The European Commission Is Testing an Open Source Alternative To Microsoft Teams (euractiv.com)
- Reference: 0180736724
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/26/02/05/1930255/the-european-commission-is-testing-an-open-source-alternative-to-microsoft-teams
- Source link: https://www.euractiv.com/news/commission-trials-european-open-source-communications-software/
Signal currently serves as the backup tool but has proven too inflexible for an organization the Commission's size, it said. The Matrix-based solution could also eventually connect the Commission to other EU bodies like the Parliament.
[1] https://www.euractiv.com/news/commission-trials-european-open-source-communications-software/
This won't work (Score:2)
Before I write this, I need to say I think Matrix is very impressive, and I've seen some amazing stuff built on that platform, even a FOSS Roblox-like application. I'm not criticizing the authors.
But.
Matrix is in many ways a proof of concept that just... falls short. It doesn't have the features of Teams, it has a very user-unfriendly encryption system that requires storing keys in local files, it's really not going to work.
Matrix proves the FOSS community can build something like this, but it isn't what th
Errrm ... Wutt?!?? You're not making sense. (Score:2)
Matrix is a protocol. It doesn't have any user facing "features" just like TCP/IP doesn't have any. Applications using matrix can have all the features you want, you just need to implement them.
Noble, but missing one key thing (Score:1)
Most users are not very savvy, especially around new software. When you are making software for governments, you get A LOT of users, and Microsoft has made a whole business of educating and brute-forcing people to learn their systems.
I would love to see Teams get replaced, but we need FOSS that has the kind of support / docs / ecosystem to allow your least-common-denominator user to succeed.
Re: Noble, but missing one key thing (Score:1)
Erm, if the cost of Teams and the associated ecosystem had been spent on OSS solutions, paying programmers directly, bypassing corporate costs like managers, stockholders, fancy real-estate, glitzy functions in golden ballrooms for 'charity' and all the things the entitled corporate hegemony demand in exchange for their 'skills', instead?
Re: Noble, but missing one key thing (Score:1)
Capitalist efficiency, my arse...
Re: Noble, but missing one key thing (Score:2)
> Erm, if the cost of Teams and the associated ecosystem had been spent on OSS solutions, paying programmers directly
What is your point? If you had all the money Microsoft spent on Teams you could build an open source version of Teams? Really? Do you not see the stupidity of that statement?
> bypassing corporate costs like managers, stockholders, fancy real-estate, glitzy functions in golden ballrooms for 'charity' and all the things the entitled corporate hegemony demand in exchange for their 'skills', instead?
Well thank you for your kitchen-sink rant...
So, out of curiosity, where would someone come up with "the cost of (money spent on) Teams and the associated ecosystem" to develop the FOSS version of Teams and not have to either recoup the investment or (perish the thought) make a profit?
Re: (Score:2)
> I would love to see Teams get replaced, but we need FOSS that has the kind of support / docs / ecosystem
Which can happen when the money spent on the exorbitant costs of tech companies' products can instead be directed at OSS alternatives that can benefit everyone in the end, likely at much lower costs in the long run.
Re: Noble, but missing one key thing (Score:2)
> Which can happen when the money spent on the exorbitant costs of tech companies' products can instead be directed at OSS alternatives that can benefit everyone in the end, likely at much lower costs in the long run.
Do you have ANY idea what kind of investment you are asking for with absolutely ZERO possibility of recouping the money spent?
Where do you imagine the literal millions of dollars it would take will come from?
Re: (Score:2)
> Where do you imagine the literal millions of dollars it would take will come from?
Asked Gemini to come up with some numbers:
- Cost of the MS Teams add-on (ignoring the base license): 5€ per user per month
- Estimated number of public sector employees in the EU: 35 million
That gives you over 2 billion € to spend every year . Seems doable.
Re: (Score:3)
> Most users are not very savvy, especially around new software.
That didn't stop people using Teams, a program that not only was rolled out to everyone with virtually no information beyond a few popup tooltips or training, but a program that drastically differed from the norms of other software (like no multi window support).
The users will be fine.
What are they looking to replace? (Score:2)
If they are looking for a chat app, then they may have success.
If they are looking for an integrated app in corporate groupware then they will fail miserably. As long as they don't side by side compare features such as Sharepoint integration, Outlook integration, the selection of commercially available meeting room hardware, etc. they may stand a chance, otherwise Teams offers a feature set that has no comparison with anything else.
God knows it needs it, no one uses that god awful piece of shit software for
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft will co-operate with any requests form the EU to open access for a Teams alternative. All the EU needs to do is pass the necessary legislation to make it happen.
Finally, it is happening (Score:5, Interesting)
The move away from MS crap. Not for the reason I expected, but still.
The fatal mistake that Microsoft made was disable the email of the chief prosecutor at the International Court of Law. At that point, it became blatantly obvious and impossible to ignore that MS will do whatever the US administration wants to its international (and probably national) customers. The EU administration observed this event very carefully and drew its conclusions. Obviously, this will be a process over the next 5-10 years or so, but MS is cooked.
Re: Finally, it is happening (Score:2)
What did it take to destroy Microsoft?
Corpocracy + fascism + consistently bad US foreign policy.
Sort of a perfect storm that turns what probably seemed like a sweet deal for the big tech companies into a nightmare scenario of break up. I bet they wish they still had Biden and the Dems in power, that let corporate interests run much of the government as long as they had diversity policies.