to be.
This focus on usability is for sheeple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359218</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358878</id>
	<title>Happened here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A few years ago my department was an "IBM shop". The managers dismissed any other technology (Sun, Linux, HP) because IBM was our strategy.</p><p>It was miserable. We ended up buying anything IBM branded. We paid millions for Tivoli, pSeries, IBM branded storage, IBM everything. In hindsight it cost a lot for not a lot of return. In fact, going with the biggest vendor means that you pay the most because they have no reason to work with you. It was this arrogance on the part of IBM that made us look at other technologies.</p><p>The idiot managers and decision makers that actually say anything like "we are a ----- shop" are pawns of that vendor's sales people.</p><p>These sorts of folks should be reported to the Ethics department. Blind adherence to a vendor probably even violates some laws. At the very least it's financially irresponsible to align completely with a single vendor. At the worst it's an ethics or violation of duty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A few years ago my department was an " IBM shop " .
The managers dismissed any other technology ( Sun , Linux , HP ) because IBM was our strategy.It was miserable .
We ended up buying anything IBM branded .
We paid millions for Tivoli , pSeries , IBM branded storage , IBM everything .
In hindsight it cost a lot for not a lot of return .
In fact , going with the biggest vendor means that you pay the most because they have no reason to work with you .
It was this arrogance on the part of IBM that made us look at other technologies.The idiot managers and decision makers that actually say anything like " we are a ----- shop " are pawns of that vendor 's sales people.These sorts of folks should be reported to the Ethics department .
Blind adherence to a vendor probably even violates some laws .
At the very least it 's financially irresponsible to align completely with a single vendor .
At the worst it 's an ethics or violation of duty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few years ago my department was an "IBM shop".
The managers dismissed any other technology (Sun, Linux, HP) because IBM was our strategy.It was miserable.
We ended up buying anything IBM branded.
We paid millions for Tivoli, pSeries, IBM branded storage, IBM everything.
In hindsight it cost a lot for not a lot of return.
In fact, going with the biggest vendor means that you pay the most because they have no reason to work with you.
It was this arrogance on the part of IBM that made us look at other technologies.The idiot managers and decision makers that actually say anything like "we are a ----- shop" are pawns of that vendor's sales people.These sorts of folks should be reported to the Ethics department.
Blind adherence to a vendor probably even violates some laws.
At the very least it's financially irresponsible to align completely with a single vendor.
At the worst it's an ethics or violation of duty.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360916</id>
	<title>IE vs. IE</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1267732200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>NO, the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.</p></div><p>But are the corporate management tools for IE 6 better than those for IE 8?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NO , the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.But are the corporate management tools for IE 6 better than those for IE 8 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NO, the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.But are the corporate management tools for IE 6 better than those for IE 8?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359854</id>
	<title>Re:Champion Team vs Team of Champions</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1267727100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with that approach is that it puts too high a barrier on change. If standardization becomes more important to you than doing things correctly, you end up with areas where you can't improve because the required approach is 'all' or 'nothing'. A better approach is managed 'non-standard' software, processs, etc, where you support a slow changeover, or even FSM forbid, using the best solution in the best situation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with that approach is that it puts too high a barrier on change .
If standardization becomes more important to you than doing things correctly , you end up with areas where you ca n't improve because the required approach is 'all ' or 'nothing' .
A better approach is managed 'non-standard ' software , processs , etc , where you support a slow changeover , or even FSM forbid , using the best solution in the best situation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with that approach is that it puts too high a barrier on change.
If standardization becomes more important to you than doing things correctly, you end up with areas where you can't improve because the required approach is 'all' or 'nothing'.
A better approach is managed 'non-standard' software, processs, etc, where you support a slow changeover, or even FSM forbid, using the best solution in the best situation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360164</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267728360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i know this is a little elitist but i find that barrier to entry of command line environments almost reassuring, any idiot can click around a gui and just about get by, or even screw something up completely, it's harder to do something wrong in a command line unless you're being fed misinformation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i know this is a little elitist but i find that barrier to entry of command line environments almost reassuring , any idiot can click around a gui and just about get by , or even screw something up completely , it 's harder to do something wrong in a command line unless you 're being fed misinformation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i know this is a little elitist but i find that barrier to entry of command line environments almost reassuring, any idiot can click around a gui and just about get by, or even screw something up completely, it's harder to do something wrong in a command line unless you're being fed misinformation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359218</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362834</id>
	<title>Biomedical Tech can help you point out the stupid.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267698120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of the biomedical equipment in the hospital runs on a hodge-podge of platforms, with the predominance of maintenance and calibration software running under Windows. You want something real easy to ask your top-dog about why using Windows exclusevely sucks? Because your radiology department, if it is digital, is most likely running Solaris to store, view, and produce the images from your CR plate readers. Siemens, Phillips, Matsushita, they run linux/unix variants to produce your radiographic imaging. And the doctors are blind without diagnostic imaging. Does your MRI, CT, run Windows? These are pretty important departments being screwed over, to be making a blanket "No anti-windows talkie talkie" statement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the biomedical equipment in the hospital runs on a hodge-podge of platforms , with the predominance of maintenance and calibration software running under Windows .
You want something real easy to ask your top-dog about why using Windows exclusevely sucks ?
Because your radiology department , if it is digital , is most likely running Solaris to store , view , and produce the images from your CR plate readers .
Siemens , Phillips , Matsushita , they run linux/unix variants to produce your radiographic imaging .
And the doctors are blind without diagnostic imaging .
Does your MRI , CT , run Windows ?
These are pretty important departments being screwed over , to be making a blanket " No anti-windows talkie talkie " statement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the biomedical equipment in the hospital runs on a hodge-podge of platforms, with the predominance of maintenance and calibration software running under Windows.
You want something real easy to ask your top-dog about why using Windows exclusevely sucks?
Because your radiology department, if it is digital, is most likely running Solaris to store, view, and produce the images from your CR plate readers.
Siemens, Phillips, Matsushita, they run linux/unix variants to produce your radiographic imaging.
And the doctors are blind without diagnostic imaging.
Does your MRI, CT, run Windows?
These are pretty important departments being screwed over, to be making a blanket "No anti-windows talkie talkie" statement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360346</id>
	<title>So what flavor is it?</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1267729380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows NT/2K/XP/Vista/7?
</p><p>Com/ActiveX/.net
</p><p>Need I go on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows NT/2K/XP/Vista/7 ?
Com/ActiveX/.net Need I go on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows NT/2K/XP/Vista/7?
Com/ActiveX/.net
Need I go on?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366804</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1267720980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This would be a lot funnier if it wasn't posted verbatim, in forum after forum, month after month. Think up a new joke!</p></div><p>No need. It remains pure comedy gold.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This would be a lot funnier if it was n't posted verbatim , in forum after forum , month after month .
Think up a new joke ! No need .
It remains pure comedy gold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would be a lot funnier if it wasn't posted verbatim, in forum after forum, month after month.
Think up a new joke!No need.
It remains pure comedy gold.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359358</id>
	<title>One word: Compliance</title>
	<author>mrmagos</author>
	<datestamp>1267725180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've worked IT for a health organization before. They're probably mandating this because whatever they've implemented to comply with HIPAA and/or other regulations is dependent on AD and Group Policy. I can tell you from experience that if you're operating on a limited budget and are already running and AD/Exchange environment, you don't have to spend any extra money to become HIPAA compliant. However, that does lock you in to using MS products, since they're the only ones (easily) supported by GP. Could other operating systems and software be introduced and still be compliant? Of course, but that would add administrative overhead supporting and auditing those systems and applications that fall outside control of your AD/GP domain.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've worked IT for a health organization before .
They 're probably mandating this because whatever they 've implemented to comply with HIPAA and/or other regulations is dependent on AD and Group Policy .
I can tell you from experience that if you 're operating on a limited budget and are already running and AD/Exchange environment , you do n't have to spend any extra money to become HIPAA compliant .
However , that does lock you in to using MS products , since they 're the only ones ( easily ) supported by GP .
Could other operating systems and software be introduced and still be compliant ?
Of course , but that would add administrative overhead supporting and auditing those systems and applications that fall outside control of your AD/GP domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've worked IT for a health organization before.
They're probably mandating this because whatever they've implemented to comply with HIPAA and/or other regulations is dependent on AD and Group Policy.
I can tell you from experience that if you're operating on a limited budget and are already running and AD/Exchange environment, you don't have to spend any extra money to become HIPAA compliant.
However, that does lock you in to using MS products, since they're the only ones (easily) supported by GP.
Could other operating systems and software be introduced and still be compliant?
Of course, but that would add administrative overhead supporting and auditing those systems and applications that fall outside control of your AD/GP domain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360174</id>
	<title>I've seen this too</title>
	<author>koan</author>
	<datestamp>1267728420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried to get a community college to switch over to Linux based systems strictly for their image libraries (pictures used in classrooms) because their aging slide projectors were going the way of the dinosaur, I had a nice tidy system set up using Gallery 2, it was fast, efficient and cost *nothing*, the other program they were looking at was $40K, with no support.<br>When I brought up the switch to the IT team at the school the head guy broke into a rage, was literally frothing at the mouth in outrage "there's no way we will do that".<br>Basically it translate to this for these guys  "I'm old, I don't want to learn anything new, and as long as I have a M$ product I have someone else to blame" and of course, a healthy spoonful of fear of the unknown (that being Linux).<br>The seat licenses and software for M$ based systems is a huge part of their yearly budget, to bad they can't see any other way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried to get a community college to switch over to Linux based systems strictly for their image libraries ( pictures used in classrooms ) because their aging slide projectors were going the way of the dinosaur , I had a nice tidy system set up using Gallery 2 , it was fast , efficient and cost * nothing * , the other program they were looking at was $ 40K , with no support.When I brought up the switch to the IT team at the school the head guy broke into a rage , was literally frothing at the mouth in outrage " there 's no way we will do that " .Basically it translate to this for these guys " I 'm old , I do n't want to learn anything new , and as long as I have a M $ product I have someone else to blame " and of course , a healthy spoonful of fear of the unknown ( that being Linux ) .The seat licenses and software for M $ based systems is a huge part of their yearly budget , to bad they ca n't see any other way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried to get a community college to switch over to Linux based systems strictly for their image libraries (pictures used in classrooms) because their aging slide projectors were going the way of the dinosaur, I had a nice tidy system set up using Gallery 2, it was fast, efficient and cost *nothing*, the other program they were looking at was $40K, with no support.When I brought up the switch to the IT team at the school the head guy broke into a rage, was literally frothing at the mouth in outrage "there's no way we will do that".Basically it translate to this for these guys  "I'm old, I don't want to learn anything new, and as long as I have a M$ product I have someone else to blame" and of course, a healthy spoonful of fear of the unknown (that being Linux).The seat licenses and software for M$ based systems is a huge part of their yearly budget, to bad they can't see any other way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359718</id>
	<title>Decision was made, move on</title>
	<author>Rastl</author>
	<datestamp>1267726440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unless you have a real shot at making any changes just let it go.  The decision seems to have come down from the top and any time for your input (assuming it would be accepted) is long past.  As has been said you need to pick your battles.</p><p>If you're involved in a project that can be better served by something out of the FOSS community then you have some kind of chance at making a change.  Otherwise you're just being a pain in everyone's [insert anatomical reference of choice] by complaining about a done decision.</p><p>My favorite way of getting past this sort of thing is summed up by "I put exactly as much emotional involvement into a situation as I have chance of changing it."  No chance to change?  Don't care.  It's kept me from ulcers and ill-timed outbursts.  I suggest you consider it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you have a real shot at making any changes just let it go .
The decision seems to have come down from the top and any time for your input ( assuming it would be accepted ) is long past .
As has been said you need to pick your battles.If you 're involved in a project that can be better served by something out of the FOSS community then you have some kind of chance at making a change .
Otherwise you 're just being a pain in everyone 's [ insert anatomical reference of choice ] by complaining about a done decision.My favorite way of getting past this sort of thing is summed up by " I put exactly as much emotional involvement into a situation as I have chance of changing it .
" No chance to change ?
Do n't care .
It 's kept me from ulcers and ill-timed outbursts .
I suggest you consider it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless you have a real shot at making any changes just let it go.
The decision seems to have come down from the top and any time for your input (assuming it would be accepted) is long past.
As has been said you need to pick your battles.If you're involved in a project that can be better served by something out of the FOSS community then you have some kind of chance at making a change.
Otherwise you're just being a pain in everyone's [insert anatomical reference of choice] by complaining about a done decision.My favorite way of getting past this sort of thing is summed up by "I put exactly as much emotional involvement into a situation as I have chance of changing it.
"  No chance to change?
Don't care.
It's kept me from ulcers and ill-timed outbursts.
I suggest you consider it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770</id>
	<title>Take it to the board</title>
	<author>Ropati</author>
	<datestamp>1267722900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the hospital is tax payer funded, then you have every right as a taxpayer to take this memo to the board.</p><p>I would suggest that you gather a number of like minded taxpayers (and voters) and make a visit to the board to explain your stance.</p><p>You might want to do some research and find that your IT director got a free beer (golf trip) out of this.  Fodder for the meeting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the hospital is tax payer funded , then you have every right as a taxpayer to take this memo to the board.I would suggest that you gather a number of like minded taxpayers ( and voters ) and make a visit to the board to explain your stance.You might want to do some research and find that your IT director got a free beer ( golf trip ) out of this .
Fodder for the meeting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the hospital is tax payer funded, then you have every right as a taxpayer to take this memo to the board.I would suggest that you gather a number of like minded taxpayers (and voters) and make a visit to the board to explain your stance.You might want to do some research and find that your IT director got a free beer (golf trip) out of this.
Fodder for the meeting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359772</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1267726740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not even a typical "MS shop" attitude. In the past, I worked in a company that's a "Microsoft Gold Certified Partner", and while MS products were predominant on the corpnet - AD, IIS, SharePoint, Exchange etc (because they came cheap with the deal, and did offer productivity improvements) - the company products itself were still only 50\%<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET-based, the other 50\% using Java/J2EE. We also had some on-site client hosting running Linux and, IIRC, Solaris for those Java projects.</p><p>Nor was there the kind of attitude displayed by email in TFS. I mean, sure, when you deal with customers, and you are on the team that works on a project written using MS-based tech, it's not exactly wise to criticize them, since you're effectively criticizing your product indirectly. And this isn't any different regardless of platform in question.</p><p>But in internal discussions, it was not a taboo subject at all. And even in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET projects, FOSS libraries were used where available for a given task (NHibernate, Castle, SharpZipLib - just to name a few).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not even a typical " MS shop " attitude .
In the past , I worked in a company that 's a " Microsoft Gold Certified Partner " , and while MS products were predominant on the corpnet - AD , IIS , SharePoint , Exchange etc ( because they came cheap with the deal , and did offer productivity improvements ) - the company products itself were still only 50 \ % .NET-based , the other 50 \ % using Java/J2EE .
We also had some on-site client hosting running Linux and , IIRC , Solaris for those Java projects.Nor was there the kind of attitude displayed by email in TFS .
I mean , sure , when you deal with customers , and you are on the team that works on a project written using MS-based tech , it 's not exactly wise to criticize them , since you 're effectively criticizing your product indirectly .
And this is n't any different regardless of platform in question.But in internal discussions , it was not a taboo subject at all .
And even in .NET projects , FOSS libraries were used where available for a given task ( NHibernate , Castle , SharpZipLib - just to name a few ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not even a typical "MS shop" attitude.
In the past, I worked in a company that's a "Microsoft Gold Certified Partner", and while MS products were predominant on the corpnet - AD, IIS, SharePoint, Exchange etc (because they came cheap with the deal, and did offer productivity improvements) - the company products itself were still only 50\% .NET-based, the other 50\% using Java/J2EE.
We also had some on-site client hosting running Linux and, IIRC, Solaris for those Java projects.Nor was there the kind of attitude displayed by email in TFS.
I mean, sure, when you deal with customers, and you are on the team that works on a project written using MS-based tech, it's not exactly wise to criticize them, since you're effectively criticizing your product indirectly.
And this isn't any different regardless of platform in question.But in internal discussions, it was not a taboo subject at all.
And even in .NET projects, FOSS libraries were used where available for a given task (NHibernate, Castle, SharpZipLib - just to name a few).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359034</id>
	<title>It's quite simple, really...</title>
	<author>ircmaxell</author>
	<datestamp>1267723800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Draft up a cool, collected, <b>reasonable</b> and complete summary of what open source software that you would like to see implemented and WHY you think it should be implemented.  You think firefox is a better solution?  Then put it in and say why.  Start with small, minor, easy and most importantly good solutions (When I say good, I mean one that has very little if any chance for difficulty...).  Firefox is a good example, because it's typically a drop in replacement, will be fast, and has little if any downsides.  Switching the email backbone from Exchange to an OS alternative is not a good first step.  Write this document, including any projected cost savings, and send it to the manager/director.  Include in the beginning of the email a blurb about basically "I know you said you don't want to here about open source.  I am just writing this so that I can clear my conscience about making proper recomendations.  This will be the last input from me unless I am specifically asked"...  Send it in.  If they do nothing, your conscience is clean since you did everything that was in your power to get the situation turned towards open source.  If they do something, then you win...  The bottom line is they get to make the decisions.  DON'T go around their backs, or they will just get pissed off at you and fire you (or worse).  DON'T try to belittle their experience (Don't go around screaming that "MS Sucks".  Instead pick and choose your battles, and show that the MS product is good, but this one is better!).  And most importantly don't overstep your own role... If you're a developer, start by asking for open source tools that will help make you personally more productive (and leave it there for a while).  If you're a sys-admin, start with tools that'll make you more productive, and show tools that will make your life easier and better (Such as the switch from IE to FF saving on the security front).  If you're a help desk worker, keep your ideas to your self...<br> <br>
Play the high road, and don't play the "But Microsoft sucks in comparison" card.  It won't work.  MS is big for a reason (And business guys tend to value company size over product quality anyway)...  Make them make the decisions...<br> <br>There's an old saying.  You can never go wrong, as long as you went with IBM.  Back in the 70's and 80's (when my Father was telling me stories about AT&amp;T), if you had a project to do and used IBM, and if failed, well that's just tough luck (It was seen that if IBM couldn't do it, it couldn't be done).  If you used an unknown, and it failed, the weight for the failure falls on you.  That's likely the mentality here (Substitute MS for IBM).  They know that there may be better alternatives, but they are just playing CYA...  Sure it'll cost more money, but they can "justify" the extra money as reason enough...
<br> <br>Just my $0.02</htmltext>
<tokenext>Draft up a cool , collected , reasonable and complete summary of what open source software that you would like to see implemented and WHY you think it should be implemented .
You think firefox is a better solution ?
Then put it in and say why .
Start with small , minor , easy and most importantly good solutions ( When I say good , I mean one that has very little if any chance for difficulty... ) .
Firefox is a good example , because it 's typically a drop in replacement , will be fast , and has little if any downsides .
Switching the email backbone from Exchange to an OS alternative is not a good first step .
Write this document , including any projected cost savings , and send it to the manager/director .
Include in the beginning of the email a blurb about basically " I know you said you do n't want to here about open source .
I am just writing this so that I can clear my conscience about making proper recomendations .
This will be the last input from me unless I am specifically asked " ... Send it in .
If they do nothing , your conscience is clean since you did everything that was in your power to get the situation turned towards open source .
If they do something , then you win... The bottom line is they get to make the decisions .
DO N'T go around their backs , or they will just get pissed off at you and fire you ( or worse ) .
DO N'T try to belittle their experience ( Do n't go around screaming that " MS Sucks " .
Instead pick and choose your battles , and show that the MS product is good , but this one is better ! ) .
And most importantly do n't overstep your own role... If you 're a developer , start by asking for open source tools that will help make you personally more productive ( and leave it there for a while ) .
If you 're a sys-admin , start with tools that 'll make you more productive , and show tools that will make your life easier and better ( Such as the switch from IE to FF saving on the security front ) .
If you 're a help desk worker , keep your ideas to your self.. . Play the high road , and do n't play the " But Microsoft sucks in comparison " card .
It wo n't work .
MS is big for a reason ( And business guys tend to value company size over product quality anyway ) ... Make them make the decisions... There 's an old saying .
You can never go wrong , as long as you went with IBM .
Back in the 70 's and 80 's ( when my Father was telling me stories about AT&amp;T ) , if you had a project to do and used IBM , and if failed , well that 's just tough luck ( It was seen that if IBM could n't do it , it could n't be done ) .
If you used an unknown , and it failed , the weight for the failure falls on you .
That 's likely the mentality here ( Substitute MS for IBM ) .
They know that there may be better alternatives , but they are just playing CYA... Sure it 'll cost more money , but they can " justify " the extra money as reason enough.. . Just my $ 0.02</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Draft up a cool, collected, reasonable and complete summary of what open source software that you would like to see implemented and WHY you think it should be implemented.
You think firefox is a better solution?
Then put it in and say why.
Start with small, minor, easy and most importantly good solutions (When I say good, I mean one that has very little if any chance for difficulty...).
Firefox is a good example, because it's typically a drop in replacement, will be fast, and has little if any downsides.
Switching the email backbone from Exchange to an OS alternative is not a good first step.
Write this document, including any projected cost savings, and send it to the manager/director.
Include in the beginning of the email a blurb about basically "I know you said you don't want to here about open source.
I am just writing this so that I can clear my conscience about making proper recomendations.
This will be the last input from me unless I am specifically asked"...  Send it in.
If they do nothing, your conscience is clean since you did everything that was in your power to get the situation turned towards open source.
If they do something, then you win...  The bottom line is they get to make the decisions.
DON'T go around their backs, or they will just get pissed off at you and fire you (or worse).
DON'T try to belittle their experience (Don't go around screaming that "MS Sucks".
Instead pick and choose your battles, and show that the MS product is good, but this one is better!).
And most importantly don't overstep your own role... If you're a developer, start by asking for open source tools that will help make you personally more productive (and leave it there for a while).
If you're a sys-admin, start with tools that'll make you more productive, and show tools that will make your life easier and better (Such as the switch from IE to FF saving on the security front).
If you're a help desk worker, keep your ideas to your self... 
Play the high road, and don't play the "But Microsoft sucks in comparison" card.
It won't work.
MS is big for a reason (And business guys tend to value company size over product quality anyway)...  Make them make the decisions... There's an old saying.
You can never go wrong, as long as you went with IBM.
Back in the 70's and 80's (when my Father was telling me stories about AT&amp;T), if you had a project to do and used IBM, and if failed, well that's just tough luck (It was seen that if IBM couldn't do it, it couldn't be done).
If you used an unknown, and it failed, the weight for the failure falls on you.
That's likely the mentality here (Substitute MS for IBM).
They know that there may be better alternatives, but they are just playing CYA...  Sure it'll cost more money, but they can "justify" the extra money as reason enough...
 Just my $0.02</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359524</id>
	<title>Re:Make noise politically</title>
	<author>uassholes</author>
	<datestamp>1267725780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Assuming they're not in the pocket of MS already</p></div><p> <b>
They are.</b></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming they 're not in the pocket of MS already They are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming they're not in the pocket of MS already 
They are.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361180</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>sammcj</author>
	<datestamp>1267733460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Great comment.
Thank you for your input, Definitely taken that onboard.

