That might be borderline - probably easiest (and most cost efficient) to work through a big provider (M$, Google, etc) to let them solve the problems for you, for a small fee, rather than tasking 0.1 FTEs on constantly whacking the moles.
MangoCats
joined 5 months ago
Icons look different, etc. People are ridiculously inflexible.
Yes, RedHat has been doing this for decades.
Thing is: RedHat probably can't price match M$ in a bidding war, probably not even close.
Also true, and at this kind of rate we can assume the state is doing most of its own IT self-support without a lot of M$ hand-holding.
Your subscription price is the source of those dividends. It pays the shareholders, it pays the sales staff's commissions, it pays for management, it pays for executive salaries and bonuses, it pays for legal counsel, it pays for political lobbying. Your subscription price is working hard, for the company, not for you.
188K dollars or euros, is basically the cost to put one warm sales body in the territory, to keep the hooks in acknowledging that they should be paid for their software.
To me, it's about digital sovereignty, and the states should stand on their own two feet and know how their own computers work, not just rely on a foreign company.
I'm guessing it's a really small state with not much IT going on.
As for cheaper to give for free: ABSOLUTELY. But, with free then they don't have their sales guys in there talking with them, they don't have the state "acknowledging the debt" and the legitimacy of their right to charge for their software.
In the 1990s M$ let the world pirate DOS and Windows with wild abandon, they were just happy that people were using their stuff and not others'. After the world was good and hooked, shortly after we all survived Y2K, they started turning the screws - requiring license keys for full functionality, getting serious about demanding payment.
Bill Gates net worth was "only" $30B before they got serious about charging for their software, today I see it's over $200B even after all of Melinda's philanthropy.
The old jibe was that Windows users are so gullible that they're just easier to phish.
The easiest hacks use social engineering. Much more social to exploit in the end-user arena.
Depends on your relationship with Microsoft.
When they have no choice...