A petition has been created by an Austrian EU rep. to replace Windows with GNU/Linux in all Europe

It’s ridiculous that governments don’t use customized Unix/Linux builds.
- well that's what this law proposition is about... Better late than never but for it to be passed a maximum of EU resident should sign that petition
- Funny enough, I'm working in IT in government exclusively with Linux for the past 20 years, which shows that indeed it's possible.
  There are a few reasons I don't believe a petition like this will change a thing though
  
  It would definitely prove interesting
- Ahem...
  
  Didn't even have to open the link to know it was red star. I've heard rumors of others as well.
- I expect 100% already do. Its ridiculous that they're not forced to, though
- Why? I've worked in two companies where IT allows Linux as an option and people are constantly having issues (including me). And these are highly technical people. Two people who are not stupid managed to break their laptops by uninstalling Python 2 which Gnome depended on.
  Yes that's technically a UX issue, but there are plenty of good old bugs too, e.g. if you remove a VPN connection that a WiFi network autoconnects to then that WiFi network will entirely stop working with no error messages to speak of. Took me a long time to figure that out. Or how about the fact that 4k only works at 30fps over HDMI, but it works fine over DisplayPort or Thunderbolt3. The hardware fully supports it and it works for other people with the same OS and laptop. I never figured that out.
  That's just a taster... I almost never have issues like that on Windows or Mac.
  Windows may cost more than "free" but the additional support costs for Linux are very far from free too.
  Maybe something like Chromebooks makes sense if everything is in the cloud.
  
  Or how about the fact that 4k only works at 30fps over HDMI, but it works fine over DisplayPort or Thunderbolt3
  Blame HDMI forum for that. They objected to AMD releasing open source driver for HDMI 2.0+ that lets you do higher modes like 4k60 or 5k etc due to patent reasons. DisplayPort folks on the other hand, had no objections. DP is quite a superior technology too, so if you could, use it instead of HDMI please.
  
  Why?
  It makes no sense for a government/military to use a proprietary system made in another country when there's a very strong movement inside of said government for an open system. They have incredibly smart people at SUSE, Manjaro and KDE right on the inside and you are telling me they can't do better than hitting subscribe on Office365?
  Assume the EU and US have a conflict, now the EU is stuck with an entire ecosystem made in the US. Assuming they don't already have all your internal data, they can just get it with a single click.
  
  That uninstalling python2 bit reminds me of stories of users deleting their system32 folder to free up disk space.
  
  We exclusively use Windows on our user's devices (over 10k devices!) and don't have to support anything else. We end up with problems like those all the time.
  occasionally all installations become blocked no matter what means or which user, requiring reimaging to resolve.
  DisplayPort connections mysteriously failing and requiring reboots of the device and sometimes also the dock or monitor. Sometimes we even have to swap the cable out, even though the cable will continue to work in another setup just fine.
  using a different brand of dock than the ones we have at our hotelling stations and disconnecting for any length of time causes wifi to fail until reboot
  wifi at the office mysteriously stops working as you move around the building, requiring restart
  None of our Linux test devices experience any of this.
  
  In an enterprise imaged Windows laptop they and you probably wouldn't have superuser privileges in order to keep yourselves from doing stuff like deleting core Windows dependencies. Maybe they give you full administrative access at your company but if you deleted the Program Files folder to save time you'd be blamed by pretty much everyone.
  You guys obviously have root privileges or else you wouldn't have been able to delete the system's core Python2 installation. And frankly you must have literally manually deleted it because the package manager would have told you what havoc you were about to enact and made you tell it to do it anyway.
  But what's even weird to me is that most python devs I know, including myself use python virtual environments (venv) to use different versions and package bloat control from something like pip but keep it all nice and neat.
  If you wanted python3 to be the default you have to change the PATH in Windows or if you don't know what you are doing I guess reinstall whichever python with a .MSI an hope it does it for you.
  Meanwhile, in Linux you can just use the alternatives utility to literally pick your preferred versions and it takes care of the paths for you.
  And with the HDMI issue? You must not be using the same graphics drivers and someone is using proprietary graphics drivers (won't have the issues you've described) and the other is using open source versions (you'll have the issues you've described) because companies are shitty about their proprietary closed standards.
  Which brings up another point. You say you all use the same laptop model and OS but you don't all use the same drivers? There's no baseline? There's no control?
  This sounds like a Hell of your own making. This is why users in general should never have full administrative privileges and they should be tailored down to just what you need. Epecially if they haven't yet learned the basics of the OS they are using because they are at best a danger to themselves and at worst a vulnerable laptop inside the network.
  