We tried to launch a pilot to run a wiki-based knowledge base for the techs and service desk, it was knee-capped by several people saying 'Use sharepoint, that's a great alternative to a wiki'.
They failed to understand:

-The difference between the way Sharepoint and Wikimedia works
-The fact that we don't need specialized 'sharepoint developers' to work on the system
-The fact that the sharepoint implementation we already have is a slow, cumbersome beast that lacks customization and portability.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Great comment .
Thank you for your input , Definitely taken that onboard .
We tried to launch a pilot to run a wiki-based knowledge base for the techs and service desk , it was knee-capped by several people saying 'Use sharepoint , that 's a great alternative to a wiki' .
They failed to understand : -The difference between the way Sharepoint and Wikimedia works -The fact that we do n't need specialized 'sharepoint developers ' to work on the system -The fact that the sharepoint implementation we already have is a slow , cumbersome beast that lacks customization and portability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great comment.
Thank you for your input, Definitely taken that onboard.
We tried to launch a pilot to run a wiki-based knowledge base for the techs and service desk, it was knee-capped by several people saying 'Use sharepoint, that's a great alternative to a wiki'.
They failed to understand:

-The difference between the way Sharepoint and Wikimedia works
-The fact that we don't need specialized 'sharepoint developers' to work on the system
-The fact that the sharepoint implementation we already have is a slow, cumbersome beast that lacks customization and portability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>ryanov</author>
	<datestamp>1267723260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The command line is a fine interface, and if you're not a jackass, it's much quicker than hunting through any set of menus.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The command line is a fine interface , and if you 're not a jackass , it 's much quicker than hunting through any set of menus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The command line is a fine interface, and if you're not a jackass, it's much quicker than hunting through any set of menus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359020</id>
	<title>I think I know your boss...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is your company based in Marriottsville, MD, by chance?  If so, I used to work for your CIO. He's on the take.</p><p>Don't worry, he'll be gone in a few years.  That's his MO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is your company based in Marriottsville , MD , by chance ?
If so , I used to work for your CIO .
He 's on the take.Do n't worry , he 'll be gone in a few years .
That 's his MO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is your company based in Marriottsville, MD, by chance?
If so, I used to work for your CIO.
He's on the take.Don't worry, he'll be gone in a few years.
That's his MO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31365348</id>
	<title>Expertise and Perception</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267709640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure this will be modded flamebait if it's modded at all, but... The decision is most likely due to the perception that properly managed Microsoft networks are more secure than most Linux networks. Especially if the organization has traditionally focused on hiring IT staff that has more experience with MS networks then why wouldn't they make this decision? If all workstations are Windows and are domain-controlled with a well thought out policy then it's much more likely to be secure than one whose servers are Linux-based. Now, as for the decision to go IE only, that is probably due to ease of integration with Active Directory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure this will be modded flamebait if it 's modded at all , but... The decision is most likely due to the perception that properly managed Microsoft networks are more secure than most Linux networks .
Especially if the organization has traditionally focused on hiring IT staff that has more experience with MS networks then why would n't they make this decision ?
If all workstations are Windows and are domain-controlled with a well thought out policy then it 's much more likely to be secure than one whose servers are Linux-based .
Now , as for the decision to go IE only , that is probably due to ease of integration with Active Directory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure this will be modded flamebait if it's modded at all, but... The decision is most likely due to the perception that properly managed Microsoft networks are more secure than most Linux networks.
Especially if the organization has traditionally focused on hiring IT staff that has more experience with MS networks then why wouldn't they make this decision?
If all workstations are Windows and are domain-controlled with a well thought out policy then it's much more likely to be secure than one whose servers are Linux-based.
Now, as for the decision to go IE only, that is probably due to ease of integration with Active Directory.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359634</id>
	<title>US Government is a MS shop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would also throw in IBM, CA, and Oracle. Why, because it's IT shops are runned by people who simply can blame someone else if things go wrong. Simply put, IT management lacks the courage and will to be good at what they do. Those companies know that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would also throw in IBM , CA , and Oracle .
Why , because it 's IT shops are runned by people who simply can blame someone else if things go wrong .
Simply put , IT management lacks the courage and will to be good at what they do .
Those companies know that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would also throw in IBM, CA, and Oracle.
Why, because it's IT shops are runned by people who simply can blame someone else if things go wrong.
Simply put, IT management lacks the courage and will to be good at what they do.
Those companies know that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359456</id>
	<title>Outraged?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267725480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You really should get out more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You really should get out more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You really should get out more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361296</id>
	<title>Re:Champion Team vs Team of Champions</title>
	<author>umghhh</author>
	<datestamp>1267734060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Standard!=windoze</htmltext>
<tokenext>Standard ! = windoze</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Standard!=windoze</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359044</id>
	<title>Don't you?</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1267723860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Now, I could somewhat understand this if I was working in a company that<br>&gt; sold and promoted the use of Microsoft software for financial gain...</p><p>Sounds rather like you do (the question is, whose financial gain?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Now , I could somewhat understand this if I was working in a company that &gt; sold and promoted the use of Microsoft software for financial gain...Sounds rather like you do ( the question is , whose financial gain ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Now, I could somewhat understand this if I was working in a company that&gt; sold and promoted the use of Microsoft software for financial gain...Sounds rather like you do (the question is, whose financial gain?
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1267725840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can think of at least one reason why this would be policy, HIPAA. It is not very hard to get a Windows Domain to not allow IE on any computer in the Domain to go to sites that would allow people to violate HIPAA. It may be possible to do with Firefox, but not as easily (I've never needed to restrict Firefox on a Domain wide basis, so I don't know how hard it would be, but the techniques that lock down IE don't lock down Firefox).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can think of at least one reason why this would be policy , HIPAA .
It is not very hard to get a Windows Domain to not allow IE on any computer in the Domain to go to sites that would allow people to violate HIPAA .
It may be possible to do with Firefox , but not as easily ( I 've never needed to restrict Firefox on a Domain wide basis , so I do n't know how hard it would be , but the techniques that lock down IE do n't lock down Firefox ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can think of at least one reason why this would be policy, HIPAA.
It is not very hard to get a Windows Domain to not allow IE on any computer in the Domain to go to sites that would allow people to violate HIPAA.
It may be possible to do with Firefox, but not as easily (I've never needed to restrict Firefox on a Domain wide basis, so I don't know how hard it would be, but the techniques that lock down IE don't lock down Firefox).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31371016</id>
	<title>That's not a strategy....</title>
	<author>Maxwell</author>
	<datestamp>1267804800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The msft cost is probably amost free. They like lockin that way, until you have everything, then you get to pay full price.</p><p>In health care the individual departments often buy their own PC's (and pay for support)</p><p>The sad part here is that Microsoft has convinced most of IT that going with all Microsoft stack is an 'IT strategy'.  They have succesfully perverted the entire 'business strategy aligns wtih IT strategy' that IT has been working for the last few decades. I see no need for the CIO of this organization to be 'at the table' when major business decisions are being made. After all, the IT 'strategy' is already set, right? No need for updating of for any correlation to the business strategy, ever.</p><p>The clowns running this organization should be ashaed of themselves for making such a clueless statement. Then again, welcome to public healthcare....</p><p>Do some basic research on IT strategy (hint: look for a pyramid shaped thingy) and ask the masters how 'windows shop' aligns with Business goals? Watch them struggle with the basic concepts....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The msft cost is probably amost free .
They like lockin that way , until you have everything , then you get to pay full price.In health care the individual departments often buy their own PC 's ( and pay for support ) The sad part here is that Microsoft has convinced most of IT that going with all Microsoft stack is an 'IT strategy' .
They have succesfully perverted the entire 'business strategy aligns wtih IT strategy ' that IT has been working for the last few decades .
I see no need for the CIO of this organization to be 'at the table ' when major business decisions are being made .
After all , the IT 'strategy ' is already set , right ?
No need for updating of for any correlation to the business strategy , ever.The clowns running this organization should be ashaed of themselves for making such a clueless statement .
Then again , welcome to public healthcare....Do some basic research on IT strategy ( hint : look for a pyramid shaped thingy ) and ask the masters how 'windows shop ' aligns with Business goals ?
Watch them struggle with the basic concepts... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The msft cost is probably amost free.
They like lockin that way, until you have everything, then you get to pay full price.In health care the individual departments often buy their own PC's (and pay for support)The sad part here is that Microsoft has convinced most of IT that going with all Microsoft stack is an 'IT strategy'.
They have succesfully perverted the entire 'business strategy aligns wtih IT strategy' that IT has been working for the last few decades.
I see no need for the CIO of this organization to be 'at the table' when major business decisions are being made.
After all, the IT 'strategy' is already set, right?
No need for updating of for any correlation to the business strategy, ever.The clowns running this organization should be ashaed of themselves for making such a clueless statement.
Then again, welcome to public healthcare....Do some basic research on IT strategy (hint: look for a pyramid shaped thingy) and ask the masters how 'windows shop' aligns with Business goals?
Watch them struggle with the basic concepts....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360062</id>
	<title>Re:Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I could not agree more with parent, this guy needs more than a "4 - interesting" !</p><p>I completely agree: techies like to explore new technologies, and are often less interested in documenting, procedures, flexible architectures and low tco.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could not agree more with parent , this guy needs more than a " 4 - interesting " ! I completely agree : techies like to explore new technologies , and are often less interested in documenting , procedures , flexible architectures and low tco .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I could not agree more with parent, this guy needs more than a "4 - interesting" !I completely agree: techies like to explore new technologies, and are often less interested in documenting, procedures, flexible architectures and low tco.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363150</id>
	<title>Is this a New Zealand DHB?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267699200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Ministry of Justice released an Open Source adoption paper in 2008. Grab it from here http://research.elabs.govt.nz/ministry-of-justice-open-source-adoption-paper/</p><p>Also see http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/spec/446B512F34E476C0CC25749000796965</p><p>The NZ Open Source Society is also running a Public Sector Remix project with 14 govt. agencies. I believe that the Ministry of Health declined an invitation to participate: not a positive signal to DHB's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Ministry of Justice released an Open Source adoption paper in 2008 .
Grab it from here http : //research.elabs.govt.nz/ministry-of-justice-open-source-adoption-paper/Also see http : //computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/spec/446B512F34E476C0CC25749000796965The NZ Open Source Society is also running a Public Sector Remix project with 14 govt .
agencies. I believe that the Ministry of Health declined an invitation to participate : not a positive signal to DHB 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Ministry of Justice released an Open Source adoption paper in 2008.
Grab it from here http://research.elabs.govt.nz/ministry-of-justice-open-source-adoption-paper/Also see http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/spec/446B512F34E476C0CC25749000796965The NZ Open Source Society is also running a Public Sector Remix project with 14 govt.
agencies. I believe that the Ministry of Health declined an invitation to participate: not a positive signal to DHB's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358880</id>
	<title>Chicken Butt?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your mom is cheaper than a $5 crack whore.</p><p>Sorry but it's true. You could spend thousands of hours massaging her 'interface,' or get a better whore that does it all for you.</p><p>There's a reason your mom can't get laid even though she puts out for free: the venereal diseases you'll get from her will cost more in the long run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your mom is cheaper than a $ 5 crack whore.Sorry but it 's true .
You could spend thousands of hours massaging her 'interface, ' or get a better whore that does it all for you.There 's a reason your mom ca n't get laid even though she puts out for free : the venereal diseases you 'll get from her will cost more in the long run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your mom is cheaper than a $5 crack whore.Sorry but it's true.
You could spend thousands of hours massaging her 'interface,' or get a better whore that does it all for you.There's a reason your mom can't get laid even though she puts out for free: the venereal diseases you'll get from her will cost more in the long run.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360614</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267730760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Soooo...you "simply want solutions that work..."</p><p>No problem.  Start here:</p><p>http://linuxmednews.com/</p><p>Continue with such items as: OpenEMR, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Soooo...you " simply want solutions that work... " No problem .
Start here : http : //linuxmednews.com/Continue with such items as : OpenEMR , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soooo...you "simply want solutions that work..."No problem.
Start here:http://linuxmednews.com/Continue with such items as: OpenEMR, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31367810</id>
	<title>Collective responsibility vs individual "rights"</title>
	<author>PensivePeter</author>
	<datestamp>1267729140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is nothing objectionable about a public authority insisting that all users respect the chosen technology platform. In any other area except technology, the insistence of a group of users to do what they damned well pleased, would be grounds for dismissal - "No, I'm gonna write everything in gold ink on black paper and send messages on heart shaped post-it notes". Even in other aspects of technology use, such an attitude would be unacceptable - " I don't give a fuck about your 11 by 8in paper formats, I'm gonna print everything on A3 and insist on having a printer and supplies to back up my 'right'. Screw you". No, dear user - screw you. If you don't like the idea of belonging to an organisation, with organisational policies and rules, go and work somewhere where you can spread your wings and exercise your desired freedom...</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is nothing objectionable about a public authority insisting that all users respect the chosen technology platform .
In any other area except technology , the insistence of a group of users to do what they damned well pleased , would be grounds for dismissal - " No , I 'm gon na write everything in gold ink on black paper and send messages on heart shaped post-it notes " .
Even in other aspects of technology use , such an attitude would be unacceptable - " I do n't give a fuck about your 11 by 8in paper formats , I 'm gon na print everything on A3 and insist on having a printer and supplies to back up my 'right' .
Screw you " .
No , dear user - screw you .
If you do n't like the idea of belonging to an organisation , with organisational policies and rules , go and work somewhere where you can spread your wings and exercise your desired freedom.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is nothing objectionable about a public authority insisting that all users respect the chosen technology platform.
In any other area except technology, the insistence of a group of users to do what they damned well pleased, would be grounds for dismissal - "No, I'm gonna write everything in gold ink on black paper and send messages on heart shaped post-it notes".
Even in other aspects of technology use, such an attitude would be unacceptable - " I don't give a fuck about your 11 by 8in paper formats, I'm gonna print everything on A3 and insist on having a printer and supplies to back up my 'right'.
Screw you".
No, dear user - screw you.
If you don't like the idea of belonging to an organisation, with organisational policies and rules, go and work somewhere where you can spread your wings and exercise your desired freedom...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360600</id>
	<title>Re:Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>gad\_zuki!</author>
	<datestamp>1267730700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;YES, most exploits are written to take advantage of IE (or, rather, its various bloat that accumulates).NO, the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.</p><p>Exactly true. At my old job I had everything mostly locked down and everyone used IE.  At my current place, because of policies and politics, the users have slightly more freedom and in exchange they get to use Firefox.  We've had 3 or 4 drive by fakeAV installs in the past two weeks.  Firefox doesnt magically protect slightly out of date flash players or stupid users being fooled by DHMTL pages that look like AV warnings.  The idea that FF is this magical panacea is overstating the fact.</p><p>Id much rather have an IE only shop where the users are running as 'users' instead of a Firefox only shop where they are 'power users' (with lots of rights taken away) or *gasp* local admins. What you can do easily in group policy with IE is worth it. Not to mention, IE7 and IE8 are pretty decent browsers considering.  I think the IE strawman is built from the old IE6 days.</p><p>That said, obviously a compltely locked down environment is the best way to go, but I want to challenge the idea that FF is suddenly going to perform this holistic change and protect users from themselves. It wont.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; YES , most exploits are written to take advantage of IE ( or , rather , its various bloat that accumulates ) .NO , the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.Exactly true .
At my old job I had everything mostly locked down and everyone used IE .
At my current place , because of policies and politics , the users have slightly more freedom and in exchange they get to use Firefox .
We 've had 3 or 4 drive by fakeAV installs in the past two weeks .
Firefox doesnt magically protect slightly out of date flash players or stupid users being fooled by DHMTL pages that look like AV warnings .
The idea that FF is this magical panacea is overstating the fact.Id much rather have an IE only shop where the users are running as 'users ' instead of a Firefox only shop where they are 'power users ' ( with lots of rights taken away ) or * gasp * local admins .
What you can do easily in group policy with IE is worth it .
Not to mention , IE7 and IE8 are pretty decent browsers considering .
I think the IE strawman is built from the old IE6 days.That said , obviously a compltely locked down environment is the best way to go , but I want to challenge the idea that FF is suddenly going to perform this holistic change and protect users from themselves .
It wont .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;YES, most exploits are written to take advantage of IE (or, rather, its various bloat that accumulates).NO, the corporate management tools for Firefox are in no way comparable to what is commercially available to IE.Exactly true.
At my old job I had everything mostly locked down and everyone used IE.
At my current place, because of policies and politics, the users have slightly more freedom and in exchange they get to use Firefox.
We've had 3 or 4 drive by fakeAV installs in the past two weeks.
Firefox doesnt magically protect slightly out of date flash players or stupid users being fooled by DHMTL pages that look like AV warnings.
The idea that FF is this magical panacea is overstating the fact.Id much rather have an IE only shop where the users are running as 'users' instead of a Firefox only shop where they are 'power users' (with lots of rights taken away) or *gasp* local admins.
What you can do easily in group policy with IE is worth it.
Not to mention, IE7 and IE8 are pretty decent browsers considering.
I think the IE strawman is built from the old IE6 days.That said, obviously a compltely locked down environment is the best way to go, but I want to challenge the idea that FF is suddenly going to perform this holistic change and protect users from themselves.
It wont.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359814</id>
	<title>Boycott the hospital!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you get a knife wound or get hit by a car, ask the ambulance to take you to ANOTHER hospital.   That'll show 'em!<br>A try to moan "Linux" through the pain, although I wouldn't try to moan "Open Source" because medics think you're saying "Open Sores" and will move you around looking for missing bandages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you get a knife wound or get hit by a car , ask the ambulance to take you to ANOTHER hospital .
That 'll show 'em ! A try to moan " Linux " through the pain , although I would n't try to moan " Open Source " because medics think you 're saying " Open Sores " and will move you around looking for missing bandages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you get a knife wound or get hit by a car, ask the ambulance to take you to ANOTHER hospital.
That'll show 'em!A try to moan "Linux" through the pain, although I wouldn't try to moan "Open Source" because medics think you're saying "Open Sores" and will move you around looking for missing bandages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358926</id>
	<title>When in doubt...</title>
	<author>Mantis8</author>
	<datestamp>1267723440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It usually boils down to money and politics.<br> <br>

Somebody somewhere in the upper mgmt area must be getting some kind of kickback or pat on the back, for being so pro-Microsoft (despite the cost of licensing fees).<br> <br>

The selfishness of upper mgmt is leading to division - hence your situation.  They are not concerned about the best interests of everybody involved here; just themselves.<br> <br>

Sad situation.  But we all know money talks, so maybe you can show to the right person(s) how much extra money the pro-microsoft stance is really costing them (TCO) and they may change their tune.  Perhaps putting it in terms of their vested interests, such as, "with all the money we will be saving on open source, maybe we can all get a raise!" would be more effective.
<br> <br>
Just my 2 cents worth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It usually boils down to money and politics .
Somebody somewhere in the upper mgmt area must be getting some kind of kickback or pat on the back , for being so pro-Microsoft ( despite the cost of licensing fees ) .
The selfishness of upper mgmt is leading to division - hence your situation .
They are not concerned about the best interests of everybody involved here ; just themselves .
Sad situation .
But we all know money talks , so maybe you can show to the right person ( s ) how much extra money the pro-microsoft stance is really costing them ( TCO ) and they may change their tune .
Perhaps putting it in terms of their vested interests , such as , " with all the money we will be saving on open source , maybe we can all get a raise !
" would be more effective .
Just my 2 cents worth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It usually boils down to money and politics.
Somebody somewhere in the upper mgmt area must be getting some kind of kickback or pat on the back, for being so pro-Microsoft (despite the cost of licensing fees).
The selfishness of upper mgmt is leading to division - hence your situation.
They are not concerned about the best interests of everybody involved here; just themselves.
Sad situation.
But we all know money talks, so maybe you can show to the right person(s) how much extra money the pro-microsoft stance is really costing them (TCO) and they may change their tune.
Perhaps putting it in terms of their vested interests, such as, "with all the money we will be saving on open source, maybe we can all get a raise!
" would be more effective.
Just my 2 cents worth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362210</id>
	<title>former NHS CIO ended up in our shop as IT Director</title>
	<author>kubitus</author>
	<datestamp>1267695300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and I can tell you - he is all M$ over and over again!<p>
. </p><p>
Hi Charly - how're ye doin? </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and I can tell you - he is all M $ over and over again !
. Hi Charly - how 're ye doin ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and I can tell you - he is all M$ over and over again!
. 
Hi Charly - how're ye doin? </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359238</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Microsoft is cheaper.</p><p>M$ is only cheaper when your Freedom is worth nothing.</p><p>(It's also cheaper if you don't care about money, so everything is free.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Microsoft is cheaper.M $ is only cheaper when your Freedom is worth nothing .
( It 's also cheaper if you do n't care about money , so everything is free .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Microsoft is cheaper.M$ is only cheaper when your Freedom is worth nothing.
(It's also cheaper if you don't care about money, so everything is free.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361142</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267733280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah poke the bear with the stick it wont come maul you, eat your wife's face then drag your corpse back to its den to devour later.  Bears dont do that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah poke the bear with the stick it wont come maul you , eat your wife 's face then drag your corpse back to its den to devour later .
Bears dont do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah poke the bear with the stick it wont come maul you, eat your wife's face then drag your corpse back to its den to devour later.
Bears dont do that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358822</id>
	<title>The Gamble</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find myself in similar situations every day, where I see a lot of inefficient and wasteful decisions and policies.</p><p>The thing is, you have to choose your battles.  Ask yourself a brutally realistic question: Do you think you can make a difference?  Is there any chance at all that you could change someone's mind about this?</p><p>The bad news is, probably not.  And if you're not willing to work hard for it, you're really better off just sucking it up and going along with it, no matter how brainless the edicts are.  Play it safe, keep your job, don't make waves.</p><p>The good news is, if you <i>are</i> willing to pitch this battle, if you <i>are</i> willing to work hard, putting together the necessary information and documentation in such a way to actually demonstrate to the powers-that-be that there is a Better Way, possibly even volunteering to take on a huge chunk of the work yourself, and do your damned best to ensure that your bosses look really good in the process, that you can not only get what you want, but you can look <i>really</i> good in a highly visible way in the process.  That's how to get promoted into places where you're not just fighting these battles, but actually making the decisions.</p><p>Or you may get fired because someone can't handle you disagreeing with them, no matter how stupid they're being.  That's the gamble, the risk versus reward.  I can't tell you which path to take, because I don't know all of the politics of your particular situation, but I hope it all turns out well, no matter which road you go down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find myself in similar situations every day , where I see a lot of inefficient and wasteful decisions and policies.The thing is , you have to choose your battles .
Ask yourself a brutally realistic question : Do you think you can make a difference ?
Is there any chance at all that you could change someone 's mind about this ? The bad news is , probably not .
And if you 're not willing to work hard for it , you 're really better off just sucking it up and going along with it , no matter how brainless the edicts are .
Play it safe , keep your job , do n't make waves.The good news is , if you are willing to pitch this battle , if you are willing to work hard , putting together the necessary information and documentation in such a way to actually demonstrate to the powers-that-be that there is a Better Way , possibly even volunteering to take on a huge chunk of the work yourself , and do your damned best to ensure that your bosses look really good in the process , that you can not only get what you want , but you can look really good in a highly visible way in the process .
That 's how to get promoted into places where you 're not just fighting these battles , but actually making the decisions.Or you may get fired because someone ca n't handle you disagreeing with them , no matter how stupid they 're being .
That 's the gamble , the risk versus reward .
I ca n't tell you which path to take , because I do n't know all of the politics of your particular situation , but I hope it all turns out well , no matter which road you go down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find myself in similar situations every day, where I see a lot of inefficient and wasteful decisions and policies.The thing is, you have to choose your battles.
Ask yourself a brutally realistic question: Do you think you can make a difference?
Is there any chance at all that you could change someone's mind about this?The bad news is, probably not.
And if you're not willing to work hard for it, you're really better off just sucking it up and going along with it, no matter how brainless the edicts are.
Play it safe, keep your job, don't make waves.The good news is, if you are willing to pitch this battle, if you are willing to work hard, putting together the necessary information and documentation in such a way to actually demonstrate to the powers-that-be that there is a Better Way, possibly even volunteering to take on a huge chunk of the work yourself, and do your damned best to ensure that your bosses look really good in the process, that you can not only get what you want, but you can look really good in a highly visible way in the process.
That's how to get promoted into places where you're not just fighting these battles, but actually making the decisions.Or you may get fired because someone can't handle you disagreeing with them, no matter how stupid they're being.
That's the gamble, the risk versus reward.
I can't tell you which path to take, because I don't know all of the politics of your particular situation, but I hope it all turns out well, no matter which road you go down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366118</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>scgtrp</author>
	<datestamp>1267715340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it just me, or does filtering like this sound like a horrible idea? Actually looking at HTTP connections and not routing those that violate whatever the policy is sounds like a much better solution than politely asking the browser to refuse to load a certain site.
<br> <br>
Rule of thumb: if I can get around your filtering with telnet to port 80, it's broken.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just me , or does filtering like this sound like a horrible idea ?
Actually looking at HTTP connections and not routing those that violate whatever the policy is sounds like a much better solution than politely asking the browser to refuse to load a certain site .
Rule of thumb : if I can get around your filtering with telnet to port 80 , it 's broken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just me, or does filtering like this sound like a horrible idea?
Actually looking at HTTP connections and not routing those that violate whatever the policy is sounds like a much better solution than politely asking the browser to refuse to load a certain site.
Rule of thumb: if I can get around your filtering with telnet to port 80, it's broken.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360306</id>
	<title>Re:Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267729140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The first 8 years of my life were spend as a CAD systems admin (Unix systems).</p></div><p>Child labor!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first 8 years of my life were spend as a CAD systems admin ( Unix systems ) .Child labor !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first 8 years of my life were spend as a CAD systems admin (Unix systems).Child labor!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359008</id>
	<title>What did you expect?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am with Linus on this one<br>Linus is right<br>The man makes sense<br>He is absolutely correct on this one</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am with Linus on this oneLinus is rightThe man makes senseHe is absolutely correct on this one</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am with Linus on this oneLinus is rightThe man makes senseHe is absolutely correct on this one</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358912</id>
	<title>Who to blame?</title>
	<author>Petersko</author>
	<datestamp>1267723380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>An email like that probably didn't come about spontaneously.<br> <br>

