Switzerland's Federal Government Tests Open-Source Alternatives to Microsoft on 3,000 Computers (itsfoss.com) 57
Switzerland has a population of 9,154,242. And its federal government just launched a pilot program to test open source alternatives to Microsoft 365 on 3,000 workstations, reports the blog It's FOSS. "That's about 7% of the federal workforce."
The target is to complete the migration by end of 2027... On September 3, 2026, the Federal Council published results of "PoC BOSS", a feasibility proof-of-concept involving 172 federal employees who tested the openDesk suite, a German open-source collaboration platform. During the proof-of-concept phase, core office tasks like document processing and email received positive assessments, while large-scale video conferencing still showed technical limitations. Based on the 'success' of the PoC phase with 172 employees, the pilot is now launched for 3,000 employees...
According to Matthias Stürmer, professor at the Bern University of Applied Sciences, Microsoft's supremacy in public institutions poses three problems that are driving this migration. First is the risk of foreign access. US cloud legislation could expose Swiss government data to foreign authorities. Second is the risk to service continuity, as dependency on a single foreign vendor creates operational risk. The third risk is the escalating costs as proprietary licensing fees are rising with no Swiss leverage.
Switzerland's military cybersecurity unit, Cyber Command, is not waiting for the civilian pilot. It is already poised to replace Microsoft 365 entirely with openDesk by October 2026. It is pretty much the same reason. Military doesn't want foreign governments accessing sensitive Swiss data.
The article notes that during the pilot phase, the new system runs in parallel with Microsoft 365 rather than replacing it. But the article's author speculates that "If the pilot is successful, we might expect the migration to continue on all the 54,000 workstations owned by the federal administrations."
According to Matthias Stürmer, professor at the Bern University of Applied Sciences, Microsoft's supremacy in public institutions poses three problems that are driving this migration. First is the risk of foreign access. US cloud legislation could expose Swiss government data to foreign authorities. Second is the risk to service continuity, as dependency on a single foreign vendor creates operational risk. The third risk is the escalating costs as proprietary licensing fees are rising with no Swiss leverage.
Switzerland's military cybersecurity unit, Cyber Command, is not waiting for the civilian pilot. It is already poised to replace Microsoft 365 entirely with openDesk by October 2026. It is pretty much the same reason. Military doesn't want foreign governments accessing sensitive Swiss data.
The article notes that during the pilot phase, the new system runs in parallel with Microsoft 365 rather than replacing it. But the article's author speculates that "If the pilot is successful, we might expect the migration to continue on all the 54,000 workstations owned by the federal administrations."
We actually looked at it (Score:5, Interesting)
Installed it, looked at the components.
While it's technically open-source, to make it usable beyond a simple proof of concept, you need to pay for a lot of "pro" stuff that requires a license.
I have no idea what it costs, but I doubt it will turn out cheaper as Microsoft.
Currently, it does not look like it's multi-tenant. So you need a full installation for every customer.
Re: We actually looked at it (Score:4, Informative)
I remember looking at Linux for an American K-12 public school district about 15 years ago.
Yes, the base OS was/is free (as in beer), but, to manage all 1,500 desktops and laptops in the district required EITHER licensing (per desktop) a third-party tool to manage the systems similar to the way we managed Windows and Mac systems with Group Policy.
At the time we spent about $35/desktop for MS Windows and MS Office & Server CALs (MS Academic rate), the third-party tools were $25/desktop as I recall. So $10/desktop...
But the savings (a fraction of a headcount) wouldn't overcome the (at least initial) costs of training to support a third operating environment during the transition (at least one Linux Admin to compliment existing Win and Mac admins), let alone required training for staff and students, as well as the FACT we could never fully migrate off Win or Mac due to required software for student IEPs and in many courses no satisfactory replacements for many Win & Mac software in the curriculum.
The cost of the OS isn't the issue, it's the cost to support/maintain the environment.
If we paid more for Windows, who knows - maybe then the numbers would make sense.
Also, the IT director had ZERO APPETITE to defend migrating to this (basically) unheard-of OS to parents upset their children were learning/using something no employers used.
It's not just about dollars and cents.
Re: We actually looked at it (Score:2)
Typo, it should read:
Yes, the base OS was/is free (as in beer), but, to manage all 1,500 desktops and laptops in the district required EITHER rolling-our-own management tools/suite or licensing (per desktop) a third-party tool to manage the systems similar to the way we managed Windows and Mac systems with Group Policy.