  If you were having issues why did you stay on Linux? It sounds like you were constantly fighting it. It is best not to waste work time trying something new.

If they can keep the MS lobbyists out, it's feasible, just ask Munich.
- Except they couldn't keep the Micro$oft ~~criminals~~ lobbyists out

My main worry with Linux becoming more popular is that it will be attacked with more malware and viruses. I wouldn't mind though if Linux programmers could come up with better protection.
- Linux is already what a decent chunk of servers run, so I don't really see it increasing malware.
  
  The insecure parts of Linux is mostly on the DE side opposed to the core OS part that servers use. We absolutely will see more vulnerabilities in the future as Linux grows.
  
  Well, servers don't generally run Thunderbird and Firefox
- Most of the Windows malware gets deployed by some user downloading and executing random files they downloaded on the web. Since installing applications on Linux is usually done through some centralized package manager or app store (Flathub), it almost entirely eliminates this attack vector. Running random scripts from the internet by downloading them using curl and piping them into sudo bash is a whole nother issue though. Noob-friendly distros like Ubuntu should IMO have some safeguards in place to block these actions.
  
  Since installing applications on Linux is usually done through some centralized package manager or app store (Flathub), it almost entirely eliminates this attack vector.
  xz moment.
  Yes, I see that weasel word "almost" in that sentence. I expect it's going to be doing increasingly heavy lifting as Linux becomes a more lucrative target to attack over time.
  Your point generally stands, though. Even if they're fallible, at least someone is vetting it at all somewhere in this pipeline.
  
  They have, snaps
- Linux is a lot easier to secure
- Linux-based OSes are less uniform than Windows. They could and probably will be targeted, but exploits won't spread because of how many verities they are and how different and incompatible they can be. Some, for example, don't even use the GNU utils and userland.
  
  This petition is for developing something dubbed "EU-Linux", so if implemented as is will be pretty uniform
  
  That is mostly false. Most of the code that faces the network is the same. As is most of the background running code. Linux is still more secure.

PSA: You can support this petition even if you're not an EU resident
- Is that So? How?
  I just signed it, but I’m in eu
  
  It lets you sign up as a country outside the EU and sign it

Double edged sword. Forced adoption of a shitty distro, or a really locked down/limited system might not be a step forward at all.
From memory, Germany did this many years ago, and ended up rolling it back?
- https://www.techspot.com/news/102518-windows-microsoft-office-replaced-linux-libreoffice-german-state.html
  The 30,000 employees of Schleswig-Holstein's local government will be moving to Linux and LibreOffice as the state pushes for what it calls "digital sovereignty," a reference to non-EU companies not gathering troves of user data so European firms can compete with these foreign rivals.
  Munich, the capital of German state Bavaria, switched from Windows to Linux-based LiMux in 2004, though it switched back in 2017 as part of an IT overhaul. Wanting Microsoft to move its headquarters to Munich likely played a part in returning to Windows, too.
  
  Then they went back to Linux a few years pater
  
  Yeah, that's the one. Gnome 2 in 2017 would have felt pretty dated. And the political reasons can't have helped either.
- Nope, not Germany. The city of Munich, and it was rolled back because a politician took Microsoft bribes and drank the Microsoft snake oil.
  
  Apparently they are back on the Linux train as of 2020, so thats good news.
  
  National governments should be harder to bribe than local ones, at least. Also harder to get them to adopt it in the first place though.
- afaik Bayern rolled back to Windows after some Microsoft "lobbying"
  
  Precisely the city of Munich had its LiMux system.
- No one wants to choose a bad OS environment, it will become one due to security or other non-negotiable requirements.
  They aren't going to just toss Ubuntu on a box and call it done. Itll be locked down, limited, and horrible to use. And users who dont know any better will blame "Linux".
  A government SOE Linux just isnt going to be a good ambassador for general desktop usage.
- Government systems should be locked down and limited.
  