"I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems". Sounds like somebody wouldn't shut up. I  would suspect that some open-source fans in the organization just couldn't let it go when their pet project's architects chose Microsoft products for delivery.<br> <br>

There's a fine line between promoting and being a big old pain in the ass.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An email like that probably did n't come about spontaneously .
" I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems " .
Sounds like somebody would n't shut up .
I would suspect that some open-source fans in the organization just could n't let it go when their pet project 's architects chose Microsoft products for delivery .
There 's a fine line between promoting and being a big old pain in the ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An email like that probably didn't come about spontaneously.
"I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems".
Sounds like somebody wouldn't shut up.
I  would suspect that some open-source fans in the organization just couldn't let it go when their pet project's architects chose Microsoft products for delivery.
There's a fine line between promoting and being a big old pain in the ass.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359652</id>
	<title>I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall for that...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently. I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from Microsoft's infrastructure, but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run."</i> <br> <br>

Sure. Take your decision right to your boss, just like that. And he'll say, "Exactly how did you arrive at your estimate of 'less than half', what's your measuring criteria for 'far better off', how long is 'the long run', and what training makes this magically appear?"<br> <br>

At that point you'll probably stammer something like, "Open source good - Microsoft bad! Nerd SMASH!" and then your boss gets to push the button that opens the trap door beneath you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" As a taxpayer , I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently .
I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from Microsoft 's infrastructure , but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft 's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system , we would be far better off in the long run .
" Sure .
Take your decision right to your boss , just like that .
And he 'll say , " Exactly how did you arrive at your estimate of 'less than half ' , what 's your measuring criteria for 'far better off ' , how long is 'the long run ' , and what training makes this magically appear ?
" At that point you 'll probably stammer something like , " Open source good - Microsoft bad !
Nerd SMASH !
" and then your boss gets to push the button that opens the trap door beneath you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently.
I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from Microsoft's infrastructure, but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run.
"  

Sure.
Take your decision right to your boss, just like that.
And he'll say, "Exactly how did you arrive at your estimate of 'less than half', what's your measuring criteria for 'far better off', how long is 'the long run', and what training makes this magically appear?
" 

At that point you'll probably stammer something like, "Open source good - Microsoft bad!
Nerd SMASH!
" and then your boss gets to push the button that opens the trap door beneath you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358832</id>
	<title>Other Possibilities</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>User Training is often not a viable option -- time spent there means business lost, and many public sector services have statutory or lawful time requirements. Understand that it is very frequently not a simple cash conversion formula - and even the blindingly pro-Microsoft have probably examined at the very least the cost structure involved in other options. Similarly, browser choice (although flat out removal is pretty harsh) can have to do with internal web-app support. Frankly, many of our less technical users do not recognize the difference in browsers, or understand how to validate using their AD credentials using browsers other than IE. You should temper your judgment with the recognition that there is at least the possibility that more is going on.</p><p>I am concerned that anyone in public sector is expressing a preference at all. Theoretically you should not endorse any product, free, open source, or paid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>User Training is often not a viable option -- time spent there means business lost , and many public sector services have statutory or lawful time requirements .
Understand that it is very frequently not a simple cash conversion formula - and even the blindingly pro-Microsoft have probably examined at the very least the cost structure involved in other options .
Similarly , browser choice ( although flat out removal is pretty harsh ) can have to do with internal web-app support .
Frankly , many of our less technical users do not recognize the difference in browsers , or understand how to validate using their AD credentials using browsers other than IE .
You should temper your judgment with the recognition that there is at least the possibility that more is going on.I am concerned that anyone in public sector is expressing a preference at all .
Theoretically you should not endorse any product , free , open source , or paid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>User Training is often not a viable option -- time spent there means business lost, and many public sector services have statutory or lawful time requirements.
Understand that it is very frequently not a simple cash conversion formula - and even the blindingly pro-Microsoft have probably examined at the very least the cost structure involved in other options.
Similarly, browser choice (although flat out removal is pretty harsh) can have to do with internal web-app support.
Frankly, many of our less technical users do not recognize the difference in browsers, or understand how to validate using their AD credentials using browsers other than IE.
You should temper your judgment with the recognition that there is at least the possibility that more is going on.I am concerned that anyone in public sector is expressing a preference at all.
Theoretically you should not endorse any product, free, open source, or paid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360144</id>
	<title>Do your job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267728240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey. First, do you know how much money is being spent on licensing? Microsoft offers very reasonable licensing costs for government and non-profits. In most cases, such licensing agreements include support. Do alternatives offer that? At the same or lower cost?  Have you actually researched and proven your  assessment on cost savings with some kind of tangible ROI or is it just a hunch that you pulled out of your ass based on what you have heard on the Internet. Have you considered compatibility with the rest of the world? Support for legacy systems? Existing investments?</p><p>Secondly, as a tax payer, wouldn't you prefer that employees in said organization spent their time doing their jobs, as directed by management,  as opposed to wasting their time fighting tooth and nail decisions which have already been made. Don't you think that bickering and ruffling feathers  with people in your own organization leads to inefficiencies as well?</p><p>Finally, to answer your question, the best way you could affect the change in this policy is to become one of the people making the policy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey .
First , do you know how much money is being spent on licensing ?
Microsoft offers very reasonable licensing costs for government and non-profits .
In most cases , such licensing agreements include support .
Do alternatives offer that ?
At the same or lower cost ?
Have you actually researched and proven your assessment on cost savings with some kind of tangible ROI or is it just a hunch that you pulled out of your ass based on what you have heard on the Internet .
Have you considered compatibility with the rest of the world ?
Support for legacy systems ?
Existing investments ? Secondly , as a tax payer , would n't you prefer that employees in said organization spent their time doing their jobs , as directed by management , as opposed to wasting their time fighting tooth and nail decisions which have already been made .
Do n't you think that bickering and ruffling feathers with people in your own organization leads to inefficiencies as well ? Finally , to answer your question , the best way you could affect the change in this policy is to become one of the people making the policy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey.
First, do you know how much money is being spent on licensing?
Microsoft offers very reasonable licensing costs for government and non-profits.
In most cases, such licensing agreements include support.
Do alternatives offer that?
At the same or lower cost?
Have you actually researched and proven your  assessment on cost savings with some kind of tangible ROI or is it just a hunch that you pulled out of your ass based on what you have heard on the Internet.
Have you considered compatibility with the rest of the world?
Support for legacy systems?
Existing investments?Secondly, as a tax payer, wouldn't you prefer that employees in said organization spent their time doing their jobs, as directed by management,  as opposed to wasting their time fighting tooth and nail decisions which have already been made.
Don't you think that bickering and ruffling feathers  with people in your own organization leads to inefficiencies as well?Finally, to answer your question, the best way you could affect the change in this policy is to become one of the people making the policy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362320</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>JWW</author>
	<datestamp>1267695900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IMHO any tech support staff that can't handle supporting at least firefox on a Windows machine, shouldn't be allowed to have a tech support job.</p><p>Too many people want to be tech support and know the script for the supported software.  These people are entirely useless in all but the very smallest organizations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IMHO any tech support staff that ca n't handle supporting at least firefox on a Windows machine , should n't be allowed to have a tech support job.Too many people want to be tech support and know the script for the supported software .
These people are entirely useless in all but the very smallest organizations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMHO any tech support staff that can't handle supporting at least firefox on a Windows machine, shouldn't be allowed to have a tech support job.Too many people want to be tech support and know the script for the supported software.
These people are entirely useless in all but the very smallest organizations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359156</id>
	<title>In case you haven't thought about it already...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shut up and conform. You don't need to create a bigger support nightmare for the IT dept.<br>We pay your bills, if you don't like it --- LEAVE.</p><p>- The Management.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shut up and conform .
You do n't need to create a bigger support nightmare for the IT dept.We pay your bills , if you do n't like it --- LEAVE.- The Management .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shut up and conform.
You don't need to create a bigger support nightmare for the IT dept.We pay your bills, if you don't like it --- LEAVE.- The Management.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359496</id>
	<title>More information needed:</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1267725660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you saying that they refuse to consider anything other than MS <em>internally</em> or that in addition to being internally a MS shop, the products are all in MS-only formats and no effort will be made to, say, make sure their outward facing web site is compatible with the top 3 browsers?</p><p>One is a design decision which may or may not cost more in the long run, but the latter forces citizens to purchase products from microsoft just to view their output, which is fairly unethical if deliberate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you saying that they refuse to consider anything other than MS internally or that in addition to being internally a MS shop , the products are all in MS-only formats and no effort will be made to , say , make sure their outward facing web site is compatible with the top 3 browsers ? One is a design decision which may or may not cost more in the long run , but the latter forces citizens to purchase products from microsoft just to view their output , which is fairly unethical if deliberate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you saying that they refuse to consider anything other than MS internally or that in addition to being internally a MS shop, the products are all in MS-only formats and no effort will be made to, say, make sure their outward facing web site is compatible with the top 3 browsers?One is a design decision which may or may not cost more in the long run, but the latter forces citizens to purchase products from microsoft just to view their output, which is fairly unethical if deliberate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359482</id>
	<title>Common business model.</title>
	<author>dlcantrell</author>
	<datestamp>1267725660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft does that to many of their customers as part of their licensing agreement.  I'll give you a break off the top provided you scratch my back later.

The mafia framework lives on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft does that to many of their customers as part of their licensing agreement .
I 'll give you a break off the top provided you scratch my back later .
The mafia framework lives on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft does that to many of their customers as part of their licensing agreement.
I'll give you a break off the top provided you scratch my back later.
The mafia framework lives on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359686</id>
	<title>Picking the wrong fight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The majority of comments I see here seem to be focusing on entirely the wrong thing.  The 'outrageous' part of this situation has nothing to do with them being a Microsoft shop and using Microsoft-only software.  Any given organization has to put in place policies that they see as being beneficial to smooth and practical operations.  People can disagree that going Microsoft-only is a good solution, but if the policy gets the job done and makes the organizations infrastructure cost-effective and manageable, then this hospital is entirely within its rights to implement this policy.  Removing Firefox is perfectly acceptable if their policy deems this application to be problematic for whatever reason.</p><p>Everybody is up in arms about how to get Open Source into this organization and how to make them see the benefits of OSS, as if the lack of OSS was the real problem here.  It isn't.  The problem is censorship.</p><p>'(XXXX) District Health Board &mdash; Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy. I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.'</p><p>There's a fairly thick line there between, "we don't use Linux because our homogeneous infrastructure is easier for us to maintain", versus, "as a publicly funded institution in a sector that has nothing to do with selling software, we believe it's acceptable to act as an advocate for one of our vendors, and we intend to squelch discussion about competing products".  Whomever sent this email intends to muzzle anyone making comments that don't promote Windows.  This is a problem.  Information Services isn't looking out for the hospital here, they're looking out for Microsoft.  They're acting as a corporate shill using taxpayer funds.</p><p>I'd be pissed too.  I have no problem with them choosing to use Windows.  I have a problem with some asshole telling me I need to act as a Windows sales rep.  And I have have a REAL problem with this sort of behavior being funded by tax dollars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The majority of comments I see here seem to be focusing on entirely the wrong thing .
The 'outrageous ' part of this situation has nothing to do with them being a Microsoft shop and using Microsoft-only software .
Any given organization has to put in place policies that they see as being beneficial to smooth and practical operations .
People can disagree that going Microsoft-only is a good solution , but if the policy gets the job done and makes the organizations infrastructure cost-effective and manageable , then this hospital is entirely within its rights to implement this policy .
Removing Firefox is perfectly acceptable if their policy deems this application to be problematic for whatever reason.Everybody is up in arms about how to get Open Source into this organization and how to make them see the benefits of OSS , as if the lack of OSS was the real problem here .
It is n't .
The problem is censorship .
' ( XXXX ) District Health Board    Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy .
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems .
'There 's a fairly thick line there between , " we do n't use Linux because our homogeneous infrastructure is easier for us to maintain " , versus , " as a publicly funded institution in a sector that has nothing to do with selling software , we believe it 's acceptable to act as an advocate for one of our vendors , and we intend to squelch discussion about competing products " .
Whomever sent this email intends to muzzle anyone making comments that do n't promote Windows .
This is a problem .
Information Services is n't looking out for the hospital here , they 're looking out for Microsoft .
They 're acting as a corporate shill using taxpayer funds.I 'd be pissed too .
I have no problem with them choosing to use Windows .
I have a problem with some asshole telling me I need to act as a Windows sales rep. And I have have a REAL problem with this sort of behavior being funded by tax dollars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The majority of comments I see here seem to be focusing on entirely the wrong thing.
The 'outrageous' part of this situation has nothing to do with them being a Microsoft shop and using Microsoft-only software.
Any given organization has to put in place policies that they see as being beneficial to smooth and practical operations.
People can disagree that going Microsoft-only is a good solution, but if the policy gets the job done and makes the organizations infrastructure cost-effective and manageable, then this hospital is entirely within its rights to implement this policy.
Removing Firefox is perfectly acceptable if their policy deems this application to be problematic for whatever reason.Everybody is up in arms about how to get Open Source into this organization and how to make them see the benefits of OSS, as if the lack of OSS was the real problem here.
It isn't.
The problem is censorship.
'(XXXX) District Health Board — Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy.
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.
'There's a fairly thick line there between, "we don't use Linux because our homogeneous infrastructure is easier for us to maintain", versus, "as a publicly funded institution in a sector that has nothing to do with selling software, we believe it's acceptable to act as an advocate for one of our vendors, and we intend to squelch discussion about competing products".
Whomever sent this email intends to muzzle anyone making comments that don't promote Windows.
This is a problem.
Information Services isn't looking out for the hospital here, they're looking out for Microsoft.
They're acting as a corporate shill using taxpayer funds.I'd be pissed too.
I have no problem with them choosing to use Windows.
I have a problem with some asshole telling me I need to act as a Windows sales rep.  And I have have a REAL problem with this sort of behavior being funded by tax dollars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358876</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I had to guess why, they got too many doses of inept lobbying by the sort of people who write things like "MS Wromtongues Infecting Your Corporate Overlords?" (I kid you not, this is a real title of a post above) promising sunshine and lolipops for everyone if they would just switch to open source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I had to guess why , they got too many doses of inept lobbying by the sort of people who write things like " MS Wromtongues Infecting Your Corporate Overlords ?
" ( I kid you not , this is a real title of a post above ) promising sunshine and lolipops for everyone if they would just switch to open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I had to guess why, they got too many doses of inept lobbying by the sort of people who write things like "MS Wromtongues Infecting Your Corporate Overlords?
" (I kid you not, this is a real title of a post above) promising sunshine and lolipops for everyone if they would just switch to open source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360652</id>
	<title>Re:Your management</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267730940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course not, because the X-Ray manufacturer isn't about to get locked out of $50, 000 profit...but don't worry, they WILL custom program an "open source" solution for you, for another $400, 000...</p></div><p>Now see, if you had a national health service with more than 8 x-ray machines in the country, that would be to your advantage.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course not , because the X-Ray manufacturer is n't about to get locked out of $ 50 , 000 profit...but do n't worry , they WILL custom program an " open source " solution for you , for another $ 400 , 000...Now see , if you had a national health service with more than 8 x-ray machines in the country , that would be to your advantage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course not, because the X-Ray manufacturer isn't about to get locked out of $50, 000 profit...but don't worry, they WILL custom program an "open source" solution for you, for another $400, 000...Now see, if you had a national health service with more than 8 x-ray machines in the country, that would be to your advantage.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31369408</id>
	<title>Whose PC is it anyway</title>
	<author>Pigskin-Referee</author>
	<datestamp>1267792680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The owner of the PC, or the organization/person(s) responsible for that PC have every right to determine how it is used, maintained and what software is installed on it. Case closed. If you don't like it, get a different job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The owner of the PC , or the organization/person ( s ) responsible for that PC have every right to determine how it is used , maintained and what software is installed on it .
Case closed .
If you do n't like it , get a different job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The owner of the PC, or the organization/person(s) responsible for that PC have every right to determine how it is used, maintained and what software is installed on it.
Case closed.
If you don't like it, get a different job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359448</id>
	<title>Tales told out of school</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1267725480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy. I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.'</i> </p><p>The last thing the boss wants to hear is that you have been lobbying staff and clients to push your own agenda - whatever that may be.</p><p>You talk to him. You work through channels - or you keep your big mouth shut.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy .
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems .
' The last thing the boss wants to hear is that you have been lobbying staff and clients to push your own agenda - whatever that may be.You talk to him .
You work through channels - or you keep your big mouth shut .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy.
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.
' The last thing the boss wants to hear is that you have been lobbying staff and clients to push your own agenda - whatever that may be.You talk to him.
You work through channels - or you keep your big mouth shut.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359592</id>
	<title>Re:You can't always get what you want...</title>
	<author>DaveV1.0</author>
	<datestamp>1267725960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>However, advocating at work the use of a different operating system than the one management has settled on, especially when one is a member of the IT department, has everything to do with the operation of "the place".</p><p>Doing as you say could be considered insubordination, which can lower your reviews and/or get you fired.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>However , advocating at work the use of a different operating system than the one management has settled on , especially when one is a member of the IT department , has everything to do with the operation of " the place " .Doing as you say could be considered insubordination , which can lower your reviews and/or get you fired .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, advocating at work the use of a different operating system than the one management has settled on, especially when one is a member of the IT department, has everything to do with the operation of "the place".Doing as you say could be considered insubordination, which can lower your reviews and/or get you fired.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363156</id>
	<title>Re:Do Your Job</title>
	<author>natophonic</author>
	<datestamp>1267699200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I bet the CIO at XXXX has already emailed sammcj's manager saying there's no merit raise for him this year!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I bet the CIO at XXXX has already emailed sammcj 's manager saying there 's no merit raise for him this year !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I bet the CIO at XXXX has already emailed sammcj's manager saying there's no merit raise for him this year!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31365672</id>
	<title>Re:Do Your Job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267711920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>     Oh I would most definitely risk my job over this one.  Sorry, but a rabidly M$ shop is a sad and painful place to work, and I would not value having a job in a place like this.  Especially in regards to being told not to recommend certain types of software -- if anyone were to ask me what I recommend, I will tell them what **I** recommend.  And then if the place has a policy, tell them what policy dictates is used instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh I would most definitely risk my job over this one .
Sorry , but a rabidly M $ shop is a sad and painful place to work , and I would not value having a job in a place like this .
Especially in regards to being told not to recommend certain types of software -- if anyone were to ask me what I recommend , I will tell them what * * I * * recommend .
And then if the place has a policy , tell them what policy dictates is used instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>     Oh I would most definitely risk my job over this one.
Sorry, but a rabidly M$ shop is a sad and painful place to work, and I would not value having a job in a place like this.
Especially in regards to being told not to recommend certain types of software -- if anyone were to ask me what I recommend, I will tell them what **I** recommend.
And then if the place has a policy, tell them what policy dictates is used instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359252</id>
	<title>A Public Funded Union Shop</title>
	<author>istartedi</author>
	<datestamp>1267724760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>s/microsoft/union amd it only reads a little
bit strangely.  A few more minor tweaks and it's the same
situation.  I'm actually not picking on unions here... too much.
Rather, I'm picking on any powerful organization that exerts
political power over elected officials.  This kind of union
influence is so entrenched that a lot of us don't even think
about it.  Microsoft is newer, so it's getting more attention.</p><p>
I work at a public hospital in the computer / technical department and (amongst others) was recently outraged by an email that was sent around our department: '(XXXX) District Health Board -- Information Services is strategically a union shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy. I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.' We have also been told to remove Firefox found on anyone's computer unless they have specific authorisation from management to have it installed under special circumstances. Now, I could somewhat understand this if I was working in a company that sold and promoted the use of union software for financial gain, but I work in the publicly / government funded health system. Several of the IT big-wigs at the DHB are seemingly blindly pro-union and seem all too quick to shrug off other, perhaps more efficient alternatives. As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently. I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from union's infrastructure, but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing union's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run. I would very much like to hear Slashdot's ideas / opinions on this 'Strategic Direction' and the silencing of our technical opinions
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>s/microsoft/union amd it only reads a little bit strangely .
A few more minor tweaks and it 's the same situation .
I 'm actually not picking on unions here... too much .
Rather , I 'm picking on any powerful organization that exerts political power over elected officials .
This kind of union influence is so entrenched that a lot of us do n't even think about it .
Microsoft is newer , so it 's getting more attention .
I work at a public hospital in the computer / technical department and ( amongst others ) was recently outraged by an email that was sent around our department : ' ( XXXX ) District Health Board -- Information Services is strategically a union shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy .
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems .
' We have also been told to remove Firefox found on anyone 's computer unless they have specific authorisation from management to have it installed under special circumstances .
Now , I could somewhat understand this if I was working in a company that sold and promoted the use of union software for financial gain , but I work in the publicly / government funded health system .
Several of the IT big-wigs at the DHB are seemingly blindly pro-union and seem all too quick to shrug off other , perhaps more efficient alternatives .
As a taxpayer , I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently .
I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from union 's infrastructure , but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing union 's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system , we would be far better off in the long run .
I would very much like to hear Slashdot 's ideas / opinions on this 'Strategic Direction ' and the silencing of our technical opinions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>s/microsoft/union amd it only reads a little
bit strangely.
A few more minor tweaks and it's the same
situation.
I'm actually not picking on unions here... too much.
Rather, I'm picking on any powerful organization that exerts
political power over elected officials.
This kind of union
influence is so entrenched that a lot of us don't even think
about it.
Microsoft is newer, so it's getting more attention.
I work at a public hospital in the computer / technical department and (amongst others) was recently outraged by an email that was sent around our department: '(XXXX) District Health Board -- Information Services is strategically a union shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy.
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.
' We have also been told to remove Firefox found on anyone's computer unless they have specific authorisation from management to have it installed under special circumstances.
Now, I could somewhat understand this if I was working in a company that sold and promoted the use of union software for financial gain, but I work in the publicly / government funded health system.
Several of the IT big-wigs at the DHB are seemingly blindly pro-union and seem all too quick to shrug off other, perhaps more efficient alternatives.
As a taxpayer, I want nothing more than to see our health systems improve and run more efficiently.
I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from union's infrastructure, but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing union's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run.
I would very much like to hear Slashdot's ideas / opinions on this 'Strategic Direction' and the silencing of our technical opinions
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359850</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You will probably want to have your resume in circulation before taking the battle to the hospital board, as the board will doubtless just ask your chief MS enabler what's going on, and s/he'll say just another sad case of an employee sowing hatred and discontent: just ignore it.  Then you will get a summons to said enabler's office and - bye bye.</p><p>Bin Dare Dondat</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You will probably want to have your resume in circulation before taking the battle to the hospital board , as the board will doubtless just ask your chief MS enabler what 's going on , and s/he 'll say just another sad case of an employee sowing hatred and discontent : just ignore it .
Then you will get a summons to said enabler 's office and - bye bye.Bin Dare Dondat</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You will probably want to have your resume in circulation before taking the battle to the hospital board, as the board will doubtless just ask your chief MS enabler what's going on, and s/he'll say just another sad case of an employee sowing hatred and discontent: just ignore it.
Then you will get a summons to said enabler's office and - bye bye.Bin Dare Dondat</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361758</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267736280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>tell me your kidding?</p><p>
&nbsp; if not you need to do some research</p><p>my sense of sarcasm is way broken</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>tell me your kidding ?
  if not you need to do some researchmy sense of sarcasm is way broken</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tell me your kidding?
  if not you need to do some researchmy sense of sarcasm is way broken</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358952</id>
	<title>Re:Your management</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The correct answer would be to make the usage of IE verboten to mitigate the risk of running afoul of HIPAA regulations due to vulnerabilities in IE (especially if the supported computer environment is significantly aged, as publicly funded entities tend to deal with, and still running Windows 2000 which supports no later than IE6.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The correct answer would be to make the usage of IE verboten to mitigate the risk of running afoul of HIPAA regulations due to vulnerabilities in IE ( especially if the supported computer environment is significantly aged , as publicly funded entities tend to deal with , and still running Windows 2000 which supports no later than IE6 .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The correct answer would be to make the usage of IE verboten to mitigate the risk of running afoul of HIPAA regulations due to vulnerabilities in IE (especially if the supported computer environment is significantly aged, as publicly funded entities tend to deal with, and still running Windows 2000 which supports no later than IE6.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359978</id>
	<title>Re:Take it one step at a time</title>
	<author>fiddley</author>
	<datestamp>1267727460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At my place we've got a bunch of MS stuff but the management and my colleagues all seem to be open source wannabe's. When I got here, the place was in a terrible state, the Terminal Servers were bluscreening multiple times a week, the file servers were thrashing constantly, basically our major incident board was lit up like a Christmas tree. Every time something went wrong, everyone would be "Bloody Microsoft, never works!!!!, viruses, malware, blue screen of death LOLLLZZZ!!!!"</p><p>So anyway I've set to work straightening everything out (nothing magical, mainly patches, firmware etc) and we've not had a terminal server bluescreen since July '09, and the helpdesk has received exactly 2 calls this afternoon, one was for a LOB app error, and the other was a user training issue. It's been this way for months. I can't actually remember the last time I've seen a helpdesk call directly attributable to the Microsoft platform. Now we're only a small org of 80 servers worldwide, so I know this run of good fortune probably wouldn't scale to some of the badass networks you lot are running, but it works for us, and works really well.</p><p>You would think this would have earned at least a little credibility on my part? Nah. I'm still the office whipping boy because I happen to think MS prods are a strategically good idea for the business. Every time something isn't working, they still straight away blame patches, Microsoft, a virus - when demonstrably the cowboy coding of our integration engineer, or a network issue or one of our LOB apps has got a bug. Pisses me off no end. We've actually had more issues with HP drivers/firmware than we've had with the MS stack, which surprised even me!</p><p>We're looking at some border gateway stuff right now, and the boss is rejecting anything without iPhone and Mac compatibility, even though it accounts for under 4\% of our userbase! I'm also trying to virtualise some of the estate, but am hitting a brick wall because he wants to use anything but Microsoft, which we don't have the skills in house to properly administer. Insanity, IMO! Then again, he does insist on referring to our server cupboard as a 'datacenter' in front of vendors, I really cringe when he does that!</p><p>So anyway, don't always count on the fact that even if you come in and make all the right moves that you'll get any credit whatsoever. People's ingrained beliefs are hard to change, even when they have been proven wrong smack bang in front of their faces.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At my place we 've got a bunch of MS stuff but the management and my colleagues all seem to be open source wannabe 's .
When I got here , the place was in a terrible state , the Terminal Servers were bluscreening multiple times a week , the file servers were thrashing constantly , basically our major incident board was lit up like a Christmas tree .
Every time something went wrong , everyone would be " Bloody Microsoft , never works ! ! !
! , viruses , malware , blue screen of death LOLLLZZZ ! ! ! !
" So anyway I 've set to work straightening everything out ( nothing magical , mainly patches , firmware etc ) and we 've not had a terminal server bluescreen since July '09 , and the helpdesk has received exactly 2 calls this afternoon , one was for a LOB app error , and the other was a user training issue .
It 's been this way for months .
I ca n't actually remember the last time I 've seen a helpdesk call directly attributable to the Microsoft platform .
Now we 're only a small org of 80 servers worldwide , so I know this run of good fortune probably would n't scale to some of the badass networks you lot are running , but it works for us , and works really well.You would think this would have earned at least a little credibility on my part ?
Nah. I 'm still the office whipping boy because I happen to think MS prods are a strategically good idea for the business .
Every time something is n't working , they still straight away blame patches , Microsoft , a virus - when demonstrably the cowboy coding of our integration engineer , or a network issue or one of our LOB apps has got a bug .
Pisses me off no end .
We 've actually had more issues with HP drivers/firmware than we 've had with the MS stack , which surprised even me ! We 're looking at some border gateway stuff right now , and the boss is rejecting anything without iPhone and Mac compatibility , even though it accounts for under 4 \ % of our userbase !
I 'm also trying to virtualise some of the estate , but am hitting a brick wall because he wants to use anything but Microsoft , which we do n't have the skills in house to properly administer .
Insanity , IMO !
Then again , he does insist on referring to our server cupboard as a 'datacenter ' in front of vendors , I really cringe when he does that ! So anyway , do n't always count on the fact that even if you come in and make all the right moves that you 'll get any credit whatsoever .
People 's ingrained beliefs are hard to change , even when they have been proven wrong smack bang in front of their faces .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At my place we've got a bunch of MS stuff but the management and my colleagues all seem to be open source wannabe's.
When I got here, the place was in a terrible state, the Terminal Servers were bluscreening multiple times a week, the file servers were thrashing constantly, basically our major incident board was lit up like a Christmas tree.
Every time something went wrong, everyone would be "Bloody Microsoft, never works!!!
!, viruses, malware, blue screen of death LOLLLZZZ!!!!
"So anyway I've set to work straightening everything out (nothing magical, mainly patches, firmware etc) and we've not had a terminal server bluescreen since July '09, and the helpdesk has received exactly 2 calls this afternoon, one was for a LOB app error, and the other was a user training issue.
It's been this way for months.
I can't actually remember the last time I've seen a helpdesk call directly attributable to the Microsoft platform.
Now we're only a small org of 80 servers worldwide, so I know this run of good fortune probably wouldn't scale to some of the badass networks you lot are running, but it works for us, and works really well.You would think this would have earned at least a little credibility on my part?
Nah. I'm still the office whipping boy because I happen to think MS prods are a strategically good idea for the business.
Every time something isn't working, they still straight away blame patches, Microsoft, a virus - when demonstrably the cowboy coding of our integration engineer, or a network issue or one of our LOB apps has got a bug.
Pisses me off no end.
We've actually had more issues with HP drivers/firmware than we've had with the MS stack, which surprised even me!We're looking at some border gateway stuff right now, and the boss is rejecting anything without iPhone and Mac compatibility, even though it accounts for under 4\% of our userbase!
I'm also trying to virtualise some of the estate, but am hitting a brick wall because he wants to use anything but Microsoft, which we don't have the skills in house to properly administer.
Insanity, IMO!
Then again, he does insist on referring to our server cupboard as a 'datacenter' in front of vendors, I really cringe when he does that!So anyway, don't always count on the fact that even if you come in and make all the right moves that you'll get any credit whatsoever.
People's ingrained beliefs are hard to change, even when they have been proven wrong smack bang in front of their faces.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359206</id>
	<title>If you don't like it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...find another job.  You are unaware if MS has made large donations to the hospital or other factors that may be involved.  Either way, it's not your call and if you don't like the restrictions find a job that you do like.</p><p>As others said public hospitals are very conservative and not the typical place to experiment with open source.  Besides it it is a public not for profit hospital, Microsoft's non-profit licensing is very cheap to the point that it might as well be free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...find another job .
You are unaware if MS has made large donations to the hospital or other factors that may be involved .
Either way , it 's not your call and if you do n't like the restrictions find a job that you do like.As others said public hospitals are very conservative and not the typical place to experiment with open source .
Besides it it is a public not for profit hospital , Microsoft 's non-profit licensing is very cheap to the point that it might as well be free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...find another job.
You are unaware if MS has made large donations to the hospital or other factors that may be involved.
Either way, it's not your call and if you don't like the restrictions find a job that you do like.As others said public hospitals are very conservative and not the typical place to experiment with open source.
Besides it it is a public not for profit hospital, Microsoft's non-profit licensing is very cheap to the point that it might as well be free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361754</id>
	<title>Don't get your knickers in a knot!</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1267736220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason in a word is "Support".</p><p>Large companies/corporations/government etc... do not like people using unauthorized software on their systems. Usually it is locked down so the user cannot change it, though it is impossible to totally lock it down and not become overly problematic.</p><p>There is a limited amount of tech support for a given system, and typically they are trained and required to know how to fix authorized things. Go outside of that scope and not only do some of the tech support become lost, but the number of things that can go wrong increases exponentially.</p><p>A pertinent example of this occurred last year for me. I am one of those users that doesn't have his admin rights totally taken away, many times I need to use custom software, or non-standard software not covered corporately. Anyway this also allows me to install Firefox, so that is what I use for most things.</p><p>However one time I called down to tech support they couldn't for the life of them figure out why a custom web application wasn't working for me. In the end I figured it out myself. It didn't initially occur to me because I just got used to using Firefox, and never considered that the crappy web application was not optimized or even compatible with other browsers other than IE. So now when using 3 distinct web applications that were designed in house (badly apparently), I switch over to IE so I can use them, and use Firefox for everything else.</p><p>Tech support, however within its narrow scope of responsibility wouldn't have a clue that I was using Firefox, nor that that would cause a problem, as the standard is IE.</p><p>If anything the only fault I saw is designing web applications on such a narrow scope of IE, just because that is all we are supposed to use currently. Bad design and short sighted. Anyway bottom line is tech help desk doesn't want to have to support every piece of software (or operating system in this case) in the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason in a word is " Support " .Large companies/corporations/government etc... do not like people using unauthorized software on their systems .
Usually it is locked down so the user can not change it , though it is impossible to totally lock it down and not become overly problematic.There is a limited amount of tech support for a given system , and typically they are trained and required to know how to fix authorized things .
Go outside of that scope and not only do some of the tech support become lost , but the number of things that can go wrong increases exponentially.A pertinent example of this occurred last year for me .
I am one of those users that does n't have his admin rights totally taken away , many times I need to use custom software , or non-standard software not covered corporately .
Anyway this also allows me to install Firefox , so that is what I use for most things.However one time I called down to tech support they could n't for the life of them figure out why a custom web application was n't working for me .
In the end I figured it out myself .
It did n't initially occur to me because I just got used to using Firefox , and never considered that the crappy web application was not optimized or even compatible with other browsers other than IE .
So now when using 3 distinct web applications that were designed in house ( badly apparently ) , I switch over to IE so I can use them , and use Firefox for everything else.Tech support , however within its narrow scope of responsibility would n't have a clue that I was using Firefox , nor that that would cause a problem , as the standard is IE.If anything the only fault I saw is designing web applications on such a narrow scope of IE , just because that is all we are supposed to use currently .
Bad design and short sighted .
Anyway bottom line is tech help desk does n't want to have to support every piece of software ( or operating system in this case ) in the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason in a word is "Support".Large companies/corporations/government etc... do not like people using unauthorized software on their systems.
Usually it is locked down so the user cannot change it, though it is impossible to totally lock it down and not become overly problematic.There is a limited amount of tech support for a given system, and typically they are trained and required to know how to fix authorized things.
Go outside of that scope and not only do some of the tech support become lost, but the number of things that can go wrong increases exponentially.A pertinent example of this occurred last year for me.
I am one of those users that doesn't have his admin rights totally taken away, many times I need to use custom software, or non-standard software not covered corporately.
Anyway this also allows me to install Firefox, so that is what I use for most things.However one time I called down to tech support they couldn't for the life of them figure out why a custom web application wasn't working for me.
In the end I figured it out myself.
It didn't initially occur to me because I just got used to using Firefox, and never considered that the crappy web application was not optimized or even compatible with other browsers other than IE.
So now when using 3 distinct web applications that were designed in house (badly apparently), I switch over to IE so I can use them, and use Firefox for everything else.Tech support, however within its narrow scope of responsibility wouldn't have a clue that I was using Firefox, nor that that would cause a problem, as the standard is IE.If anything the only fault I saw is designing web applications on such a narrow scope of IE, just because that is all we are supposed to use currently.
Bad design and short sighted.
Anyway bottom line is tech help desk doesn't want to have to support every piece of software (or operating system in this case) in the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31365310</id>
	<title>Re:Your management</title>
	<author>juan2074</author>
	<datestamp>1267709400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know of a single person where I work who does not know how to use a browser already.  My employer spends nothing to support browser (IE, Firefox, Safari, Chrome) users.