Re: We actually looked at it (Score:5, Informative)
You are right in your statement but you don't manage 1,500 Linux/Unix stations like Windows that's why it was so expensive. There are tools for free to even manage a greater number of stations.
When you lock yourself in a proprietary system and tools then you are right that they don't work on other systems. It's not Linux that is restricting your use.
My kids grew up using systems no employer used. They grew up computer literate and today they have no issues using any computer even the ones employers use.
Re: We actually looked at it (Score:5, Interesting)
Exactly. On Linux you can automatize system administration very well with FOSS. Yes, you have to use different tools, but, for example, SSH-ing into a box with certificate-based authentication when it is up is trivial. Scripting that way is trivial. Even a doing a full installation (on top of a minimal one) this way is trivial. Doing updates this way is trivial. All with the security mind-set that UNIX was designed with from the start.
Now, if you want the same admin interface on Linux as you had on Windows, of course you are paying for that. But you are doing it wrong. There is a reason you need a lot fewer sysadmins on UNIX (and Linux) than on Windows and that reason is that once the sysadmin has automatized everything, very little breaks. Quite unlike Windows.
Of course, the other part of this is that UNIX sysadmins are quite a bit more expensive than Windows ones, because the expectations are a lot higher. But you still come out ahead by a lot.
Re: We actually looked at it (Score:2)
Re: We actually looked at it (Score:4, Insightful)
Ah, no. But MS stepped up its efforts to lie to you. Quite successfully, I see.
Re: We actually looked at it (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. On Linux you can automatize system administration very well with FOSS. Yes, you have to use different tools, but, for example, SSH-ing into a box with certificate-based authentication when it is up is trivial. Scripting that way is trivial. Even a doing a full installation (on top of a minimal one) this way is trivial. Doing updates this way is trivial. All with the security mind-set that UNIX was designed with from the start.
We were successfully managing 1,500 Windows and Mac desktops with exactlyone Windows Admin and exactly one Mac Admin, along with a DBA/Report generator person to help admin staff get the reports/data they needed.
We had absolutely zero interest in SSHing into individual desktops to run scripts - managing the desktops with Group Policy was a simple, well-known mechanism. I don't mean this as a disparaging judgement, but your comments are really about today, 15 years after the fact - I'm talking about the stat
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. On Linux you can automatize system administration very well with FOSS. Yes, you have to use different tools, but, for example, SSH-ing into a box with certificate-based authentication when it is up is trivial. Scripting that way is trivial. Even a doing a full installation (on top of a minimal one) this way is trivial. Doing updates this way is trivial. All with the security mind-set that UNIX was designed with from the start.
We were successfully managing 1,500 Windows and Mac desktops with exactlyone Windows Admin and exactly one Mac Admin, along with a DBA/Report generator person to help admin staff get the reports/data they needed.
We had absolutely zero interest in SSHing into individual desktops to run scripts - managing the desktops with Group Policy was a simple, well-known mechanism. I don't mean this as a disparaging judgement, but your comments are really about today, 15 years after the fact - I'm talking about the state of the systems in 2010, not 2025, and your comments make me think you've never seen how a well-run windows shop is administered.
You missed his whole point. You don't need third party software to administer an unlimited number of Linux boxes, you can script it with built in tools that can connect and manage the box. For Windows admins who want to manage Linux there is also GUI tools.
I'm not even going to mention that you can migrate the OS and all the installed software onto newer hardware remotely and have it run for 30 years by multiple migrations and regular software upgrades.
Windows is PITA to manage but I guess it's what you are
School/property taxes (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I feel like some arbitrary constraints were placed that puts Linux (or any free Unix) at a disadvantage.
In the late 90's to 2000's, I would have ran NIS (ypbind/ypserv). And after 2010 I would have went to LDAP even for a small network because the tools to sync LDAP and ActiveDirectory are better. The advantage of this setup is you don't pay anything per client, you pay on the server and that's only if you want to hook into AD.
If you have a lot of student accounts at a school, but none of them need to
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, I feel like some arbitrary constraints were placed that puts Linux (or any free Unix) at a disadvantage.
No, you can't just "redesign" a system serving the educational needs of 3,000 students and satisfying all state and federal reporting requirements.