  Yup, exactly, which is kinda my point. The OS given to users is gonna be heavily restricted, so no one is going to use it and then run home to install it on a home PC. Government OSs are just not good ambassadors.
- Solution: don't ship a shitty distro. This is the sort of issue that actual IT professionals need final say in. Not the MBAs. Not the politicals. The people who actually know what they're doing. Additionally, years ago Linux was in a much different place. It's really matured into something more suitable for both the average end user as well as professional adoption.
  
  That argument would be fine, if only the Linux community could actually agree on what is a good distro.
  
  Thats the problem though, there are near infinite ways for someone along the way to completely fuck it up, and very few ways to get it right. And security concerns are almost always going to make the distro worse for the users.
  And even if it was left to IT professionals, they are just as capable of making it a mess on their own.
- From memory, Germany did this many years ago, and ended up rolling it back?
  The city of Munich deployed their own custom Linux systems many years ago. But since it wasn't really maintained and updated, the user experience was pretty bad and the city's employees were unhappy. Then Micro$oft lobbyists also came in and made them switch - by threatening to move their German headquarters out of Munich, which would cost the city lots of tax revenue.
  https://itsfoss.com/munich-linux-failure/
  
  You think that Microsoft lobbyist would have had any traction if the user experience was any decent?
  Of course not. They wouldn't have had any reason to switch.
  That is the biggest issue with Linux at the moment. It takes more maintenance than Windows. And there are a lot less people with the knowledge to setup and maintain those environments.
  At the end of the day, the point of those environments is to allow the user to work in them. But if the user is unable to work properly because of the environment, then that environment must be changed. It is as simple as that.
- Linux isn't a platform but rather a general ecosystem. The hard part is making a base system that means the requirements and is rock solid.
- They then switched back to Linux
- a really locked down/limited system might not be a step forward at all
  Depends what you mean. Locked down as in hidden from the public (I don't think that's legal anyways because of the GPL) would be bad. But locked down/limited from employees so that they can't bork the system is good, imo.
  
  The latter, and it is good from an organisational perspective, but its never a nice experience, and for many, this will be their first real experience with a Linux.
  Right now Linux is "That nerd OS", if this goes badly, for millions it could change to "That OS they forced on us at work, where I can't XYZ"
  Edit: on the GPL front, GPL doesn't require that you publish your code to everyone, just to the recipients of your binaries. And you only have to give it upon request. So they definitely could keep it somewhat under wraps if they wanted to. If they are smart, they'll follow the Munich model and stick to upstreaming any changes they make.

I mean I'd be fine with BSD too. the point should be to force public institutions to use FOSS
- FreeBSD is fine for servers I guess, but due that most server administrators know Linux better than any BSD, it's probably not going to be used much. BSD's also seem to be severely underfunded and the future of them seem vague.
- Sure but nobody is petitioning for BSD desktops in the EU
  
  Sigh. Guess I'll have to do it
- That would be incredibly dumb. There are entire fields where the FOSS is just hilariously behind proprietary software (or sometimes the only option). Do you want to cripple public institutions by cutting them off entirely from proprietary software?
  
  Right now public institutions are paying for proprietary software. If they would invest the same money into FOSS, the FOSS option would not be behind proprietary software for long.
  
  I think the point is to invest the money into the continued development and improvement of the foss software instead of giving the money to businesses who shield their proprietary codebase. In theory.
  
  Switzerland already did it. Its brilliant. Instead of the gov pouring money into proprietary solutions to meet their needs, they can fund FOSS and benefit from the same software being funded by other governments and companies too.
  Proprietary is crippling. Its only chosen due to corruption
  
  "There are entire fields where the FOSS is just hilariously behind proprietary software"
  “hilariously”?
  Examples?

Adopting Linux is the best way to help ensure European sovereignty from maga meddling.

dunno how many online petitions actually worked, but "kay guys... now... linux!" ain't gonna work.
- That's a parliament petition. If it succeed it is forced by EU constitution to be turned into an EU law.
  That tool is offered to EU representant to create a kind of referendum and accelerate the adoption of a law through direct democracy.
  
  I think you're a bit mistaken. Per https://www.edf-feph.org/enforcement-toolkit-european-parliament-peti-committee/
  "The Petitions Committee does not have investigatory nor enforcement powers and it can only adopt non-binding recommendations. Nevertheless, it can be a good tool to draw political attention to specific matters."
  At most, it makes the parliament have to look at the proposal and decide if its worth looking into or not. It doesn't force anything.
  Unless I'm looking at the wrong kind of petition to the EU Parliament?