<br> <br>How much does your company spend to support browser users?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know of a single person where I work who does not know how to use a browser already .
My employer spends nothing to support browser ( IE , Firefox , Safari , Chrome ) users .
How much does your company spend to support browser users ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know of a single person where I work who does not know how to use a browser already.
My employer spends nothing to support browser (IE, Firefox, Safari, Chrome) users.
How much does your company spend to support browser users?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359276</id>
	<title>Shadup and do your job</title>
	<author>frist</author>
	<datestamp>1267724820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about you let the IT guys do their job, and you do your job. Now go fetch your mop and bucket.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about you let the IT guys do their job , and you do your job .
Now go fetch your mop and bucket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about you let the IT guys do their job, and you do your job.
Now go fetch your mop and bucket.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361740</id>
	<title>Value / $$</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267736160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run.</p></div><p>What about taking the other half and contributing to the developers of the systems that help you to succeed.</p><p>There's nothing wrong with Microsoft or any other company making money on their software--as long as they make their money fairly. If IE provides the best value for your company, why not pay for it? If Firefox works best, why not pay for that?</p><p>If the only advantage of an open source system is a cost advantage, you probably haven't found the best system.</p><p>If you really hate Microsoft systems and think they are holding you back, put your money into better systems. That includes rewarding the developers financially.</p><p>Same value for less money is a race to zero. Seek better value for the same money.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft 's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system , we would be far better off in the long run.What about taking the other half and contributing to the developers of the systems that help you to succeed.There 's nothing wrong with Microsoft or any other company making money on their software--as long as they make their money fairly .
If IE provides the best value for your company , why not pay for it ?
If Firefox works best , why not pay for that ? If the only advantage of an open source system is a cost advantage , you probably have n't found the best system.If you really hate Microsoft systems and think they are holding you back , put your money into better systems .
That includes rewarding the developers financially.Same value for less money is a race to zero .
Seek better value for the same money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run.What about taking the other half and contributing to the developers of the systems that help you to succeed.There's nothing wrong with Microsoft or any other company making money on their software--as long as they make their money fairly.
If IE provides the best value for your company, why not pay for it?
If Firefox works best, why not pay for that?If the only advantage of an open source system is a cost advantage, you probably haven't found the best system.If you really hate Microsoft systems and think they are holding you back, put your money into better systems.
That includes rewarding the developers financially.Same value for less money is a race to zero.
Seek better value for the same money.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31367450</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267725480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If someone wants to violate HIPAA, they can. You can't really stop them. Just like anyone that wants to do a crime, generally can do so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If someone wants to violate HIPAA , they can .
You ca n't really stop them .
Just like anyone that wants to do a crime , generally can do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If someone wants to violate HIPAA, they can.
You can't really stop them.
Just like anyone that wants to do a crime, generally can do so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361136</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>sammcj</author>
	<datestamp>1267733220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You wouldn't believe the number of times we've tried to make management realise there are real-life cost-effective alternatives.
Meetings are guaranteed to turn into head-banging sessions when ever its brought up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You would n't believe the number of times we 've tried to make management realise there are real-life cost-effective alternatives .
Meetings are guaranteed to turn into head-banging sessions when ever its brought up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You wouldn't believe the number of times we've tried to make management realise there are real-life cost-effective alternatives.
Meetings are guaranteed to turn into head-banging sessions when ever its brought up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359378</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267725240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So who are you saying is the Taliban in this fight? I can't really see the Open Source movement as the Amish. <br>
You do realize that Taliban vs. Amish would be a very one sided fight since the Amish are as fanatically non-resistant as the Taliban are violent?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So who are you saying is the Taliban in this fight ?
I ca n't really see the Open Source movement as the Amish .
You do realize that Taliban vs. Amish would be a very one sided fight since the Amish are as fanatically non-resistant as the Taliban are violent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So who are you saying is the Taliban in this fight?
I can't really see the Open Source movement as the Amish.
You do realize that Taliban vs. Amish would be a very one sided fight since the Amish are as fanatically non-resistant as the Taliban are violent?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359976</id>
	<title>Everyone call them and complain!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I work at a public hospital in the computer / technical department and (amongst others) was recently outraged by an email that was sent around our department: '(XXXX) District Health Board &mdash; Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop</i></p><p>Seriously, the only way anything ever gets done in this world is by naming and shaming:</p><p>Canterbury District Health Board<br>Information Services, Level 2, H Block<br>The Princess Margaret Hospital<br>Cashmere Road, Cashmere<br>Christchurch, New Zealand</p><p>Phone: +64 33 640380<br>Web: http://www.cdhb.govt.nz/contact.htm</p><p>As well as the Hospital Advisory Committee:<br>Web: http://www.cdhb.govt.nz/aboutus/management.htm</p><p>And the douchebag responsible for this mess is:<br>Michele Hider: michele.hider@cdhb.govt.nz</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work at a public hospital in the computer / technical department and ( amongst others ) was recently outraged by an email that was sent around our department : ' ( XXXX ) District Health Board    Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shopSeriously , the only way anything ever gets done in this world is by naming and shaming : Canterbury District Health BoardInformation Services , Level 2 , H BlockThe Princess Margaret HospitalCashmere Road , CashmereChristchurch , New ZealandPhone : + 64 33 640380Web : http : //www.cdhb.govt.nz/contact.htmAs well as the Hospital Advisory Committee : Web : http : //www.cdhb.govt.nz/aboutus/management.htmAnd the douchebag responsible for this mess is : Michele Hider : michele.hider @ cdhb.govt.nz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work at a public hospital in the computer / technical department and (amongst others) was recently outraged by an email that was sent around our department: '(XXXX) District Health Board — Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shopSeriously, the only way anything ever gets done in this world is by naming and shaming:Canterbury District Health BoardInformation Services, Level 2, H BlockThe Princess Margaret HospitalCashmere Road, CashmereChristchurch, New ZealandPhone: +64 33 640380Web: http://www.cdhb.govt.nz/contact.htmAs well as the Hospital Advisory Committee:Web: http://www.cdhb.govt.nz/aboutus/management.htmAnd the douchebag responsible for this mess is:Michele Hider: michele.hider@cdhb.govt.nz</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361190</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267733520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LOLOLOLOL<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. this got to be one of *the* most ignorant comments I have ever seen!  Of course the sun doesn't rise without Windows!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LOLOLOLOL .. this got to be one of * the * most ignorant comments I have ever seen !
Of course the sun does n't rise without Windows !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOLOLOLOL .. this got to be one of *the* most ignorant comments I have ever seen!
Of course the sun doesn't rise without Windows!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359030</id>
	<title>Comparison to Another HIT Story</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I worked at a private healthcare institution where Microsoft was the de-facto standard on all machines.  Some of the software that was mission critical would only work with Microsoft software (i.e. IE 6 or Windows XP).  Even when Microsoft issued upgrades (IE 7, Vista, etc.) they couldn't upgrade those programs until the third party vendor updated their software.  They allow Firefox (and all the IT staff encourages it for everything that will work with it), and some of the IT staff even have Macs.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; When it comes to maintaining the systems, however, they want to get a relatively uniform installation.  Lots of the same machine, with the same software, so that it's easy to manage when the doctors/nurses/receptionists call in with "I can't do X."<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; There's a reason to have everything standardized, and there's a reason for that standard to be based on Microsoft products, but there's no reason that no other products be considered.  This shop uses the best tools for the job, which often have MS dependencies.  But sometimes it's perl scripts and grep.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; In your case, I would make some noise saying "if I find a better, cheaper alternative, is it still taboo to consider non-MS software?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked at a private healthcare institution where Microsoft was the de-facto standard on all machines .
Some of the software that was mission critical would only work with Microsoft software ( i.e .
IE 6 or Windows XP ) .
Even when Microsoft issued upgrades ( IE 7 , Vista , etc .
) they could n't upgrade those programs until the third party vendor updated their software .
They allow Firefox ( and all the IT staff encourages it for everything that will work with it ) , and some of the IT staff even have Macs .
    When it comes to maintaining the systems , however , they want to get a relatively uniform installation .
Lots of the same machine , with the same software , so that it 's easy to manage when the doctors/nurses/receptionists call in with " I ca n't do X .
"     There 's a reason to have everything standardized , and there 's a reason for that standard to be based on Microsoft products , but there 's no reason that no other products be considered .
This shop uses the best tools for the job , which often have MS dependencies .
But sometimes it 's perl scripts and grep .
    In your case , I would make some noise saying " if I find a better , cheaper alternative , is it still taboo to consider non-MS software ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked at a private healthcare institution where Microsoft was the de-facto standard on all machines.
Some of the software that was mission critical would only work with Microsoft software (i.e.
IE 6 or Windows XP).
Even when Microsoft issued upgrades (IE 7, Vista, etc.
) they couldn't upgrade those programs until the third party vendor updated their software.
They allow Firefox (and all the IT staff encourages it for everything that will work with it), and some of the IT staff even have Macs.
    When it comes to maintaining the systems, however, they want to get a relatively uniform installation.
Lots of the same machine, with the same software, so that it's easy to manage when the doctors/nurses/receptionists call in with "I can't do X.
"
    There's a reason to have everything standardized, and there's a reason for that standard to be based on Microsoft products, but there's no reason that no other products be considered.
This shop uses the best tools for the job, which often have MS dependencies.
But sometimes it's perl scripts and grep.
    In your case, I would make some noise saying "if I find a better, cheaper alternative, is it still taboo to consider non-MS software?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790</id>
	<title>Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>gazbo</author>
	<datestamp>1267722960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you enquired as to why they've implemented this policy?  If so, it would be useful information for people to suggest counterarguments.  If not, wouldn't that be a better starting point than posting in impotent rage?<p>It's entirely possible they have a good (depending on viewpoint) reason for this beyond your implication of shilling for MS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you enquired as to why they 've implemented this policy ?
If so , it would be useful information for people to suggest counterarguments .
If not , would n't that be a better starting point than posting in impotent rage ? It 's entirely possible they have a good ( depending on viewpoint ) reason for this beyond your implication of shilling for MS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you enquired as to why they've implemented this policy?
If so, it would be useful information for people to suggest counterarguments.
If not, wouldn't that be a better starting point than posting in impotent rage?It's entirely possible they have a good (depending on viewpoint) reason for this beyond your implication of shilling for MS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31367642</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory</title>
	<author>zaphod777</author>
	<datestamp>1267727280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?

That sounds preposterous to me.

If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.

Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.

Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.

I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.</p></div><p>You obviously don't understand how a PC works. I can assure you my laptop running Linux has no Microsoft applications running on it. The BIOS takes car of half of the what you said and then it hands things over to the boot load in my case GRUB.