I was lucky in my career. I had a deal with a public school through my connections that let me completely redo their email system. I tossed the Windows NT 3.51 doing DHCP (putting it into storage in case someone wanted to repurpose it), I took the Windows NT 4.0 off the public network that was hosting email poorly, and setup two scrap P90 machines as Linux machines. One on the internal network doing DHCP and relaying SMTP. and the other machine with public IPs just running qmail, imap3d and ssh.
Let's all, for the sake of argument, agree that converting an email server from Exchange to running "relaying SMTP" on two scrap desktops is whole lot easier that converting an entire 3,000 user-base to a completely new OS/ecosystem.
Replacing a single point in the network (email) with a FOSS solution is trivial, but that would have resulted in literally ZERO sav
Re: (Score:1)
we could never fully migrate off Win or Mac due to required software for student IEPs and in many courses no satisfactory replacements for many Win & Mac software in the curriculum
This is every fucking industry. I don't care if you're a doctor, a lawyer, an accountant, or a mechanic. There's some software your industry leverages heavily, probably several such softwares, that only run on Windows. Maybe, maybe a few will run on Mac without having to emulate Windows. Not many people actually do their work in Word and Excel alone day in and day out. Even Word and Excel are often made useful in practice with plug-ins and add-ons from companies that only produce the plugins for Word and Ex
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just about dollars and cents.
Correct. The value is not in the amount of money saved/spent.
In the situation you described, the value is in the experience of students learning more than one way to do things on more than one type of system (Mac+Win+Linux).
In Switzerland, the value may be in using something not tied to the USA.
For those who have a hate-boner for Microsoft, the value is in using anything-but-Microsoft.
Re: (Score:1)
I largely agree, but the Juice wasn't worth the Squeeze - we were approached by an activist dad who waged an all-out frontal assault on the school district trying to convince us that "if we just ran Linux on our current desktops we could save millions of dollar/year and the kids would be using better tools".
We didn't spend "millions of dollars/year" on MS licenses so the savings promised (by him) were impossible, and his other claim, that we wouldn't have to replace out desktop computers every 5 years was b
Re:We actually looked at it (Score:4, Interesting)
'Core Suite' is fully open source and would cover most day to day needs of 'non-enterprise' users: files (Nextcloud), office editing (Collabora Online), email/calendar (Open-Xchange), chat/video (Element/Jitsi), project management, wiki, etc.
'Enterprise Edition' does add paid operational features:
On cost, Schleswig-Holstein showed [comparethecloud.net] €15M/year licence savings vs a €9M one-off migration/infra investment, which sounds quite effective to me, but remember that cost is only one part of this stuff.
It doesn't have to be cheaper (Score:2, Insightful)
Trump threatened to invade greenland. The only good reason for America to do that is to prep for an invasion of Europe.
Now that's insane but yeah so is Trump and so are the project 2025 lunatics who are actually running things while that senile old man does increasingly stupid and crazy things to get attention.
I don't think people realize just how much Donald Trump as president has fucked things up for America. Europe no longer trusts us and they are getting re
Re: (Score:1)
I can't believe it! I had to read three times and then I used a text search to make really sure. You didn't mention the Epstein class. Unbelievable!
Re: We actually looked at it (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:We actually looked at it (Score:4, Interesting)
Most of the "pro" stuff in our engineering office is web-based. With a handful of tools being attached to a lab station (like JTAG and programmers) or are offering Linux versions of their product as part of the existing license as a "beta" product.
Stuff that has to go into build automation has to be Linux, there's no compromise there, we couldn't accept a Windows-only tool in our pipeline very easily. So the opposite problem exists, if Linux was banned at my work today, we would struggle to find a suitable replacement.
Re: (Score:2)
Cheaper than M$? Really? And if the Idiot decides he doesn't like you, he calls M$ and tells them to shut you down.
What's the cost of *that*?
Re: (Score:2)
The EU is working seriously towards decoupling, they need to make their whole stack available world wide.
They also need to
heavily tax social media
Enforce "right to repair" and get rid of the DMCA laws, allow people to reverse engineer stuff so they can supply servicing tools/codes/parts Reduce copyright back
Good (Score:1, Insightful)
Fuck Microsoft and the USA
Re: (Score:3)
Mod parent up.
Reliability (Score:5, Interesting)
Switzerland is taking reasonable precautions.
Under our current regime the USA can not be relied upon
on a day-to-day basis, let alone over the years.
That goes for our U.S. citizens as well as for foreign interests.
Rick Wilson, American Republican strategist said it well
just before Trump's first election:
"Everything Trump touches dies"
Events since then have proven him right.