This is an uphill battle in the face of corporate lobbying, learned fixedness, and, let's face it, unintuitive UX that is found in some selection of FLOSS which is often absent in proprietary counterparts: something that people who are not tech savvy (tech-indifferent?) would prefer not to put up with.
However, I think the latter can be mitigated with the right focus and funding from such initiatives.
There have been many such initiatives[0][1] over the years in different countries where they eventually lose steam and fade away.
Also, is there an operating system backed or sponsored by EU that is actively maintained, analogous to BOSS[2] and Pardus[3]?
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:State-sponsored_Linux_distributions
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_adopters
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharat_Operating_System_Solutions
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardus_(operating_system)
E: typo

Maybe it's too early in the morning, anyone got a link, I couldn't find any?
- The post does contain the link to the petition, anyway it's this one: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/petitions/it/petition/content/0729%252F2024/html/Petition-No-0729%252F2024-by-N.-W.-%2528Austrian%2529-on-the-implementation-of-an-EU-Linux-operating-system-in-public-administrations-across-all-EU-countries
  
  This was helpfull but Its in Italian so here is the English version LINK
- This is a link sharing platform. All posts are supposed to have a link to a news article. Its at the top.

Supported!

Why creating a new distro instead of using a big one and contribute to it?
- They aren't building something from scratch. They probably are just going to make a base image with everything configured in a standard way.
- Governments tend to have security standards that differ from most solutions readily available. Not saying this is the case, but it's a possibility.

I've always said governments and public institutions funded by taxpayers should use FLOSS and not be beholden to private companies. Any shortcomings or unfulfilled needs in Linux and FLOSS software would quickly be dealt with once large organizations like these started using it as the default, since they could easily fund whatever features or fixes are needed for significantly less money than they pay for proprietary software (especially now that these days they're forking over annual subscriptions), and thus they'd also have much more control over the making sure the software meets their needs.
It seems like a no-brainer to me. Maybe it wasn't in the earlier days of Linux but not for the last decade or so.
- Total proprietary capitalist hellscape
  Foss: "lol, we don't need you, we have lin-
  ENTER: new global Ai standards that depend on proprietary blobs that only work on nvidia hardware and Windows.
  Foss: "w-we don't need Ai."
  PLEASE UPDATE YOUR BROWSER TO USE-
  Foss: "STOP IT!"
  UNSUPPORTED

I like and support the idea in general, but the petition's scope is just too broad and lacks focus. Migrating to Linux? Sure, but let's not force a single distribution across the EU. New EU mobile OS? Nice idea, but there is no solid alternative unless a lot of time and money is spent on developing it.

Based.

"I'd just like to interject for a moment..."

I feel like they don't know the magnitude of that what means.
Very cool but unlikely to work
- Could easily fork a distro and pay a government agency or independent entity the same amount as Microsoft is currently being paid to maintain the distro. Or they could put financial backing on any of the current commercial Linux solutions out there. It's far from farfetched.
  
  The problem is dealing with the application side.
  Just one feature that's massive - how many systems have automatic import/export using Excel file formats. Converting those processes will be a huge undertaking themselves, let alone how many other things that will require re-engineering. The scope and scale of this is staggering.
  A better effort would be to convert a single, small organization in government, then the scope is limited, but you get to build the fundamentals, and gain the experience of interfacing with extant systems.

For governments, I think the priority should be exchange and archive formats. Regardless of what apps and platforms they use, I as a citizen should be able to read that data via free software. Govt should be able to read what I provide to them. Govt in the future should be able to access archives if they have moved to free software.
Next is the platform ( the OS and the web browser ). You can run your proprietary video editing on Linux. If demand on the scale of ALL European gov moved to Linux, I assure you that Linux versions of the software they need would exist ( even if still proprietary ). I use Outlook on Linux every day. I also use Teams ( usually on Edge ). RMS would hate me. But I only archive to AV1 and Opus, never HEVC and AAC. Most of what I use is FOSS.
Least important really is the apps. I have no problem with companies solving problems better than FOSS and getting paid for it. Even by gov. As above though, those that do not need the “better” version should be free to use something else. And the “default” ( for things like basic docs ) should be FOSS too. This is just not as important as the file formats and platforms.

Cope
- You sound super nice.