MAC is not using Microsoft and Intel they are only using Intel hardware. They realized that the dev cost and comparability was better using intel.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it , at all ?
As in , without a boot disk , without any drivers , and without any services ?
That sounds preposterous to me .
If it were true ( and I doubt it ) , then companies would be selling computers without a windows .
This clearly is not happening , so there must be some error in your calculations .
I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ?
Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish , and that is a very difficult thing to acheive .
A lot of people dont realise this .
Microsoft just spent $ 9 billion and many years to create Vista , so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that .
It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve .
IBM tried , and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows .
Apple tried to create their own system for years , but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft .
Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish , without using some of the more critical parts of windows .
Not possible .
I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.You obviously do n't understand how a PC works .
I can assure you my laptop running Linux has no Microsoft applications running on it .
The BIOS takes car of half of the what you said and then it hands things over to the boot load in my case GRUB .
MAC is not using Microsoft and Intel they are only using Intel hardware .
They realized that the dev cost and comparability was better using intel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ?
As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?
That sounds preposterous to me.
If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows.
This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations.
I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ?
Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive.
A lot of people dont realise this.
Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that.
It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve.
IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows.
Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.
Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows.
Not possible.
I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.You obviously don't understand how a PC works.
I can assure you my laptop running Linux has no Microsoft applications running on it.
The BIOS takes car of half of the what you said and then it hands things over to the boot load in my case GRUB.
MAC is not using Microsoft and Intel they are only using Intel hardware.
They realized that the dev cost and comparability was better using intel.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359190</id>
	<title>Re:Leak the email</title>
	<author>NetNinja</author>
	<datestamp>1267724460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>fraud, waste and abuse? I think you better be prepared to lose your job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>fraud , waste and abuse ?
I think you better be prepared to lose your job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fraud, waste and abuse?
I think you better be prepared to lose your job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362632</id>
	<title>Company Policy vs Free Speech</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267697520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's 2 issues here, and you have to treat them separately:</p><p>First, there's the fact that the company you work for has partnered with MS and standardized on their software, and the IT directive is to do that unless there's a very good reason not to.  No matter how much you dislike MS, there's nothing wrong with this from a purely policy standpoint, and your job is to implement it.  You can try to make good arguments for alternatives, but unless the policy changes there's not much you can do.</p><p>Second, there's the free speech aspect.  You say this is a public hospital, which in theory means it's run by the government.  They can tell you what software you have to use, but they can't tell you not to talk about alternatives.  Banning comments promoting other OSs is a violation of Free Speech, IFF (if and only if) the government runs your company.  If it's privately run, you're out of luck, but if it really is public they can't stop you from talking about it.  OTOH, they CAN completely ignore everything you have to say, and while they probably can't just fire you for not keeping your mouth shut, they probably can find ways to hurt your career in other, less-provable ways.</p><p>Pick your battles - if you can't demonstrate a clear benefit to your career in making a fuss, think long and hard before you do it.  However, if you can prove any violations of state law, you should be covered under whistleblower statutes and should take it up with the AG's office.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's 2 issues here , and you have to treat them separately : First , there 's the fact that the company you work for has partnered with MS and standardized on their software , and the IT directive is to do that unless there 's a very good reason not to .
No matter how much you dislike MS , there 's nothing wrong with this from a purely policy standpoint , and your job is to implement it .
You can try to make good arguments for alternatives , but unless the policy changes there 's not much you can do.Second , there 's the free speech aspect .
You say this is a public hospital , which in theory means it 's run by the government .
They can tell you what software you have to use , but they ca n't tell you not to talk about alternatives .
Banning comments promoting other OSs is a violation of Free Speech , IFF ( if and only if ) the government runs your company .
If it 's privately run , you 're out of luck , but if it really is public they ca n't stop you from talking about it .
OTOH , they CAN completely ignore everything you have to say , and while they probably ca n't just fire you for not keeping your mouth shut , they probably can find ways to hurt your career in other , less-provable ways.Pick your battles - if you ca n't demonstrate a clear benefit to your career in making a fuss , think long and hard before you do it .
However , if you can prove any violations of state law , you should be covered under whistleblower statutes and should take it up with the AG 's office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's 2 issues here, and you have to treat them separately:First, there's the fact that the company you work for has partnered with MS and standardized on their software, and the IT directive is to do that unless there's a very good reason not to.
No matter how much you dislike MS, there's nothing wrong with this from a purely policy standpoint, and your job is to implement it.
You can try to make good arguments for alternatives, but unless the policy changes there's not much you can do.Second, there's the free speech aspect.
You say this is a public hospital, which in theory means it's run by the government.
They can tell you what software you have to use, but they can't tell you not to talk about alternatives.
Banning comments promoting other OSs is a violation of Free Speech, IFF (if and only if) the government runs your company.
If it's privately run, you're out of luck, but if it really is public they can't stop you from talking about it.
OTOH, they CAN completely ignore everything you have to say, and while they probably can't just fire you for not keeping your mouth shut, they probably can find ways to hurt your career in other, less-provable ways.Pick your battles - if you can't demonstrate a clear benefit to your career in making a fuss, think long and hard before you do it.
However, if you can prove any violations of state law, you should be covered under whistleblower statutes and should take it up with the AG's office.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363648</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>Hymer</author>
	<datestamp>1267701360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Usually one would: <ol>
<li>install a proxy-server with a blacklist + content filter and optionally also on-line antivirus</li>
<li>prohibit any outgoing traffic thru the firewall except from the proxy</li>
<li>tell everyone to use the proxy</li>
<li>be safe... since all computers on your network has to go thru the proxy.</li>
</ol></htmltext>
<tokenext>Usually one would : install a proxy-server with a blacklist + content filter and optionally also on-line antivirus prohibit any outgoing traffic thru the firewall except from the proxy tell everyone to use the proxy be safe... since all computers on your network has to go thru the proxy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Usually one would: 
install a proxy-server with a blacklist + content filter and optionally also on-line antivirus
prohibit any outgoing traffic thru the firewall except from the proxy
tell everyone to use the proxy
be safe... since all computers on your network has to go thru the proxy.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358836</id>
	<title>Corrected</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy. I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.</p></div></blockquote><p>Information Services is strategically a public service that should use <b>the most effective and efficient tool for the job!</b> Comments championing a specific commercial vendor when alternatives should (in the public interest) be considered will be taken as an indication of gross incompetence and indication the commenter is  resigning from public service.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy .
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.Information Services is strategically a public service that should use the most effective and efficient tool for the job !
Comments championing a specific commercial vendor when alternatives should ( in the public interest ) be considered will be taken as an indication of gross incompetence and indication the commenter is resigning from public service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Information Services is strategically a Microsoft shop and when talking to staff / customers we are to support this strategy.
I no longer want to see comments promoting other Operating Systems.Information Services is strategically a public service that should use the most effective and efficient tool for the job!
Comments championing a specific commercial vendor when alternatives should (in the public interest) be considered will be taken as an indication of gross incompetence and indication the commenter is  resigning from public service.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366250</id>
	<title>Re:You really aren't that knowledgeable, newb.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267716240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Open source will likely cost more overall. You'll have more difficulty integrating with proprietary systems in use, because those private systems have no urge to deal with Linux, its not worth their effort to hit a target that moves daily."<br>
     There's problems with proprietary systems no matter what move you make, including Windows-&gt;Windows.  This makes no argument at all except towards never changing anything, which in the long term is just not possible.</p><p>"like OO.org and how those documents deal with other organizations the hospital has to deal with. You'll lose more the first year in time because of people sending documents in the wrong document format "<br>
     The Interoperability is good, and OO can be set to save in whatever format by default you'd like, office 2007 docx, office 97/2000/XP/2003 doc, or whatever.  Not a valid complaint.</p><p>"The problem with your post is typical with the FLOSS community. The problem is the misconception that the cost of purchasing software is the expensive part."<br>
     No, the license cost is lower but a lot of FLOSS software is more efficient (so you can use older computers longer if you want), less buggy, fewer security problems, and those problems are patched faster.</p><p>"Fast patching"<br>
      Fast patching IS an advantage.  Your agument that "patch Tuesday" is good is absurd.  Having a company sit on patches until one day a month ala Microsoft, then FURTHER delay the patches by staging in company, is in no way better than being able to get patches right away and start doing your staging tests on them right away.   If you are trying to imply patch management is somehow harder with Linux, this is silly as well -- simply point the machines to your own update server, and you can roll out patches how you would like.</p><p>"FLOSS offers the promise of open access to your data, but no one cares how open it is from a technical point of view if every time they send it to someone else, the other people can't view it. It is in fact for all intents and purposes less open with OO.org in native format than DOCX as far as the normal user is concerned."<br>
     Not a fact --  DOCX is a poor choice in this regards as well, too many people still have older Office versions.</p><p>"Training people to switch from Windows to Linux is not as cheap as you think, you can't just send them to a couple classes and everything will be dandy and they'll be just as productive as they always were. They won't, it will take years for them to return to that level of productivity<nobr> <wbr></nobr>."<br>
     The same is true going from one version of Windows to the next; in the case of Office 2007, training would be easier going from Office 2003 or below to OpenOffice than going to 2007 I think.  Going to Vista or 7 moves things around plenty too.  This just isn't a valid argument for anything other than never updating your software.</p><p>"You might want to consider that those people making the choices above you might<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... maybe<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... have just a little more experience managing than you do. "<br>
     No, what I've generally seen from people with this attitude is people that are afraid of change -- not risk averse, but actually afraid of making any chances to the infrastructure they manage.    They see how much time they spend "firefighting" problems caused by deficiencies of Windows, they think this is the norm and don't realize changing would elmiinate the "firefighting" issues; they think any system will have the labyrinthine complexities of Windows and figure there's no way they can learn it all.  In some cases they are in a state of denial and think the Linux desktop is just how it was 10 years ago, or alternately they do know how good it is and are afraid for their jobs, since there'd be much less IT work needed.</p><p>"No, FLOSS fa</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Open source will likely cost more overall .
You 'll have more difficulty integrating with proprietary systems in use , because those private systems have no urge to deal with Linux , its not worth their effort to hit a target that moves daily .
" There 's problems with proprietary systems no matter what move you make , including Windows- &gt; Windows .
This makes no argument at all except towards never changing anything , which in the long term is just not possible .
" like OO.org and how those documents deal with other organizations the hospital has to deal with .
You 'll lose more the first year in time because of people sending documents in the wrong document format " The Interoperability is good , and OO can be set to save in whatever format by default you 'd like , office 2007 docx , office 97/2000/XP/2003 doc , or whatever .
Not a valid complaint .
" The problem with your post is typical with the FLOSS community .
The problem is the misconception that the cost of purchasing software is the expensive part .
" No , the license cost is lower but a lot of FLOSS software is more efficient ( so you can use older computers longer if you want ) , less buggy , fewer security problems , and those problems are patched faster .
" Fast patching " Fast patching IS an advantage .
Your agument that " patch Tuesday " is good is absurd .
Having a company sit on patches until one day a month ala Microsoft , then FURTHER delay the patches by staging in company , is in no way better than being able to get patches right away and start doing your staging tests on them right away .
If you are trying to imply patch management is somehow harder with Linux , this is silly as well -- simply point the machines to your own update server , and you can roll out patches how you would like .
" FLOSS offers the promise of open access to your data , but no one cares how open it is from a technical point of view if every time they send it to someone else , the other people ca n't view it .
It is in fact for all intents and purposes less open with OO.org in native format than DOCX as far as the normal user is concerned .
" Not a fact -- DOCX is a poor choice in this regards as well , too many people still have older Office versions .
" Training people to switch from Windows to Linux is not as cheap as you think , you ca n't just send them to a couple classes and everything will be dandy and they 'll be just as productive as they always were .
They wo n't , it will take years for them to return to that level of productivity .
" The same is true going from one version of Windows to the next ; in the case of Office 2007 , training would be easier going from Office 2003 or below to OpenOffice than going to 2007 I think .
Going to Vista or 7 moves things around plenty too .
This just is n't a valid argument for anything other than never updating your software .
" You might want to consider that those people making the choices above you might ... maybe ... have just a little more experience managing than you do .
" No , what I 've generally seen from people with this attitude is people that are afraid of change -- not risk averse , but actually afraid of making any chances to the infrastructure they manage .
They see how much time they spend " firefighting " problems caused by deficiencies of Windows , they think this is the norm and do n't realize changing would elmiinate the " firefighting " issues ; they think any system will have the labyrinthine complexities of Windows and figure there 's no way they can learn it all .
In some cases they are in a state of denial and think the Linux desktop is just how it was 10 years ago , or alternately they do know how good it is and are afraid for their jobs , since there 'd be much less IT work needed .
" No , FLOSS fa</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Open source will likely cost more overall.
You'll have more difficulty integrating with proprietary systems in use, because those private systems have no urge to deal with Linux, its not worth their effort to hit a target that moves daily.
"
     There's problems with proprietary systems no matter what move you make, including Windows-&gt;Windows.
This makes no argument at all except towards never changing anything, which in the long term is just not possible.
"like OO.org and how those documents deal with other organizations the hospital has to deal with.
You'll lose more the first year in time because of people sending documents in the wrong document format "
     The Interoperability is good, and OO can be set to save in whatever format by default you'd like, office 2007 docx, office 97/2000/XP/2003 doc, or whatever.
Not a valid complaint.
"The problem with your post is typical with the FLOSS community.
The problem is the misconception that the cost of purchasing software is the expensive part.
"
     No, the license cost is lower but a lot of FLOSS software is more efficient (so you can use older computers longer if you want), less buggy, fewer security problems, and those problems are patched faster.
"Fast patching"
      Fast patching IS an advantage.
Your agument that "patch Tuesday" is good is absurd.
Having a company sit on patches until one day a month ala Microsoft, then FURTHER delay the patches by staging in company, is in no way better than being able to get patches right away and start doing your staging tests on them right away.
If you are trying to imply patch management is somehow harder with Linux, this is silly as well -- simply point the machines to your own update server, and you can roll out patches how you would like.
"FLOSS offers the promise of open access to your data, but no one cares how open it is from a technical point of view if every time they send it to someone else, the other people can't view it.
It is in fact for all intents and purposes less open with OO.org in native format than DOCX as far as the normal user is concerned.
"
     Not a fact --  DOCX is a poor choice in this regards as well, too many people still have older Office versions.
"Training people to switch from Windows to Linux is not as cheap as you think, you can't just send them to a couple classes and everything will be dandy and they'll be just as productive as they always were.
They won't, it will take years for them to return to that level of productivity .
"
     The same is true going from one version of Windows to the next; in the case of Office 2007, training would be easier going from Office 2003 or below to OpenOffice than going to 2007 I think.
Going to Vista or 7 moves things around plenty too.
This just isn't a valid argument for anything other than never updating your software.
"You might want to consider that those people making the choices above you might ... maybe ... have just a little more experience managing than you do.
"
     No, what I've generally seen from people with this attitude is people that are afraid of change -- not risk averse, but actually afraid of making any chances to the infrastructure they manage.
They see how much time they spend "firefighting" problems caused by deficiencies of Windows, they think this is the norm and don't realize changing would elmiinate the "firefighting" issues; they think any system will have the labyrinthine complexities of Windows and figure there's no way they can learn it all.
In some cases they are in a state of denial and think the Linux desktop is just how it was 10 years ago, or alternately they do know how good it is and are afraid for their jobs, since there'd be much less IT work needed.
"No, FLOSS fa</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31367130</id>
	<title>my few cents worth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm posting as an anonymous coward to protect the guilty<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>A few years ago the Uni. where I worked at (I was the sysadmin for a large science department) decided to *centralise* all their IT services.<br>Nothing really wrong with that, except that the guys there were all pro-Microsoft.  I was (and still am) pro-Linux.  (However, we had a multi-flavoured<br>dept. and I did my best to support the users there. I understand that people will use what they are most familiar with.)</p><p>To cut a long story short - my ideas of how to keep linux running at the dept. (about 40\% of users used linux, plus a number of servers) - conflicted<br>strongly with theirs.  The dept. management didn't support me.</p><p>I left.</p><p>I now have a really good job still oriented towards linux, with better prospects, while the old dept.'s Linux support has filtered down to virtually nil (I still<br>have contact with people there) and most of the Linux users there try ingenious methods to keep their systems working.  The IT center still doesn't<br>understand that scientists need more than just Microsoft desktops.   (The IT center also degraded support considerably - so there are complaints<br>about them in general.)</p><p>My only final comment is that I'm glad that this wasn't a hospital, because lives would have been lost because of the attitude of that IT department.<br>(I am, of course, extrapolating here<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm posting as an anonymous coward to protect the guilty : ) A few years ago the Uni .
where I worked at ( I was the sysadmin for a large science department ) decided to * centralise * all their IT services.Nothing really wrong with that , except that the guys there were all pro-Microsoft .
I was ( and still am ) pro-Linux .
( However , we had a multi-flavoureddept .
and I did my best to support the users there .
I understand that people will use what they are most familiar with .
) To cut a long story short - my ideas of how to keep linux running at the dept .
( about 40 \ % of users used linux , plus a number of servers ) - conflictedstrongly with theirs .
The dept .
management did n't support me.I left.I now have a really good job still oriented towards linux , with better prospects , while the old dept .
's Linux support has filtered down to virtually nil ( I stillhave contact with people there ) and most of the Linux users there try ingenious methods to keep their systems working .
The IT center still doesn'tunderstand that scientists need more than just Microsoft desktops .
( The IT center also degraded support considerably - so there are complaintsabout them in general .
) My only final comment is that I 'm glad that this was n't a hospital , because lives would have been lost because of the attitude of that IT department .
( I am , of course , extrapolating here ... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm posting as an anonymous coward to protect the guilty :)A few years ago the Uni.
where I worked at (I was the sysadmin for a large science department) decided to *centralise* all their IT services.Nothing really wrong with that, except that the guys there were all pro-Microsoft.
I was (and still am) pro-Linux.
(However, we had a multi-flavoureddept.
and I did my best to support the users there.
I understand that people will use what they are most familiar with.
)To cut a long story short - my ideas of how to keep linux running at the dept.
(about 40\% of users used linux, plus a number of servers) - conflictedstrongly with theirs.
The dept.
management didn't support me.I left.I now have a really good job still oriented towards linux, with better prospects, while the old dept.
's Linux support has filtered down to virtually nil (I stillhave contact with people there) and most of the Linux users there try ingenious methods to keep their systems working.
The IT center still doesn'tunderstand that scientists need more than just Microsoft desktops.
(The IT center also degraded support considerably - so there are complaintsabout them in general.
)My only final comment is that I'm glad that this wasn't a hospital, because lives would have been lost because of the attitude of that IT department.
(I am, of course, extrapolating here ...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359294</id>
	<title>Standards and Security Certification</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget that there are probably multiple data privacy components at play. What is it going to cost to meet those requirements in a non-standard shop? Detailed logging, user access control, automated software updates, automated configuration controls, all of these need to be delivered in the environment, with ability to prove during audit, in order to be certified compliant. Will the benefits of non-standardization cover the extra cost to still meet all of the security requirements, plus support and management? Doubtful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget that there are probably multiple data privacy components at play .
What is it going to cost to meet those requirements in a non-standard shop ?
Detailed logging , user access control , automated software updates , automated configuration controls , all of these need to be delivered in the environment , with ability to prove during audit , in order to be certified compliant .
Will the benefits of non-standardization cover the extra cost to still meet all of the security requirements , plus support and management ?
Doubtful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget that there are probably multiple data privacy components at play.
What is it going to cost to meet those requirements in a non-standard shop?
Detailed logging, user access control, automated software updates, automated configuration controls, all of these need to be delivered in the environment, with ability to prove during audit, in order to be certified compliant.
Will the benefits of non-standardization cover the extra cost to still meet all of the security requirements, plus support and management?
Doubtful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>Publikwerks</author>
	<datestamp>1267725900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My company is becoming an MS only shop, and for good reason. By grabbing whatever the flavor of the month is, you ensure that your going to have all sorts of issues with compatibility. Additionally, you then have to maintain personnel with skills to service these different platforms. We randomly discover tools that were developed by someone using the flavor of the month that no one knows how to use, so then we have to start from scratch. By going to MS only, you can cover most(if not all) of your bases while only requiring one skillset to maintain them.
 <p>
That alone will make up for any licensing fees.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My company is becoming an MS only shop , and for good reason .
By grabbing whatever the flavor of the month is , you ensure that your going to have all sorts of issues with compatibility .
Additionally , you then have to maintain personnel with skills to service these different platforms .
We randomly discover tools that were developed by someone using the flavor of the month that no one knows how to use , so then we have to start from scratch .
By going to MS only , you can cover most ( if not all ) of your bases while only requiring one skillset to maintain them .
That alone will make up for any licensing fees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My company is becoming an MS only shop, and for good reason.
By grabbing whatever the flavor of the month is, you ensure that your going to have all sorts of issues with compatibility.
Additionally, you then have to maintain personnel with skills to service these different platforms.
We randomly discover tools that were developed by someone using the flavor of the month that no one knows how to use, so then we have to start from scratch.
By going to MS only, you can cover most(if not all) of your bases while only requiring one skillset to maintain them.
That alone will make up for any licensing fees.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>Registered Coward v2</author>
	<datestamp>1267724220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the hospital is tax payer funded, then you have every right as a taxpayer to take this memo to the board.</p><p>I would suggest that you gather a number of like minded taxpayers (and voters) and make a visit to the board to explain your stance.</p><p>You might want to do some research and find that your IT director got a free beer (golf trip) out of this.  Fodder for the meeting.</p></div><p>You might have the right to do this; but consider the consequences; i.e. is it worth potentially losing your job or getting shunted aside?  Poking a dog in the eye gets its attention but also may provoke a response that harms you.  Accusing someone of malfeasance really puts you in a good position.</p><p>Generally, when forced to publicly defend their position, leadership tends to strengthen their support of their position and finds ways to discredit the opposition. At any rate; that doesn't get them to consider open source but just makes it more of an enemy.</p><p>A far better way, IMHO, is first to define how OSS can do the job better - not just cheaper, but really better.  Change is hard; and changing just to save money, especially when it involves systems that currently are viewed as working, is ngh on impossible. So, if you are serious about this:</p><p>1.  Determine the requirements of current systems and how well the current solutions meet those requirements; a cost benefit analysis will also show if ot is truly worth switching.</p><p>2.  Identify an area where OSS software can do that better without impacting any other areas; implicit in this is who will provide support or add needed features?  "The community" is not the right answer.</p><p>3.  Propose a small scale pilot to see if the solution will really work and be better.</p><p>4. If 3 is successful, then you can look at a doing cost<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/benefit analysis for a broader rollout; and then getting support for switching.</p><p>This type of approach builds support for your concept rather than creating an adversarial relationship from the start.</p><p>One of the issues facing OSS is the zealot's desire to have it be everywhere simply because *they* believe it is a better way.  That's nice, but in the real world people need to be convinced and it needs to be better than what currently is in use.  People simply want solutions that work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the hospital is tax payer funded , then you have every right as a taxpayer to take this memo to the board.I would suggest that you gather a number of like minded taxpayers ( and voters ) and make a visit to the board to explain your stance.You might want to do some research and find that your IT director got a free beer ( golf trip ) out of this .
Fodder for the meeting.You might have the right to do this ; but consider the consequences ; i.e .
is it worth potentially losing your job or getting shunted aside ?
Poking a dog in the eye gets its attention but also may provoke a response that harms you .
Accusing someone of malfeasance really puts you in a good position.Generally , when forced to publicly defend their position , leadership tends to strengthen their support of their position and finds ways to discredit the opposition .
At any rate ; that does n't get them to consider open source but just makes it more of an enemy.A far better way , IMHO , is first to define how OSS can do the job better - not just cheaper , but really better .
Change is hard ; and changing just to save money , especially when it involves systems that currently are viewed as working , is ngh on impossible .
So , if you are serious about this : 1 .
Determine the requirements of current systems and how well the current solutions meet those requirements ; a cost benefit analysis will also show if ot is truly worth switching.2 .
Identify an area where OSS software can do that better without impacting any other areas ; implicit in this is who will provide support or add needed features ?
" The community " is not the right answer.3 .
Propose a small scale pilot to see if the solution will really work and be better.4 .
If 3 is successful , then you can look at a doing cost /benefit analysis for a broader rollout ; and then getting support for switching.This type of approach builds support for your concept rather than creating an adversarial relationship from the start.One of the issues facing OSS is the zealot 's desire to have it be everywhere simply because * they * believe it is a better way .
That 's nice , but in the real world people need to be convinced and it needs to be better than what currently is in use .
People simply want solutions that work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the hospital is tax payer funded, then you have every right as a taxpayer to take this memo to the board.I would suggest that you gather a number of like minded taxpayers (and voters) and make a visit to the board to explain your stance.You might want to do some research and find that your IT director got a free beer (golf trip) out of this.
Fodder for the meeting.You might have the right to do this; but consider the consequences; i.e.
is it worth potentially losing your job or getting shunted aside?
Poking a dog in the eye gets its attention but also may provoke a response that harms you.
Accusing someone of malfeasance really puts you in a good position.Generally, when forced to publicly defend their position, leadership tends to strengthen their support of their position and finds ways to discredit the opposition.
At any rate; that doesn't get them to consider open source but just makes it more of an enemy.A far better way, IMHO, is first to define how OSS can do the job better - not just cheaper, but really better.
Change is hard; and changing just to save money, especially when it involves systems that currently are viewed as working, is ngh on impossible.
So, if you are serious about this:1.
Determine the requirements of current systems and how well the current solutions meet those requirements; a cost benefit analysis will also show if ot is truly worth switching.2.
Identify an area where OSS software can do that better without impacting any other areas; implicit in this is who will provide support or add needed features?
"The community" is not the right answer.3.
Propose a small scale pilot to see if the solution will really work and be better.4.
If 3 is successful, then you can look at a doing cost /benefit analysis for a broader rollout; and then getting support for switching.This type of approach builds support for your concept rather than creating an adversarial relationship from the start.One of the issues facing OSS is the zealot's desire to have it be everywhere simply because *they* believe it is a better way.
That's nice, but in the real world people need to be convinced and it needs to be better than what currently is in use.
People simply want solutions that work.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360648</id>
	<title>Siding with Mgt</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267730940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not withstanding the free speech issue, I wonder why management had to make such a statement to begin with.  Perhaps there is way too much discussion going on putting constant and unnecessary pressure on the procurement process of systems already decided upon by committee and senior management.  When it comes to determining the architecture and authorized systems on an enterprise system, there is typically a process for determining user needs and weighing that against resources, security, and abililty to support.  In this, I agree with management that once a system is decided upon and developed, there is no place for end-user free lancing, and there absolutely should be an iron fist against installing unapproved applications (no matter how trendy or useful they may be). I am more concerned with tax-payer dollars being spent on a system which is not secure that I am concerned about a  techy end-user not getting their way. It aint a democracy just because its paid for with tax dollars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not withstanding the free speech issue , I wonder why management had to make such a statement to begin with .
Perhaps there is way too much discussion going on putting constant and unnecessary pressure on the procurement process of systems already decided upon by committee and senior management .
When it comes to determining the architecture and authorized systems on an enterprise system , there is typically a process for determining user needs and weighing that against resources , security , and abililty to support .
In this , I agree with management that once a system is decided upon and developed , there is no place for end-user free lancing , and there absolutely should be an iron fist against installing unapproved applications ( no matter how trendy or useful they may be ) .
I am more concerned with tax-payer dollars being spent on a system which is not secure that I am concerned about a techy end-user not getting their way .
It aint a democracy just because its paid for with tax dollars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not withstanding the free speech issue, I wonder why management had to make such a statement to begin with.
Perhaps there is way too much discussion going on putting constant and unnecessary pressure on the procurement process of systems already decided upon by committee and senior management.
When it comes to determining the architecture and authorized systems on an enterprise system, there is typically a process for determining user needs and weighing that against resources, security, and abililty to support.
In this, I agree with management that once a system is decided upon and developed, there is no place for end-user free lancing, and there absolutely should be an iron fist against installing unapproved applications (no matter how trendy or useful they may be).
I am more concerned with tax-payer dollars being spent on a system which is not secure that I am concerned about a  techy end-user not getting their way.
It aint a democracy just because its paid for with tax dollars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358936</id>
	<title>Are you in Washington State?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you are in Washington state/King County, then you bow to Microsoft's every whim. I have worked at companies that had close relationships with Microsoft and had similar emails and conversations happen when Steve Ballmer came through and saw Linux books on my shelf.<br> <br>

As a state/county/city, it's appalling when we could save millions when our state is in debt but we bend over vackwards for a company that incorporates in Nevada to avoid paying state taxes. Some would say the people they employ more than makes up for it but they do there best to keep everyone as temporary employees and rotate them out every 6 months to also avoid paying benefits.<br> <br>

If you are in any other state, call up your local news agencies, phone Oprah, call newspapers and phone a REPUBLICAN cogressman (they will make noise right now because they are not in power).</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are in Washington state/King County , then you bow to Microsoft 's every whim .
I have worked at companies that had close relationships with Microsoft and had similar emails and conversations happen when Steve Ballmer came through and saw Linux books on my shelf .
As a state/county/city , it 's appalling when we could save millions when our state is in debt but we bend over vackwards for a company that incorporates in Nevada to avoid paying state taxes .
Some would say the people they employ more than makes up for it but they do there best to keep everyone as temporary employees and rotate them out every 6 months to also avoid paying benefits .
If you are in any other state , call up your local news agencies , phone Oprah , call newspapers and phone a REPUBLICAN cogressman ( they will make noise right now because they are not in power ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are in Washington state/King County, then you bow to Microsoft's every whim.
I have worked at companies that had close relationships with Microsoft and had similar emails and conversations happen when Steve Ballmer came through and saw Linux books on my shelf.
As a state/county/city, it's appalling when we could save millions when our state is in debt but we bend over vackwards for a company that incorporates in Nevada to avoid paying state taxes.
Some would say the people they employ more than makes up for it but they do there best to keep everyone as temporary employees and rotate them out every 6 months to also avoid paying benefits.
If you are in any other state, call up your local news agencies, phone Oprah, call newspapers and phone a REPUBLICAN cogressman (they will make noise right now because they are not in power).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359060</id>
	<title>Suck it up.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The organization wants a standard and it is expensive to carry multiple standards.  If you don't like the decision, you are always free to find other employment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The organization wants a standard and it is expensive to carry multiple standards .
If you do n't like the decision , you are always free to find other employment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The organization wants a standard and it is expensive to carry multiple standards.
If you don't like the decision, you are always free to find other employment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358922</id>
	<title>make them feel your pain</title>
	<author>Huckminster</author>
	<datestamp>1267723440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>First you should figure out if for some odd reason running MS is mission critical (like "we absolutely must have MS Office").

Second, crunch the numbers and figure out just how much they could save by switching.  If you're as right as you think you are, it will be a large number.  Don't just give them a number though - figure out some health-care equipment or service that costs that much money.  Then get some big-wigs in a room and tell them you're going to give them that health-care equipment/service for FREE.  Or some such other audacious strategy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First you should figure out if for some odd reason running MS is mission critical ( like " we absolutely must have MS Office " ) .
Second , crunch the numbers and figure out just how much they could save by switching .
If you 're as right as you think you are , it will be a large number .
Do n't just give them a number though - figure out some health-care equipment or service that costs that much money .
Then get some big-wigs in a room and tell them you 're going to give them that health-care equipment/service for FREE .
Or some such other audacious strategy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First you should figure out if for some odd reason running MS is mission critical (like "we absolutely must have MS Office").
Second, crunch the numbers and figure out just how much they could save by switching.
If you're as right as you think you are, it will be a large number.
Don't just give them a number though - figure out some health-care equipment or service that costs that much money.
Then get some big-wigs in a room and tell them you're going to give them that health-care equipment/service for FREE.
Or some such other audacious strategy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31373752</id>
	<title>Re:I can almost relate to their point</title>
	<author>macintard</author>
	<datestamp>1267817700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I mostly agree with your post, you went a bit overboard.

These operating systems can make GREAT servers.  Linux definitely has a place in the business world.  And yes, even OS X does as well.  For some reason, Photoshop and "creative" apps run better on a Mac.  I defer to those people, since I'm not "creative."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)

I have worked for 3 different companies in an IT Administration capacity during my professional career (10 years).  I LOVE Linux.  I use it at home, and have tried using it at work as a workstation.  I have my own NetApp filer that uses a Unix derivative (ONTAP) to publish files shares and authenticate against AD. At work, Linux interoperability with Windows is decent, but I am more productive if I use an actual Windows machine to administer a Windows environment.

I would never push Linux or even OSX as a desktop replacement in our medium size 1000 user environment for multiple reasons. The biggest one of those reasons is a lack of centralized management that is as effective as Active Directory.  Having AD in an environment and being able to control it via central management is HUGE when you are management and you need to have a solution that can administer your users and machines in a cost effective manner.  Additionally, you will need to retrain your staff or hire replacements who would subsequently demand more salary.

Or, you can just stick with the known evils you have and do your best to overcome them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I mostly agree with your post , you went a bit overboard .
These operating systems can make GREAT servers .
Linux definitely has a place in the business world .
And yes , even OS X does as well .
For some reason , Photoshop and " creative " apps run better on a Mac .
I defer to those people , since I 'm not " creative .
" : ) I have worked for 3 different companies in an IT Administration capacity during my professional career ( 10 years ) .
I LOVE Linux .
I use it at home , and have tried using it at work as a workstation .
I have my own NetApp filer that uses a Unix derivative ( ONTAP ) to publish files shares and authenticate against AD .
At work , Linux interoperability with Windows is decent , but I am more productive if I use an actual Windows machine to administer a Windows environment .
I would never push Linux or even OSX as a desktop replacement in our medium size 1000 user environment for multiple reasons .
The biggest one of those reasons is a lack of centralized management that is as effective as Active Directory .
Having AD in an environment and being able to control it via central management is HUGE when you are management and you need to have a solution that can administer your users and machines in a cost effective manner .
Additionally , you will need to retrain your staff or hire replacements who would subsequently demand more salary .
Or , you can just stick with the known evils you have and do your best to overcome them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I mostly agree with your post, you went a bit overboard.
These operating systems can make GREAT servers.
Linux definitely has a place in the business world.
And yes, even OS X does as well.
For some reason, Photoshop and "creative" apps run better on a Mac.
I defer to those people, since I'm not "creative.
" :)

I have worked for 3 different companies in an IT Administration capacity during my professional career (10 years).
I LOVE Linux.
I use it at home, and have tried using it at work as a workstation.
I have my own NetApp filer that uses a Unix derivative (ONTAP) to publish files shares and authenticate against AD.
At work, Linux interoperability with Windows is decent, but I am more productive if I use an actual Windows machine to administer a Windows environment.
I would never push Linux or even OSX as a desktop replacement in our medium size 1000 user environment for multiple reasons.
The biggest one of those reasons is a lack of centralized management that is as effective as Active Directory.
Having AD in an environment and being able to control it via central management is HUGE when you are management and you need to have a solution that can administer your users and machines in a cost effective manner.
Additionally, you will need to retrain your staff or hire replacements who would subsequently demand more salary.
Or, you can just stick with the known evils you have and do your best to overcome them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359018</id>
	<title>This isn't about efficiency.</title>
	<author>KDEnut</author>
	<datestamp>1267723800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's about liability, again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's about liability , again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's about liability, again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363228</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1267699440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft is cheaper.</p><p>Sorry, but it's true. You can either spend thousands of hours managing Linux and it's terrible interfaces, or get Microsoft that does it already for you.</p></div><p>I see you needed to post as AC since you don't want to attach your name to such statements. That tells me all I need to know about the strength of both your character and your argument.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft is cheaper.Sorry , but it 's true .
You can either spend thousands of hours managing Linux and it 's terrible interfaces , or get Microsoft that does it already for you.I see you needed to post as AC since you do n't want to attach your name to such statements .
That tells me all I need to know about the strength of both your character and your argument .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft is cheaper.Sorry, but it's true.
You can either spend thousands of hours managing Linux and it's terrible interfaces, or get Microsoft that does it already for you.I see you needed to post as AC since you don't want to attach your name to such statements.
That tells me all I need to know about the strength of both your character and your argument.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363214</id>
	<title>Re:I think I know your boss...</title>
	<author>Kalriath</author>
	<datestamp>1267699380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it's not.  One country in the world has "District Health Boards" - New Zealand.  I'd know, I work for one (not that one though, we don't call the IT department "Information Services").</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it 's not .
One country in the world has " District Health Boards " - New Zealand .
I 'd know , I work for one ( not that one though , we do n't call the IT department " Information Services " ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it's not.
One country in the world has "District Health Boards" - New Zealand.
I'd know, I work for one (not that one though, we don't call the IT department "Information Services").</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360232</id>
	<title>I can almost relate to their point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267728720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can almost relate with this point of view.</p><p>I work for a Los Angeles County public facility, with a total of 2 IT staff, supporting 400-500 employees at 3 sites.  Yes... thats TWO.  there are no other technically educated employees here.  This is almost an impossible scenario to function in, but its all made possible.. by microsoft.</p><p>Active Directory pulling everything together, users/servers, as well as high end utilities that let us deploy to users with ease and 5mins of training (or packet shape, or fine control group policies).  Not to mention the availability and low cost to hire temporary contractors that support MS OS's.</p><p>It does get on my nerves when the mac monkeys or linux lovers promote other OS's that dont even begin to meet the functionality and versatility that Microsoft has made possible.  Macs are pretty, i get it... leave em at home.  Linux.. i know.. its super stable... leave it at home.</p><p>Just have to accept that in some business environments, working smarter and easier is far greater than a pretty computer case, or open source that requires training by IT staff you dont have to spare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can almost relate with this point of view.I work for a Los Angeles County public facility , with a total of 2 IT staff , supporting 400-500 employees at 3 sites .
Yes... thats TWO .
there are no other technically educated employees here .
This is almost an impossible scenario to function in , but its all made possible.. by microsoft.Active Directory pulling everything together , users/servers , as well as high end utilities that let us deploy to users with ease and 5mins of training ( or packet shape , or fine control group policies ) .
Not to mention the availability and low cost to hire temporary contractors that support MS OS 's.It does get on my nerves when the mac monkeys or linux lovers promote other OS 's that dont even begin to meet the functionality and versatility that Microsoft has made possible .
Macs are pretty , i get it... leave em at home .
Linux.. i know.. its super stable... leave it at home.Just have to accept that in some business environments , working smarter and easier is far greater than a pretty computer case , or open source that requires training by IT staff you dont have to spare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can almost relate with this point of view.I work for a Los Angeles County public facility, with a total of 2 IT staff, supporting 400-500 employees at 3 sites.
Yes... thats TWO.
there are no other technically educated employees here.
This is almost an impossible scenario to function in, but its all made possible.. by microsoft.Active Directory pulling everything together, users/servers, as well as high end utilities that let us deploy to users with ease and 5mins of training (or packet shape, or fine control group policies).
Not to mention the availability and low cost to hire temporary contractors that support MS OS's.It does get on my nerves when the mac monkeys or linux lovers promote other OS's that dont even begin to meet the functionality and versatility that Microsoft has made possible.
Macs are pretty, i get it... leave em at home.
Linux.. i know.. its super stable... leave it at home.Just have to accept that in some business environments, working smarter and easier is far greater than a pretty computer case, or open source that requires training by IT staff you dont have to spare.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358842</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm going to respond under the assumption that you aren't a troll.  I can see where you are coming from, but Linux's interface and general functionality isn't bad...it's just complicated.  If you get someone running a Linux infrastructure that knows what they are doing, it will be as good if not better than Windows.  The problem is finding someone who knows what they are doing.</p><p>Then again, that's a problem in general with IT...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to respond under the assumption that you are n't a troll .
I can see where you are coming from , but Linux 's interface and general functionality is n't bad...it 's just complicated .
If you get someone running a Linux infrastructure that knows what they are doing , it will be as good if not better than Windows .
The problem is finding someone who knows what they are doing.Then again , that 's a problem in general with IT.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to respond under the assumption that you aren't a troll.
I can see where you are coming from, but Linux's interface and general functionality isn't bad...it's just complicated.
If you get someone running a Linux infrastructure that knows what they are doing, it will be as good if not better than Windows.
The problem is finding someone who knows what they are doing.Then again, that's a problem in general with IT...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362504</id>
	<title>Take a step back</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267697040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) Nobody's forcing you to take the paycheck.  Don't like their ideas?  Go elsewhere and have it your way.</p><p>2) "was recently outraged by an email"  Outraged?  This isn't helping you.</p><p>I used to be religious over things like this and then realized it doesn't help.  As many have pointed out you need to take a step back, figure how this relates to the big picture, and see if you can either accept decisions or build a base of credibility through productive contribution.  I've rarely, if ever been in a shop where "technical freedom of expression" is encouraged.  It's just too tough on the wallet in terms of support.</p><p>If this is that offensive to you then you may want to avoid working in places like hospitals (the HIPAA point is spot on) and maybe consider getting a job at a university.  I worked in one for a while and they were about as far from "standardization" as you could get.  It's why I left, actually.  PITA to get anything done given there was no common ground to build from<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p><p>What troubles me is the word "outraged."  Really - it's not worth getting mad over.  You're the only one who suffers with that.  You've got to channel that energy into something positive.  Look around - most good OSS projects are the result of frustration being channeled into something productive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Nobody 's forcing you to take the paycheck .
Do n't like their ideas ?
Go elsewhere and have it your way.2 ) " was recently outraged by an email " Outraged ?
This is n't helping you.I used to be religious over things like this and then realized it does n't help .
As many have pointed out you need to take a step back , figure how this relates to the big picture , and see if you can either accept decisions or build a base of credibility through productive contribution .
I 've rarely , if ever been in a shop where " technical freedom of expression " is encouraged .
It 's just too tough on the wallet in terms of support.If this is that offensive to you then you may want to avoid working in places like hospitals ( the HIPAA point is spot on ) and maybe consider getting a job at a university .
I worked in one for a while and they were about as far from " standardization " as you could get .
It 's why I left , actually .
PITA to get anything done given there was no common ground to build from : PWhat troubles me is the word " outraged .
" Really - it 's not worth getting mad over .
You 're the only one who suffers with that .
You 've got to channel that energy into something positive .
Look around - most good OSS projects are the result of frustration being channeled into something productive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Nobody's forcing you to take the paycheck.
Don't like their ideas?
Go elsewhere and have it your way.2) "was recently outraged by an email"  Outraged?
This isn't helping you.I used to be religious over things like this and then realized it doesn't help.
As many have pointed out you need to take a step back, figure how this relates to the big picture, and see if you can either accept decisions or build a base of credibility through productive contribution.
I've rarely, if ever been in a shop where "technical freedom of expression" is encouraged.
It's just too tough on the wallet in terms of support.If this is that offensive to you then you may want to avoid working in places like hospitals (the HIPAA point is spot on) and maybe consider getting a job at a university.
I worked in one for a while and they were about as far from "standardization" as you could get.
It's why I left, actually.
PITA to get anything done given there was no common ground to build from :PWhat troubles me is the word "outraged.
"  Really - it's not worth getting mad over.
You're the only one who suffers with that.
You've got to channel that energy into something positive.
Look around - most good OSS projects are the result of frustration being channeled into something productive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359934</id>
	<title>Leak the memo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect you are in New Zealand from the terms you use. In that case it is vital that you invoke the 'whistle blower' legislation, and get that memo out in public. Public entities are not allowed to make prejudicial decisions about any service or product they buy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect you are in New Zealand from the terms you use .
In that case it is vital that you invoke the 'whistle blower ' legislation , and get that memo out in public .
Public entities are not allowed to make prejudicial decisions about any service or product they buy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect you are in New Zealand from the terms you use.
In that case it is vital that you invoke the 'whistle blower' legislation, and get that memo out in public.
Public entities are not allowed to make prejudicial decisions about any service or product they buy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359528</id>
	<title>Re:See it all the time</title>
	<author>man\_of\_mr\_e</author>
	<datestamp>1267725780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frontpage is old.  VERY old.  It hasn't been sold for a decade, at least.  SourceSafe isn't as bad as it once was, the 2005 version can be client/server and is "good enough" for most people.  I prefer other tools, but I've used it in very large (500+ clients) situations.</p><p>Visual Studio certainly has it's quirks, and bugs, but it hardly "sucks".  It's pretty much THE standard for IDE's, and if you throw in some 3rd party extensions like ReSharper it's freaking amazing.</p><p>Zune?  Have you actually used one?  Everyone that I know who owns a Zune loves it.  That's about 30 people that I know personally, and they would never give it up.  The Zune has largely fallen prey to the same kind of FUD as Vista.</p><p>Yeah, Windows Mobile sucks as a general purpose phone.. it works great in situations like Point of Sale, or handheld field devices, but not so much for a phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frontpage is old .
VERY old .
It has n't been sold for a decade , at least .
SourceSafe is n't as bad as it once was , the 2005 version can be client/server and is " good enough " for most people .
I prefer other tools , but I 've used it in very large ( 500 + clients ) situations.Visual Studio certainly has it 's quirks , and bugs , but it hardly " sucks " .
It 's pretty much THE standard for IDE 's , and if you throw in some 3rd party extensions like ReSharper it 's freaking amazing.Zune ?
Have you actually used one ?
Everyone that I know who owns a Zune loves it .
That 's about 30 people that I know personally , and they would never give it up .
The Zune has largely fallen prey to the same kind of FUD as Vista.Yeah , Windows Mobile sucks as a general purpose phone.. it works great in situations like Point of Sale , or handheld field devices , but not so much for a phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frontpage is old.
VERY old.
It hasn't been sold for a decade, at least.
SourceSafe isn't as bad as it once was, the 2005 version can be client/server and is "good enough" for most people.
I prefer other tools, but I've used it in very large (500+ clients) situations.Visual Studio certainly has it's quirks, and bugs, but it hardly "sucks".
It's pretty much THE standard for IDE's, and if you throw in some 3rd party extensions like ReSharper it's freaking amazing.Zune?
Have you actually used one?
Everyone that I know who owns a Zune loves it.
That's about 30 people that I know personally, and they would never give it up.
The Zune has largely fallen prey to the same kind of FUD as Vista.Yeah, Windows Mobile sucks as a general purpose phone.. it works great in situations like Point of Sale, or handheld field devices, but not so much for a phone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361172</id>
	<title>I feel your pain</title>
	<author>jocknerd</author>
	<datestamp>1267733400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What you have at your place are executives who don't want to make tough decisions.  They want the decisions to be made for them.  If they give Microsoft exclusivity over their I.T. choices, it makes their life much easier.</p><p>I suffer from the same things.  We've been an IBM shop forever.  Our managers have basically given all control to IBM to make our decisions for us.  But we hired a new CIO.  Not a friend of the mainframe.  While we haven't abandoned the mainframe yet, its going to happen.  Unfortunately, our CIO is making the same mistakes as the previous generation of CIO's.  While he's no ally of IBM, he's had no problem going with Microsoft for everything else.  So nothing has really changed.</p><p>I believe its really the culture these managers came through.  In 10 years, we'll see more upper-level managers who accept open source or Apple technology.</p><p>I guess its really hard to find upper level management who believes in their employees.  They are going to side with Microsoft over what their employees tell them.</p><p>My company hasn't listened to me ever.  They only listen to IBM, Microsoft, and Gartner.   Yet, when Gartner tells them the same thing I told them 18 months earlier, its like a revelation to them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What you have at your place are executives who do n't want to make tough decisions .
They want the decisions to be made for them .
If they give Microsoft exclusivity over their I.T .
choices , it makes their life much easier.I suffer from the same things .
We 've been an IBM shop forever .
Our managers have basically given all control to IBM to make our decisions for us .
But we hired a new CIO .
Not a friend of the mainframe .
While we have n't abandoned the mainframe yet , its going to happen .
Unfortunately , our CIO is making the same mistakes as the previous generation of CIO 's .
While he 's no ally of IBM , he 's had no problem going with Microsoft for everything else .
So nothing has really changed.I believe its really the culture these managers came through .
In 10 years , we 'll see more upper-level managers who accept open source or Apple technology.I guess its really hard to find upper level management who believes in their employees .
They are going to side with Microsoft over what their employees tell them.My company has n't listened to me ever .
They only listen to IBM , Microsoft , and Gartner .
Yet , when Gartner tells them the same thing I told them 18 months earlier , its like a revelation to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you have at your place are executives who don't want to make tough decisions.
They want the decisions to be made for them.
If they give Microsoft exclusivity over their I.T.
choices, it makes their life much easier.I suffer from the same things.
We've been an IBM shop forever.
Our managers have basically given all control to IBM to make our decisions for us.
But we hired a new CIO.
Not a friend of the mainframe.
While we haven't abandoned the mainframe yet, its going to happen.
Unfortunately, our CIO is making the same mistakes as the previous generation of CIO's.
While he's no ally of IBM, he's had no problem going with Microsoft for everything else.
So nothing has really changed.I believe its really the culture these managers came through.
In 10 years, we'll see more upper-level managers who accept open source or Apple technology.I guess its really hard to find upper level management who believes in their employees.
They are going to side with Microsoft over what their employees tell them.My company hasn't listened to me ever.
They only listen to IBM, Microsoft, and Gartner.
Yet, when Gartner tells them the same thing I told them 18 months earlier, its like a revelation to them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359152</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doctors and Nurses are not Computer Nerds! Get a clue until Linux has a GUI worth a crap and drops so much dependency on the command line it will always be a Geeks OS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Doctors and Nurses are not Computer Nerds !
Get a clue until Linux has a GUI worth a crap and drops so much dependency on the command line it will always be a Geeks OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doctors and Nurses are not Computer Nerds!
Get a clue until Linux has a GUI worth a crap and drops so much dependency on the command line it will always be a Geeks OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358862</id>
	<title>Savings only in the long run</title>
	<author>bheer</author>
	<datestamp>1267723260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes it would cost less in the long run, but in the short to medium term they'll be running around like headless chickens outside their comfort zone (sorry for the mixed metaphors).</p><p>For right now: If these guys are 'strategically' a Microsoft shop, then there's little you can do at your pay grade. Suck it up or leave.</p><p>And as much as I hate being tied to IE, I (putting my IT manager hat on) can see why I wouldn't want an unsupported browser on my network. And Mozilla doesn't make it easy to deploy Firefox across an enterprise (no group policy, no MSI -- I know about 3rd party tools but those don't really count)</p><p>And who knows, maybe your bosses are the nasty types who see the fact that IE performs poorly on modern websites as a 'feature'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes it would cost less in the long run , but in the short to medium term they 'll be running around like headless chickens outside their comfort zone ( sorry for the mixed metaphors ) .For right now : If these guys are 'strategically ' a Microsoft shop , then there 's little you can do at your pay grade .
Suck it up or leave.And as much as I hate being tied to IE , I ( putting my IT manager hat on ) can see why I would n't want an unsupported browser on my network .
And Mozilla does n't make it easy to deploy Firefox across an enterprise ( no group policy , no MSI -- I know about 3rd party tools but those do n't really count ) And who knows , maybe your bosses are the nasty types who see the fact that IE performs poorly on modern websites as a 'feature' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes it would cost less in the long run, but in the short to medium term they'll be running around like headless chickens outside their comfort zone (sorry for the mixed metaphors).For right now: If these guys are 'strategically' a Microsoft shop, then there's little you can do at your pay grade.
Suck it up or leave.And as much as I hate being tied to IE, I (putting my IT manager hat on) can see why I wouldn't want an unsupported browser on my network.
And Mozilla doesn't make it easy to deploy Firefox across an enterprise (no group policy, no MSI -- I know about 3rd party tools but those don't really count)And who knows, maybe your bosses are the nasty types who see the fact that IE performs poorly on modern websites as a 'feature'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31365078</id>
	<title>find a new job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267707900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You obviously know better than your management whats best for your company.  I mean that MBA you have or Masters in MIS speaks volumes.  Microsoft stuff just plays well together.  ASP.NET web pages are best displayed in IE.  You have no reason to run Firefox.  Sure open source is free but Oracle isn't and don't even humor me with running MySQL, I would fire you for suggesting it.  I used to think that open source was the end all to be all but 2 years of working in a Microsoft shop changed my mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You obviously know better than your management whats best for your company .
I mean that MBA you have or Masters in MIS speaks volumes .
Microsoft stuff just plays well together .
ASP.NET web pages are best displayed in IE .
You have no reason to run Firefox .
Sure open source is free but Oracle is n't and do n't even humor me with running MySQL , I would fire you for suggesting it .
I used to think that open source was the end all to be all but 2 years of working in a Microsoft shop changed my mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You obviously know better than your management whats best for your company.
I mean that MBA you have or Masters in MIS speaks volumes.
Microsoft stuff just plays well together.
ASP.NET web pages are best displayed in IE.
You have no reason to run Firefox.
Sure open source is free but Oracle isn't and don't even humor me with running MySQL, I would fire you for suggesting it.
I used to think that open source was the end all to be all but 2 years of working in a Microsoft shop changed my mind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359176</id>
	<title>It's above your pay grade</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1267724400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are legitimate technical and economic reasons to be a monolithic shop.</p><p>There are legitimate technical and economic reasons to be a heterogeneous shop.</p><p>Sometimes these decisions are made for reasons other than what is in the best interest of the company or its stakeholders.</p><p>For good or bad, those decisions are above your pay grade.  I recommend either biting the bullet or resigning and then putting on your taxpayer hat, and taking it up with the elected official who is in charge of the hospital or who appoints those in charge of the hospital.  If it turns out there is good reason for their decision you will have given up your job for nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are legitimate technical and economic reasons to be a monolithic shop.There are legitimate technical and economic reasons to be a heterogeneous shop.Sometimes these decisions are made for reasons other than what is in the best interest of the company or its stakeholders.For good or bad , those decisions are above your pay grade .
I recommend either biting the bullet or resigning and then putting on your taxpayer hat , and taking it up with the elected official who is in charge of the hospital or who appoints those in charge of the hospital .
If it turns out there is good reason for their decision you will have given up your job for nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are legitimate technical and economic reasons to be a monolithic shop.There are legitimate technical and economic reasons to be a heterogeneous shop.Sometimes these decisions are made for reasons other than what is in the best interest of the company or its stakeholders.For good or bad, those decisions are above your pay grade.
I recommend either biting the bullet or resigning and then putting on your taxpayer hat, and taking it up with the elected official who is in charge of the hospital or who appoints those in charge of the hospital.
If it turns out there is good reason for their decision you will have given up your job for nothing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359612</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some one has to maintain every piece of software - and train people on each piece of software. This is not your developer shop - this is a public hospital with a lot of people who are not very computer savvy. Every piece of software adds to the complexity of the system.</p><p>By the way - stop saying 'my tax dollars' - you are paying your share to administrators who decide how to do something. Just cos you paid $10K of a $1Billion budget doesnt mean you get to say how every penny should be used.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some one has to maintain every piece of software - and train people on each piece of software .
This is not your developer shop - this is a public hospital with a lot of people who are not very computer savvy .
Every piece of software adds to the complexity of the system.By the way - stop saying 'my tax dollars ' - you are paying your share to administrators who decide how to do something .
Just cos you paid $ 10K of a $ 1Billion budget doesnt mean you get to say how every penny should be used .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some one has to maintain every piece of software - and train people on each piece of software.
This is not your developer shop - this is a public hospital with a lot of people who are not very computer savvy.
Every piece of software adds to the complexity of the system.By the way - stop saying 'my tax dollars' - you are paying your share to administrators who decide how to do something.
Just cos you paid $10K of a $1Billion budget doesnt mean you get to say how every penny should be used.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361914</id>
	<title>Stand up and protest!</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1267693740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, and get your resume ready first.</p><p>Its your choice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , and get your resume ready first.Its your choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, and get your resume ready first.Its your choice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359942</id>
	<title>me too!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work at a state government agency and we were recently told that we couldn't use firefox because it isn't secure.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-S  We were recommended to use IE7 instead.  Unfortunately I am not aware of a single coworker who used firefox previously and stopped then using it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work at a state government agency and we were recently told that we could n't use firefox because it is n't secure .
: -S We were recommended to use IE7 instead .
Unfortunately I am not aware of a single coworker who used firefox previously and stopped then using it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work at a state government agency and we were recently told that we couldn't use firefox because it isn't secure.
:-S  We were recommended to use IE7 instead.
Unfortunately I am not aware of a single coworker who used firefox previously and stopped then using it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361454</id>
	<title>OP Here: Colleague's Take On This:</title>
	<author>sammcj</author>
	<datestamp>1267734720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Someone at my work emailed me this, thismorning:

"I'll tell you this we had an opportunity to use a product to compete with end note and save us thousands of dollars and they denied it. They even wanted him to remove it from his computer. All he wanted was add a add-in to word so he could use this open source type end-note program. He was looking at this because his department couldn't or wouldn't fund end-note $600"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone at my work emailed me this , thismorning : " I 'll tell you this we had an opportunity to use a product to compete with end note and save us thousands of dollars and they denied it .
They even wanted him to remove it from his computer .
All he wanted was add a add-in to word so he could use this open source type end-note program .
He was looking at this because his department could n't or would n't fund end-note $ 600 "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone at my work emailed me this, thismorning:

"I'll tell you this we had an opportunity to use a product to compete with end note and save us thousands of dollars and they denied it.
They even wanted him to remove it from his computer.
All he wanted was add a add-in to word so he could use this open source type end-note program.
He was looking at this because his department couldn't or wouldn't fund end-note $600"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358872</id>
	<title>A clear case...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems to be a clear case of management by magazine, or management influenced by some free launch event.  Make proper recommendations.  Respectfully document your objections while providing alternatives.  Then, in a few years, when the company is facing public scrutiny for being a financial failure, someone will come across your correspondance and you'll have the unique satisfaction of being able to say "I told 'em so."</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to be a clear case of management by magazine , or management influenced by some free launch event .
Make proper recommendations .
Respectfully document your objections while providing alternatives .
Then , in a few years , when the company is facing public scrutiny for being a financial failure , someone will come across your correspondance and you 'll have the unique satisfaction of being able to say " I told 'em so .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to be a clear case of management by magazine, or management influenced by some free launch event.
Make proper recommendations.
Respectfully document your objections while providing alternatives.
Then, in a few years, when the company is facing public scrutiny for being a financial failure, someone will come across your correspondance and you'll have the unique satisfaction of being able to say "I told 'em so.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359512</id>
	<title>Re:Your management</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267725720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from Microsoft's infrastructure, but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run.</p></div><p>Open source? Invested in training? I probably have some news for you...when dealing with healthcare, nothing is free, especially the software. The reason why many hospitals run Windows XP and use Exchange, MS SQL, etc, is because it interfaces with the large customer/patient databases and X-Ray machines.</p><p>A bottom of the line digital X-Ray machine for a Vet Clinic (I'm using this as an example, because I have experience with it) is $200, 000. Software costs $50, 000 and runs only on Windows. Now, say we were to go with an "open source" OS, like Ubuntu. Sure, it's free (we save $150!!), but now who is going to program this amazing "open source" X-Ray program to interface with the X-Ray machine? Oh, wait, you mean you can't? Of course not, because the X-Ray manufacturer isn't about to get locked out of $50, 000 profit...but don't worry, they WILL custom program an "open source" solution for you, for another $400, 000...</p><p>What about that patient database and front-end? What? It only works on Windows? Why? Because programming one for Windows and Linux, when Linux has 1\% market share, or 5\% or 10\% isn't worth the development costs - there is no return on investment. One major player has to take a chance and do it - they will likely lose money for the first few years, until enough hospitals/clinics, switch over. The problem with switching to an open source OS, is that ALL of their programs have to work on it. No IT body is going to jury-rig a solution where they use Ubuntu for program X, and then throw VMware or VirtualBox on it to have Windows XP to use program Y. It's a support nightmare, and very difficult to sell to upper-management. Custom software is a bitch, and no one will do it for free. Do you know why companies still pay millions of dollars per year to MS and Oracle for their databases? Because Postgres and MySQL, even though they are free and open source, just cannot compete in certain situations. Healthcare is a big industry, and it represents the equivalent of a Berlin Wall of technology. Nothing gets in unless it is thoroughly vetted and tested. It's not that they believe Windows XP is the best OS to run their X-Ray machine, it's that they know 100\% what to expect, they have used it for years, they have policies regarding its use, they have it locked down. Changing it brings a whole lot of uncertainty and cost...and like I said before, until a huge player tries something different, nothing will change...and no player that big is going to make shit for free.</p><p>The MS Exchange, SQL, Windows licences are a tiny, miniscule amount of the software costs compared to the custom software hospitals use. It's all made for Windows (well, a lot of it).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from Microsoft 's infrastructure , but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft 's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system , we would be far better off in the long run.Open source ?
Invested in training ?
I probably have some news for you...when dealing with healthcare , nothing is free , especially the software .
The reason why many hospitals run Windows XP and use Exchange , MS SQL , etc , is because it interfaces with the large customer/patient databases and X-Ray machines.A bottom of the line digital X-Ray machine for a Vet Clinic ( I 'm using this as an example , because I have experience with it ) is $ 200 , 000 .
Software costs $ 50 , 000 and runs only on Windows .
Now , say we were to go with an " open source " OS , like Ubuntu .
Sure , it 's free ( we save $ 150 ! !
) , but now who is going to program this amazing " open source " X-Ray program to interface with the X-Ray machine ?
Oh , wait , you mean you ca n't ?
Of course not , because the X-Ray manufacturer is n't about to get locked out of $ 50 , 000 profit...but do n't worry , they WILL custom program an " open source " solution for you , for another $ 400 , 000...What about that patient database and front-end ?
What ? It only works on Windows ?
Why ? Because programming one for Windows and Linux , when Linux has 1 \ % market share , or 5 \ % or 10 \ % is n't worth the development costs - there is no return on investment .
One major player has to take a chance and do it - they will likely lose money for the first few years , until enough hospitals/clinics , switch over .
The problem with switching to an open source OS , is that ALL of their programs have to work on it .
No IT body is going to jury-rig a solution where they use Ubuntu for program X , and then throw VMware or VirtualBox on it to have Windows XP to use program Y. It 's a support nightmare , and very difficult to sell to upper-management .
Custom software is a bitch , and no one will do it for free .
Do you know why companies still pay millions of dollars per year to MS and Oracle for their databases ?
Because Postgres and MySQL , even though they are free and open source , just can not compete in certain situations .
Healthcare is a big industry , and it represents the equivalent of a Berlin Wall of technology .
Nothing gets in unless it is thoroughly vetted and tested .
It 's not that they believe Windows XP is the best OS to run their X-Ray machine , it 's that they know 100 \ % what to expect , they have used it for years , they have policies regarding its use , they have it locked down .
Changing it brings a whole lot of uncertainty and cost...and like I said before , until a huge player tries something different , nothing will change...and no player that big is going to make shit for free.The MS Exchange , SQL , Windows licences are a tiny , miniscule amount of the software costs compared to the custom software hospitals use .
It 's all made for Windows ( well , a lot of it ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not foolish enough to say all our problems would be solved overnight by changing away from Microsoft's infrastructure, but I am convinced that if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run.Open source?
Invested in training?
I probably have some news for you...when dealing with healthcare, nothing is free, especially the software.
The reason why many hospitals run Windows XP and use Exchange, MS SQL, etc, is because it interfaces with the large customer/patient databases and X-Ray machines.A bottom of the line digital X-Ray machine for a Vet Clinic (I'm using this as an example, because I have experience with it) is $200, 000.
Software costs $50, 000 and runs only on Windows.
Now, say we were to go with an "open source" OS, like Ubuntu.
Sure, it's free (we save $150!!
), but now who is going to program this amazing "open source" X-Ray program to interface with the X-Ray machine?
Oh, wait, you mean you can't?
Of course not, because the X-Ray manufacturer isn't about to get locked out of $50, 000 profit...but don't worry, they WILL custom program an "open source" solution for you, for another $400, 000...What about that patient database and front-end?
What? It only works on Windows?
Why? Because programming one for Windows and Linux, when Linux has 1\% market share, or 5\% or 10\% isn't worth the development costs - there is no return on investment.
One major player has to take a chance and do it - they will likely lose money for the first few years, until enough hospitals/clinics, switch over.
The problem with switching to an open source OS, is that ALL of their programs have to work on it.
No IT body is going to jury-rig a solution where they use Ubuntu for program X, and then throw VMware or VirtualBox on it to have Windows XP to use program Y. It's a support nightmare, and very difficult to sell to upper-management.
Custom software is a bitch, and no one will do it for free.
Do you know why companies still pay millions of dollars per year to MS and Oracle for their databases?
Because Postgres and MySQL, even though they are free and open source, just cannot compete in certain situations.
Healthcare is a big industry, and it represents the equivalent of a Berlin Wall of technology.
Nothing gets in unless it is thoroughly vetted and tested.
It's not that they believe Windows XP is the best OS to run their X-Ray machine, it's that they know 100\% what to expect, they have used it for years, they have policies regarding its use, they have it locked down.
Changing it brings a whole lot of uncertainty and cost...and like I said before, until a huge player tries something different, nothing will change...and no player that big is going to make shit for free.The MS Exchange, SQL, Windows licences are a tiny, miniscule amount of the software costs compared to the custom software hospitals use.
It's all made for Windows (well, a lot of it).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358818</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>Cornwallis</author>
	<datestamp>1267723140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry Mr. Ballmer...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry Mr. Ballmer.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry Mr. Ballmer...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358782</id>
	<title>Leak the email</title>
	<author>mgessner</author>
	<datestamp>1267722900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let the public know.  I doubt many of the citizens would take a side, but you could be putting pressure on the IT directors to justify why they spend so much money.</p><p>Of course, they might contact Microsoft, who would bring out their own "independent" (read: Microsoft-funded) studies that show that, in the long run, Microsoft is cheaper than open source.</p><p>But perhaps in this time of economic trouble, a friendly journalist might take your side and decide they want to screw with the government for wasting taxpayer $$.</p><p>Good luck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let the public know .
I doubt many of the citizens would take a side , but you could be putting pressure on the IT directors to justify why they spend so much money.Of course , they might contact Microsoft , who would bring out their own " independent " ( read : Microsoft-funded ) studies that show that , in the long run , Microsoft is cheaper than open source.But perhaps in this time of economic trouble , a friendly journalist might take your side and decide they want to screw with the government for wasting taxpayer $ $ .Good luck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let the public know.
I doubt many of the citizens would take a side, but you could be putting pressure on the IT directors to justify why they spend so much money.Of course, they might contact Microsoft, who would bring out their own "independent" (read: Microsoft-funded) studies that show that, in the long run, Microsoft is cheaper than open source.But perhaps in this time of economic trouble, a friendly journalist might take your side and decide they want to screw with the government for wasting taxpayer $$.Good luck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359046</id>
	<title>Take it one step at a time</title>
	<author>spyrochaete</author>
	<datestamp>1267723860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you go to your CIO saying "if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run" you will be ignored.  Rip and replace never goes as smoothly as the pamphlets promise.  Fine one application with measurable improvements over your existing system and make an ROI case for that one small change.  Earn the credibility by being sympathetic to your CIO or IT Director's objectives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you go to your CIO saying " if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft 's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system , we would be far better off in the long run " you will be ignored .
Rip and replace never goes as smoothly as the pamphlets promise .
Fine one application with measurable improvements over your existing system and make an ROI case for that one small change .
Earn the credibility by being sympathetic to your CIO or IT Director 's objectives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you go to your CIO saying "if we took less than half the money we spend on licensing Microsoft's software alone and invested that in training users for an open source system, we would be far better off in the long run" you will be ignored.
Rip and replace never goes as smoothly as the pamphlets promise.
Fine one application with measurable improvements over your existing system and make an ROI case for that one small change.
Earn the credibility by being sympathetic to your CIO or IT Director's objectives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359536</id>
	<title>Take it to the politicians</title>
	<author>swb</author>
	<datestamp>1267725840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take it to the politicians who oversee your hospital and provide funding and ultimately governance.</p><p>My guess is that Democrats would be the most likely to care about this, either from a public interest perspective, a conflict of interest or possibly even kickback basis, or even a freedom of speech basis (yes, you don't have freedom of speech at work but the rules are often more fluid when you work for the government).</p><p>I'd like for Republicans to care about this from a government-money-being-wasted basis, but AFAICT the general trend seems to be Republicans generally being in favor of corporate alignment, sweetheart deals, executive preference and suppressing workers.</p><p>The right politician on this case might actually put the fear of God in the executives responsible for this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take it to the politicians who oversee your hospital and provide funding and ultimately governance.My guess is that Democrats would be the most likely to care about this , either from a public interest perspective , a conflict of interest or possibly even kickback basis , or even a freedom of speech basis ( yes , you do n't have freedom of speech at work but the rules are often more fluid when you work for the government ) .I 'd like for Republicans to care about this from a government-money-being-wasted basis , but AFAICT the general trend seems to be Republicans generally being in favor of corporate alignment , sweetheart deals , executive preference and suppressing workers.The right politician on this case might actually put the fear of God in the executives responsible for this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take it to the politicians who oversee your hospital and provide funding and ultimately governance.My guess is that Democrats would be the most likely to care about this, either from a public interest perspective, a conflict of interest or possibly even kickback basis, or even a freedom of speech basis (yes, you don't have freedom of speech at work but the rules are often more fluid when you work for the government).I'd like for Republicans to care about this from a government-money-being-wasted basis, but AFAICT the general trend seems to be Republicans generally being in favor of corporate alignment, sweetheart deals, executive preference and suppressing workers.The right politician on this case might actually put the fear of God in the executives responsible for this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363424</id>
	<title>Re:OP Here: M$ Cost Per Client.</title>
	<author>Kalriath</author>
	<datestamp>1267700280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then whoever negotiated your VLA is an idiot.  We don't pay near that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then whoever negotiated your VLA is an idiot .
We do n't pay near that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then whoever negotiated your VLA is an idiot.
We don't pay near that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358882</id>
	<title>Paid for</title>
	<author>DogDude</author>
	<datestamp>1267723320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The silence was paid for.  Microsoft probably gave them a really great deal, in exchange for going exclusively MS.  MS does it for visibility.

I don't think it's stifling anything.  Major IT decisions about an organization are made at the top, not by the users.  That's the way things work the best.  The same person or people who made the MS decision, are the same ones who would undo it, as well.  So, who exactly are you trying to convince?  If you don't like the policy, apply for the VP IT job.

I'd also like to point out that at this point, you have little to no information on which to think that going all MS is a BAD idea.  Perhaps it's a very good thing for your organization, financially, or otherwise.  You don't sound like you're in a position to know any of the decision making points for this organization, in fact.  Why does everybody who can use a mouse think that they're qualified to offer their opinion on large IT infrastructure decisions?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The silence was paid for .
Microsoft probably gave them a really great deal , in exchange for going exclusively MS. MS does it for visibility .
I do n't think it 's stifling anything .
Major IT decisions about an organization are made at the top , not by the users .
That 's the way things work the best .
The same person or people who made the MS decision , are the same ones who would undo it , as well .
So , who exactly are you trying to convince ?
If you do n't like the policy , apply for the VP IT job .
I 'd also like to point out that at this point , you have little to no information on which to think that going all MS is a BAD idea .
Perhaps it 's a very good thing for your organization , financially , or otherwise .
You do n't sound like you 're in a position to know any of the decision making points for this organization , in fact .
Why does everybody who can use a mouse think that they 're qualified to offer their opinion on large IT infrastructure decisions ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The silence was paid for.
Microsoft probably gave them a really great deal, in exchange for going exclusively MS.  MS does it for visibility.
I don't think it's stifling anything.
Major IT decisions about an organization are made at the top, not by the users.
That's the way things work the best.
The same person or people who made the MS decision, are the same ones who would undo it, as well.
So, who exactly are you trying to convince?
If you don't like the policy, apply for the VP IT job.
I'd also like to point out that at this point, you have little to no information on which to think that going all MS is a BAD idea.
Perhaps it's a very good thing for your organization, financially, or otherwise.
You don't sound like you're in a position to know any of the decision making points for this organization, in fact.
Why does everybody who can use a mouse think that they're qualified to offer their opinion on large IT infrastructure decisions?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360534</id>
	<title>Re:Take it to the board</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267730340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I came here to say exactly this; except I would add that "whistle-blowing" would be the ace-in-the-hole. If you have a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis proving that a public organisation could save money, and the administrators refused, you could very easily forward a copy to the media, who'll do a nice hatchet-piece about how wasteful said organisation (and government bureaucrats in general) are. This would only be a final recourse (I'd try your steps first), and you'd have to make the higher-ups aware that you (know you) have this piece of leverage and are prepared to use it. You might also consider "looking for a new job" as part and parcel with "whistle blowing" (depending on your local jurisdictions' policies towards employment protection for whistle-blowers).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I came here to say exactly this ; except I would add that " whistle-blowing " would be the ace-in-the-hole .
If you have a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis proving that a public organisation could save money , and the administrators refused , you could very easily forward a copy to the media , who 'll do a nice hatchet-piece about how wasteful said organisation ( and government bureaucrats in general ) are .
This would only be a final recourse ( I 'd try your steps first ) , and you 'd have to make the higher-ups aware that you ( know you ) have this piece of leverage and are prepared to use it .
You might also consider " looking for a new job " as part and parcel with " whistle blowing " ( depending on your local jurisdictions ' policies towards employment protection for whistle-blowers ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I came here to say exactly this; except I would add that "whistle-blowing" would be the ace-in-the-hole.
If you have a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis proving that a public organisation could save money, and the administrators refused, you could very easily forward a copy to the media, who'll do a nice hatchet-piece about how wasteful said organisation (and government bureaucrats in general) are.
This would only be a final recourse (I'd try your steps first), and you'd have to make the higher-ups aware that you (know you) have this piece of leverage and are prepared to use it.
You might also consider "looking for a new job" as part and parcel with "whistle blowing" (depending on your local jurisdictions' policies towards employment protection for whistle-blowers).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216</id>
	<title>Obligatory</title>
	<author>Tikkun</author>
	<datestamp>1267724520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?

That sounds preposterous to me.

If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.

Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.

Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.

I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it , at all ?
As in , without a boot disk , without any drivers , and without any services ?
That sounds preposterous to me .
If it were true ( and I doubt it ) , then companies would be selling computers without a windows .
This clearly is not happening , so there must be some error in your calculations .
I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ?
Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish , and that is a very difficult thing to acheive .
A lot of people dont realise this .
Microsoft just spent $ 9 billion and many years to create Vista , so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that .
It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve .
IBM tried , and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows .
Apple tried to create their own system for years , but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft .
Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish , without using some of the more critical parts of windows .
Not possible .
I think you need to re-examine your assumptions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ?
As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?
That sounds preposterous to me.
If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows.
This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations.
I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ?
Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive.
A lot of people dont realise this.
Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that.
It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve.
IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows.
Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.
Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows.
Not possible.
I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31370200</id>
	<title>Re:Have you asked why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267800420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Goddamn, is it so hard to implement a filtering proxy nowadays? Why would you fiddle with AD for this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Goddamn , is it so hard to implement a filtering proxy nowadays ?
Why would you fiddle with AD for this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Goddamn, is it so hard to implement a filtering proxy nowadays?
Why would you fiddle with AD for this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362316</id>
	<title>Re:Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>Monchanger</author>
	<datestamp>1267695900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My employer, despite generally being a Microsoft shop, is aware of security and pays for proper software which has no problem handling popular non-Microsoft software.</p><p>Our corporate security software automatically updates IE and notifies me every time my Firefox &amp; Chrome need updates (which, for anyone hiding under a rock, perform self-updates on startup) as well as many other pieces of software.  My boss is notified if I don't take care of things within a set deadline.  It's all automatic except for a few weird applications I need to update myself.</p><p>If you admit IE is a productivity drain, why not do your homework and figure out how to take advantage of better software?  Is your convenience and stubbornness more important than the output and happiness of your users?</p><p>Who's really not thinking strategically?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My employer , despite generally being a Microsoft shop , is aware of security and pays for proper software which has no problem handling popular non-Microsoft software.Our corporate security software automatically updates IE and notifies me every time my Firefox &amp; Chrome need updates ( which , for anyone hiding under a rock , perform self-updates on startup ) as well as many other pieces of software .
My boss is notified if I do n't take care of things within a set deadline .
It 's all automatic except for a few weird applications I need to update myself.If you admit IE is a productivity drain , why not do your homework and figure out how to take advantage of better software ?
Is your convenience and stubbornness more important than the output and happiness of your users ? Who 's really not thinking strategically ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My employer, despite generally being a Microsoft shop, is aware of security and pays for proper software which has no problem handling popular non-Microsoft software.Our corporate security software automatically updates IE and notifies me every time my Firefox &amp; Chrome need updates (which, for anyone hiding under a rock, perform self-updates on startup) as well as many other pieces of software.
My boss is notified if I don't take care of things within a set deadline.
It's all automatic except for a few weird applications I need to update myself.If you admit IE is a productivity drain, why not do your homework and figure out how to take advantage of better software?
Is your convenience and stubbornness more important than the output and happiness of your users?Who's really not thinking strategically?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359962</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory</title>
	<author>scotts13</author>
	<datestamp>1267727400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This would be a lot funnier if it wasn't posted verbatim, in forum after forum, month after month. Think up a new joke!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This would be a lot funnier if it was n't posted verbatim , in forum after forum , month after month .
Think up a new joke !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would be a lot funnier if it wasn't posted verbatim, in forum after forum, month after month.
Think up a new joke!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363344</id>
	<title>Me Too</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267699920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm working in a publicly owned utility. I was thinking I might publish a suggestion in the local paper (under a pseudonym of course) regarding how our county could save some money, and possibly avoid a few layoffs. Some of the proprietary software we are being forced to use is inferior to the free alternatives. In other cases the proprietary software is very good, but if the provider thought we were investigating other alternatives, they might give us discounts. I wonder whether Microsoft would cut us a deal on MS Office if we installed Open Office on every machine and encouraged our staff to experiment with it. And I see no reason that we shouldn't replace Lotus Notes with a free (as in beer and speech) alternative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm working in a publicly owned utility .
I was thinking I might publish a suggestion in the local paper ( under a pseudonym of course ) regarding how our county could save some money , and possibly avoid a few layoffs .
Some of the proprietary software we are being forced to use is inferior to the free alternatives .
In other cases the proprietary software is very good , but if the provider thought we were investigating other alternatives , they might give us discounts .
I wonder whether Microsoft would cut us a deal on MS Office if we installed Open Office on every machine and encouraged our staff to experiment with it .
And I see no reason that we should n't replace Lotus Notes with a free ( as in beer and speech ) alternative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm working in a publicly owned utility.
I was thinking I might publish a suggestion in the local paper (under a pseudonym of course) regarding how our county could save some money, and possibly avoid a few layoffs.
Some of the proprietary software we are being forced to use is inferior to the free alternatives.
In other cases the proprietary software is very good, but if the provider thought we were investigating other alternatives, they might give us discounts.
I wonder whether Microsoft would cut us a deal on MS Office if we installed Open Office on every machine and encouraged our staff to experiment with it.
And I see no reason that we shouldn't replace Lotus Notes with a free (as in beer and speech) alternative.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361486</id>
	<title>Re:Bossy Overlords</title>
	<author>sammcj</author>
	<datestamp>1267735020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>bahhaha. I actually lol'd.</htmltext>
<tokenext>bahhaha .
I actually lol 'd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bahhaha.
I actually lol'd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358900</id>
	<title>As always</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Licensing costs are a cost, but are one of the smallest costs of running an organization.  A Windows license costs, what, $80/person?  What would training them for Linux cost? In two-four years, what does training their replacement cost? How much more do you pay for competent *nix admins?</p><p>For desktop users, the cost of Windows is insignificant compared to the costs of human beings and the costs of switching, or even testing to see if switching makes sense, is often a waste of money.</p><p>Even if Linux is "good enough" for their work, it's not worth switching.</p><p>Firefox is a stranger case.  I can think of technical reasons an organization might not choose to support it, (minority overall, the union of IE exploits and Firefox exploits is greater than IE exploits alone, doesn't support group policy) but it seems odd to have it as a policy.</p><p>IMO, this is a case of "shut the fuck up, you've talked this to death, we've made a decision, now get to work"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Licensing costs are a cost , but are one of the smallest costs of running an organization .
A Windows license costs , what , $ 80/person ?
What would training them for Linux cost ?
In two-four years , what does training their replacement cost ?
How much more do you pay for competent * nix admins ? For desktop users , the cost of Windows is insignificant compared to the costs of human beings and the costs of switching , or even testing to see if switching makes sense , is often a waste of money.Even if Linux is " good enough " for their work , it 's not worth switching.Firefox is a stranger case .
I can think of technical reasons an organization might not choose to support it , ( minority overall , the union of IE exploits and Firefox exploits is greater than IE exploits alone , does n't support group policy ) but it seems odd to have it as a policy.IMO , this is a case of " shut the fuck up , you 've talked this to death , we 've made a decision , now get to work "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Licensing costs are a cost, but are one of the smallest costs of running an organization.
A Windows license costs, what, $80/person?
What would training them for Linux cost?
In two-four years, what does training their replacement cost?
How much more do you pay for competent *nix admins?For desktop users, the cost of Windows is insignificant compared to the costs of human beings and the costs of switching, or even testing to see if switching makes sense, is often a waste of money.Even if Linux is "good enough" for their work, it's not worth switching.Firefox is a stranger case.
I can think of technical reasons an organization might not choose to support it, (minority overall, the union of IE exploits and Firefox exploits is greater than IE exploits alone, doesn't support group policy) but it seems odd to have it as a policy.IMO, this is a case of "shut the fuck up, you've talked this to death, we've made a decision, now get to work"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360098</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>MadCow42</author>
	<datestamp>1267728000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just to illustrate my point, I used to give demos of using Photoshop with a digital photographic printer my company made.  Even doing so in Japan, on a Japanese-language version of Photoshop wasn't an issue because I know where each option was in the menus.  It was quick and efficient (as opposed to keyboard shortcuts on a Japanese keyboard)... no "hunting" required.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just to illustrate my point , I used to give demos of using Photoshop with a digital photographic printer my company made .
Even doing so in Japan , on a Japanese-language version of Photoshop was n't an issue because I know where each option was in the menus .
It was quick and efficient ( as opposed to keyboard shortcuts on a Japanese keyboard ) ... no " hunting " required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just to illustrate my point, I used to give demos of using Photoshop with a digital photographic printer my company made.
Even doing so in Japan, on a Japanese-language version of Photoshop wasn't an issue because I know where each option was in the menus.
It was quick and efficient (as opposed to keyboard shortcuts on a Japanese keyboard)... no "hunting" required.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359218</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362234</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1267695420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unless you mean MS flavor of the month, how long did vista last?</p><p>This smells like astroturf.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you mean MS flavor of the month , how long did vista last ? This smells like astroturf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless you mean MS flavor of the month, how long did vista last?This smells like astroturf.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360680</id>
	<title>Follow the money</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1267731060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whoever decided this policy will either be rolling into work in a new car, taking a very expensive summer vacation, or soon will be 'golden parachuting' into a well-compensated consultancy gig for a front company indirectly owned by a certain corporation located in the Pacific Northwest.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whoever decided this policy will either be rolling into work in a new car , taking a very expensive summer vacation , or soon will be 'golden parachuting ' into a well-compensated consultancy gig for a front company indirectly owned by a certain corporation located in the Pacific Northwest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whoever decided this policy will either be rolling into work in a new car, taking a very expensive summer vacation, or soon will be 'golden parachuting' into a well-compensated consultancy gig for a front company indirectly owned by a certain corporation located in the Pacific Northwest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361156</id>
	<title>What's the problem?</title>
	<author>AK Marc</author>
	<datestamp>1267733340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The answer to this is "Upper management is tired of hearing people whining that their purchase decisions are crap, and the next person that calls Upper Management a Microsoft shill is fired."  It really makes sense if there are a couple Linux nuts that run around installing rogue software, whining about their jobs to the users (unprofessional regardless of what they are supposed to be installing), and generally causing disruption.  The Upper Management did the ROI/business case once.  They won't do it again for a long time, even if wrong.  That's business.  If you work for them, you do what they say.  If you complain to your users that management is idiots (and that's how management sees constant complaints about their choices), then management would be right to fire you.  You are undermining their leadership for a choice that isn't yours to make.<br> <br>If you can't live with that, become a contractor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The answer to this is " Upper management is tired of hearing people whining that their purchase decisions are crap , and the next person that calls Upper Management a Microsoft shill is fired .
" It really makes sense if there are a couple Linux nuts that run around installing rogue software , whining about their jobs to the users ( unprofessional regardless of what they are supposed to be installing ) , and generally causing disruption .
The Upper Management did the ROI/business case once .
They wo n't do it again for a long time , even if wrong .
That 's business .
If you work for them , you do what they say .
If you complain to your users that management is idiots ( and that 's how management sees constant complaints about their choices ) , then management would be right to fire you .
You are undermining their leadership for a choice that is n't yours to make .
If you ca n't live with that , become a contractor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The answer to this is "Upper management is tired of hearing people whining that their purchase decisions are crap, and the next person that calls Upper Management a Microsoft shill is fired.
"  It really makes sense if there are a couple Linux nuts that run around installing rogue software, whining about their jobs to the users (unprofessional regardless of what they are supposed to be installing), and generally causing disruption.
The Upper Management did the ROI/business case once.
They won't do it again for a long time, even if wrong.
That's business.
If you work for them, you do what they say.
If you complain to your users that management is idiots (and that's how management sees constant complaints about their choices), then management would be right to fire you.
You are undermining their leadership for a choice that isn't yours to make.
If you can't live with that, become a contractor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361470</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>tbannist</author>
	<datestamp>1267734900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because nothing ever written by Microsoft ever turns out the be the "flavor of the month".  There are no IE6 only web sites that can't be upgraded to newer browsers.  Microsoft didn't totally change Visual Basic a couple of times.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net never existed.  Silverlight has always been more popular and better than flash.</p><p>The problem you describe has nothing to do with MS or not and everything to do with the changing nature of technology and/or a failure to establish consistent policies.  Frankly, going MS only is the idiot's way of solving this problem in that it's the wrong answer to the wrong problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because nothing ever written by Microsoft ever turns out the be the " flavor of the month " .
There are no IE6 only web sites that ca n't be upgraded to newer browsers .
Microsoft did n't totally change Visual Basic a couple of times .
.Net never existed .
Silverlight has always been more popular and better than flash.The problem you describe has nothing to do with MS or not and everything to do with the changing nature of technology and/or a failure to establish consistent policies .
Frankly , going MS only is the idiot 's way of solving this problem in that it 's the wrong answer to the wrong problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because nothing ever written by Microsoft ever turns out the be the "flavor of the month".
There are no IE6 only web sites that can't be upgraded to newer browsers.
Microsoft didn't totally change Visual Basic a couple of times.
.Net never existed.
Silverlight has always been more popular and better than flash.The problem you describe has nothing to do with MS or not and everything to do with the changing nature of technology and/or a failure to establish consistent policies.
Frankly, going MS only is the idiot's way of solving this problem in that it's the wrong answer to the wrong problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359678</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1267726260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft is cheaper.</p></div><p>It may well be the case for the company in question, but that's no reason to ban Firefox on corporate desktops, or prohibit employees from any remarks that can in any way be seen as promoting alternatives.</p><p>Among other things, you can't objectively judge if something is cheaper or not if you suppress any discussion of competing products.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft is cheaper.It may well be the case for the company in question , but that 's no reason to ban Firefox on corporate desktops , or prohibit employees from any remarks that can in any way be seen as promoting alternatives.Among other things , you ca n't objectively judge if something is cheaper or not if you suppress any discussion of competing products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft is cheaper.It may well be the case for the company in question, but that's no reason to ban Firefox on corporate desktops, or prohibit employees from any remarks that can in any way be seen as promoting alternatives.Among other things, you can't objectively judge if something is cheaper or not if you suppress any discussion of competing products.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360780</id>
	<title>WTF? I'm not seeing that at all</title>
	<author>walterbyrd</author>
	<datestamp>1267731540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am seeing some well reasoned responses to this topic. Some posters seem to believe that it may be wise to be an MS only shop.</p><p>Could you please cite all this anti-msft hate and fud to which you are referring?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am seeing some well reasoned responses to this topic .
Some posters seem to believe that it may be wise to be an MS only shop.Could you please cite all this anti-msft hate and fud to which you are referring ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am seeing some well reasoned responses to this topic.
Some posters seem to believe that it may be wise to be an MS only shop.Could you please cite all this anti-msft hate and fud to which you are referring?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363114</id>
	<title>So You Have</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1267699080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you have asshat zealots for bosses and you came to Slashdot for advice? Let the games begin!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you have asshat zealots for bosses and you came to Slashdot for advice ?
Let the games begin !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you have asshat zealots for bosses and you came to Slashdot for advice?
Let the games begin!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361164</id>
	<title>Re:Policy isn't your job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267733340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could always phrase your reply as "company/department policy says this...", and leave the unstated continuation for the other person to figure out.  You haven't outright contradicted the company policy, but the smarter folks will catch on to what you mean.  And the ones who are too STUPID to figure it out deserve all the crap that's coming their way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could always phrase your reply as " company/department policy says this... " , and leave the unstated continuation for the other person to figure out .
You have n't outright contradicted the company policy , but the smarter folks will catch on to what you mean .
And the ones who are too STUPID to figure it out deserve all the crap that 's coming their way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could always phrase your reply as "company/department policy says this...", and leave the unstated continuation for the other person to figure out.
You haven't outright contradicted the company policy, but the smarter folks will catch on to what you mean.
And the ones who are too STUPID to figure it out deserve all the crap that's coming their way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359192</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359846</id>
	<title>Just because you hate MS</title>
	<author>cenobyte40k</author>
	<datestamp>1267727100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doesn't make it OK to sabotage your workplace by encouraging open IT revolt. Honestly I don't know why so many MS haters feel like whatever they do there actions are appropriate as long as it's anti-MS. You fail to show us if you have any understanding at all of why MS is being used, or why you would think something else would be better overall. I know all the complaints about MS products, but honestly they are just a very few of the thousands of factors that need to be taken into account when buying software for a large business.

I am in no way saying here that there are not better products to do the jobs you do than the MS products you are using. However the only thing you really tell us here is that you hate MS and find it upsetting that your Bosses what you to do what they tell you. If you think there should be a change in policy and have some legitimate reasons why perhaps you should put them on paper and talk to your bosses. Don't be surprised when your bosses have legitimate reasons for wanting to stay with what they have. Planning IT for a large org is more complicated than you might think.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't make it OK to sabotage your workplace by encouraging open IT revolt .
Honestly I do n't know why so many MS haters feel like whatever they do there actions are appropriate as long as it 's anti-MS. You fail to show us if you have any understanding at all of why MS is being used , or why you would think something else would be better overall .
I know all the complaints about MS products , but honestly they are just a very few of the thousands of factors that need to be taken into account when buying software for a large business .
I am in no way saying here that there are not better products to do the jobs you do than the MS products you are using .
However the only thing you really tell us here is that you hate MS and find it upsetting that your Bosses what you to do what they tell you .
If you think there should be a change in policy and have some legitimate reasons why perhaps you should put them on paper and talk to your bosses .
Do n't be surprised when your bosses have legitimate reasons for wanting to stay with what they have .
Planning IT for a large org is more complicated than you might think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't make it OK to sabotage your workplace by encouraging open IT revolt.
Honestly I don't know why so many MS haters feel like whatever they do there actions are appropriate as long as it's anti-MS. You fail to show us if you have any understanding at all of why MS is being used, or why you would think something else would be better overall.
I know all the complaints about MS products, but honestly they are just a very few of the thousands of factors that need to be taken into account when buying software for a large business.
I am in no way saying here that there are not better products to do the jobs you do than the MS products you are using.
However the only thing you really tell us here is that you hate MS and find it upsetting that your Bosses what you to do what they tell you.
If you think there should be a change in policy and have some legitimate reasons why perhaps you should put them on paper and talk to your bosses.
Don't be surprised when your bosses have legitimate reasons for wanting to stay with what they have.
Planning IT for a large org is more complicated than you might think.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361012</id>
	<title>Outcome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267732620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is nothing new.</p><p>Here is my take on the whole controversy.</p><p>I originally got into unix because I noticed the smartest guys were into unix.  I got into open source software because it gave the user power.</p><p>In the end smart powerful people will triumph.  It will be a battle but I'm not worried about the outcome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is nothing new.Here is my take on the whole controversy.I originally got into unix because I noticed the smartest guys were into unix .
I got into open source software because it gave the user power.In the end smart powerful people will triumph .
It will be a battle but I 'm not worried about the outcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is nothing new.Here is my take on the whole controversy.I originally got into unix because I noticed the smartest guys were into unix.
I got into open source software because it gave the user power.In the end smart powerful people will triumph.
It will be a battle but I'm not worried about the outcome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361566</id>
	<title>Re:Think strategically for a moment - PLEASE.</title>
	<author>sammcj</author>
	<datestamp>1267735380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...

We do actually use squid, it's bloody great, never dies, never faults and never crashes on us.
But we now run webmarshal over the top and it causes us endless grief.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh and .. . We do actually use squid , it 's bloody great , never dies , never faults and never crashes on us .
But we now run webmarshal over the top and it causes us endless grief .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh and ...

We do actually use squid, it's bloody great, never dies, never faults and never crashes on us.
But we now run webmarshal over the top and it causes us endless grief.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362064</id>
	<title>Re:Policy isn't your job</title>
	<author>sammcj</author>
	<datestamp>1267694460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd rather stir things up and get in trouble while doing my bit to make things better.
I will NOT promote something I do not believe is the right decision however, I'm not going to walk round bad-mouthing management to customers, as you said that would be unprofessional.
However, when people ask me what I think of certain software I should feel free to express my opinion, this of course would be a problem if I say for example... worked for Microsoft or a Microsoft shop in which case I would just keep quiet and keep my opinions out of it, but as I said, I'm working for the taxpayer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd rather stir things up and get in trouble while doing my bit to make things better .
I will NOT promote something I do not believe is the right decision however , I 'm not going to walk round bad-mouthing management to customers , as you said that would be unprofessional .
However , when people ask me what I think of certain software I should feel free to express my opinion , this of course would be a problem if I say for example... worked for Microsoft or a Microsoft shop in which case I would just keep quiet and keep my opinions out of it , but as I said , I 'm working for the taxpayer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd rather stir things up and get in trouble while doing my bit to make things better.
I will NOT promote something I do not believe is the right decision however, I'm not going to walk round bad-mouthing management to customers, as you said that would be unprofessional.
However, when people ask me what I think of certain software I should feel free to express my opinion, this of course would be a problem if I say for example... worked for Microsoft or a Microsoft shop in which case I would just keep quiet and keep my opinions out of it, but as I said, I'm working for the taxpayer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359192</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788</id>
	<title>Your management</title>
	<author>bugs2squash</author>
	<datestamp>1267722960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>also have reason to prevent scope creep to contain support costs. Firefox may well be easier to support than IE, but IE alone will be easier to support than IE+FF.</htmltext>
<tokenext>also have reason to prevent scope creep to contain support costs .
Firefox may well be easier to support than IE , but IE alone will be easier to support than IE + FF .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>also have reason to prevent scope creep to contain support costs.
Firefox may well be easier to support than IE, but IE alone will be easier to support than IE+FF.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362768</id>
	<title>Re:Guess what</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1267697940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux isn't really more difficult, it's just different... In many ways it's actually easier, to do anything complex it's a lot simpler for instance and most configuration is done in text files that often have very good comments.</p><p>The problem is that people think windows can be run by any idiots (thanks to ms marketing it as such), which simply isn't the case... If you want a windows based network that's even remotely secure or stable you need to hire competent staff, and those people are generally not cheap... You also need a lot of third party software to keep a windows network running properly.</p><p>If you've content to have a flakey windows network operated by the cheapest possible staff you *might* save money, especially if you don't consider the costs of security breaches. If you're willing to invest in decent staff and think long term, linux will almost always come out cheaper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux is n't really more difficult , it 's just different... In many ways it 's actually easier , to do anything complex it 's a lot simpler for instance and most configuration is done in text files that often have very good comments.The problem is that people think windows can be run by any idiots ( thanks to ms marketing it as such ) , which simply is n't the case... If you want a windows based network that 's even remotely secure or stable you need to hire competent staff , and those people are generally not cheap... You also need a lot of third party software to keep a windows network running properly.If you 've content to have a flakey windows network operated by the cheapest possible staff you * might * save money , especially if you do n't consider the costs of security breaches .
If you 're willing to invest in decent staff and think long term , linux will almost always come out cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux isn't really more difficult, it's just different... In many ways it's actually easier, to do anything complex it's a lot simpler for instance and most configuration is done in text files that often have very good comments.The problem is that people think windows can be run by any idiots (thanks to ms marketing it as such), which simply isn't the case... If you want a windows based network that's even remotely secure or stable you need to hire competent staff, and those people are generally not cheap... You also need a lot of third party software to keep a windows network running properly.If you've content to have a flakey windows network operated by the cheapest possible staff you *might* save money, especially if you don't consider the costs of security breaches.
If you're willing to invest in decent staff and think long term, linux will almost always come out cheaper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359000</id>
	<title>Follow the money...</title>
	<author>Yaa 101</author>
	<datestamp>1267723680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The staff probably has stocks in or other perks from MS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The staff probably has stocks in or other perks from MS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The staff probably has stocks in or other perks from MS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358888</id>
	<title>Efficiency ?</title>
	<author>JeremyGNJ</author>
	<datestamp>1267723320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're speaking of "efficiency".  I assume you're speaking of FireFox as an example.    But there's is nothing more efficient about an IT organization supporting more than one tool for the same purpose, based on the preference of a user (or an admin).

If you can lay out how a company or IT organization would improve efficiency by supporting FireFox, along side IE (because you MUST support IE since many 3rd party apps use the IE engine embedded), I'd love to see it.  I might even elect you to office.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're speaking of " efficiency " .
I assume you 're speaking of FireFox as an example .
But there 's is nothing more efficient about an IT organization supporting more than one tool for the same purpose , based on the preference of a user ( or an admin ) .
If you can lay out how a company or IT organization would improve efficiency by supporting FireFox , along side IE ( because you MUST support IE since many 3rd party apps use the IE engine embedded ) , I 'd love to see it .
I might even elect you to office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're speaking of "efficiency".
I assume you're speaking of FireFox as an example.
But there's is nothing more efficient about an IT organization supporting more than one tool for the same purpose, based on the preference of a user (or an admin).
If you can lay out how a company or IT organization would improve efficiency by supporting FireFox, along side IE (because you MUST support IE since many 3rd party apps use the IE engine embedded), I'd love to see it.
I might even elect you to office.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359852</id>
	<title>Same here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I also am a part of gov't grant-funded group in healthcare sector with managers and coworkers promoting ourselves as a Microsoft shop and strongly discourage other alternatives for our software development and whatnot.  It feels rather alienating to be part of an ignorant group who are more afraid of open source due to lack of their skills.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I also am a part of gov't grant-funded group in healthcare sector with managers and coworkers promoting ourselves as a Microsoft shop and strongly discourage other alternatives for our software development and whatnot .
It feels rather alienating to be part of an ignorant group who are more afraid of open source due to lack of their skills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also am a part of gov't grant-funded group in healthcare sector with managers and coworkers promoting ourselves as a Microsoft shop and strongly discourage other alternatives for our software development and whatnot.
It feels rather alienating to be part of an ignorant group who are more afraid of open source due to lack of their skills.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31367642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31365672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31365310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31370200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31367450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31373752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31364038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_04_1416226_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359524
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361486
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359512
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31365310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359042
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359190
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360444
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359528
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359218
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359830
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360164
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360098
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359072
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360070
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359834
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358842
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359176
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359178
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359686
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359978
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361296
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358872
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358902
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359726
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359700
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360614
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360534
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361142
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359976
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358926
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360174
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359112
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358916
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359326
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359568
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361490
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360346
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361470
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362234
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360032
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359612
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362320
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359378
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366250
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358936
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359534
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31370200
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366104
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31364038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363648
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366118
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31367450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363214
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358912
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31365672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31363156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31358888
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359962
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31366804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31367642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361190
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31360232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31373752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31361164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31362064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_04_1416226.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_04_1416226.31359912
</commentlist>
</conversation>