Especially regarding the United States.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Trump is that he thinks he's some kind of genius that has the power to fix things.
Re:Reliability (Score:5, Informative)
To be fair, he is really good at breaking and messing up things. Seems almost like a super-power.
Re: (Score:3)
Under our current regime the USA can not be relied upon
So the idea is to completely transition their IT infrastructure to Linux by the end of 2027 (if everything, and I mean everything) happens exactly as planned, so that they can enjoy exactly one year of using Linux before the "current regime" changes and Trump is out of office.
I think the issues are bigger than a concern about Donald Trump.
I think them learning to be more self-reliant, send less money to foreign companies for vital infrastructure is a good idea, for everybody, Switzerland, EU, America, everybody... I seriously doubt the only reason is Trump, it's just non-sensical, because it is temporary.
Trump might be temporary, but a nation willing to vote in a person like Trump twice means long term that country is no longer trustworthy to deal with.
National security (Score:5, Insightful)
Relying on proprietary USA software or services is a national security risk for all non-USA countries. So good for Switzerland.
I wish my country (Canada) would start taking digital sovereignty seriously, but our government is so far down the MSFT rabbit-hole that I don't hold out much hope we'll ever disentangle ourselves until the USA does something draconian and then we're really screwed.
There really isn't any point for Canada (Score:1, Offtopic)
Digital sovereignty is a good thing for Europe because they've got an ocean between them and America so if we go completely off the deep end by electing another Republican in 2028 (whether it's Trump or Vance doesn't really matter) they at least have some t
Re:There really isn't any point for Canada (Score:4, Funny)
Without having the ocean there isn't really a hell of a lot Ukraine can do if Russia becomes belligerent
Re: (Score:2)
America seems weak because we still have some semblance of sanity holding us back from violence.
No doubt America has the resources to wreak havoc if it wanted to do so. OTOH, at this point, nobody in America (outside of Trump and Stephen Miller) wants to do so. A sufficiently popular and persuasive demagogue might change that, but Trump's debacle in Iran has demonstrated that he is not that person. I don't think JD Vance has what it takes to go "full Hitler" either, although I suppose he could (unpleasantly) surprise me.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know what production capacity you are talking about. Last I heard, Elon is worried Americans aren't producing enough.
Re:Russia is a weak country (Score:4, Insightful)
Pete Hegseth is doing a better job of undermining the US military than any outside power possibly could.
If things ever got to the point where a president ordered military action against Canada, there would be a civil war in the United States first that would likely destroy the USA. Canada is united while the USA is dangerously divided.
Yes, it's prudent to fear the USA. But let's be realistic. It's going to use economic and diplomatic coercion against Canada. It's not going to invade; that would be a complete disaster for both countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Relying on proprietary USA software or services is a national security risk for all non-USA countries. So good for Switzerland.
I wish my country (Canada) would start taking digital sovereignty seriously, but our government is so far down the MSFT rabbit-hole that I don't hold out much hope we'll ever disentangle ourselves until the USA does something draconian and then we're really screwed.
The Canadian government might choose to weigh up the risk (of being dependent on US software and infrastructure) against the cost of migration, but aside from the actual business case aspect of decision making, the Canadian government might choose an non-US option simply as a means of taking a stance.
Re: (Score:2)
The alternatives should be called "blueware" because blue is the opposite color of orange. I'll let that sink in.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely right. We also lack privacy protection laws like the GDPR. ... crickets.
It would seem like a slan-dunk politically but
Re: (Score:2)
It's just as big of a problem for USA users too. Everyone should be minimizing their proprietary dependencies.
The US better look into this too (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft is only looking out for Microsoft. Heck, just a few months ago we found out that Microsoft was using "proxy techs" in China for DoD tech support. ALL governments need to rethink how deeply they want Microsoft, or any other closed source tech company, within their ranks.
Re: (Score:2)
And that is the real problem. All the crap Microsoft and and the US administration pulled was just the trigger that made it impossible to keep ignoring the problem. And not that the problem is not ignored anymore, things are happening.
On a related note, I still do not understand how Microsoft could have been so abysmally stupid as to block ICJ o365 business accounts. That triggered the whole thing and made it abysmally clear that their stuff cannot be relied on.
All-government access instead? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
1998 called and wants the Halloween Documents [wikipedia.org] back. You're 2.5 decades late with that particular FUD talking point.
Re: (Score:2)
You are aware, that all major governments (including the Swiss one, where I personally know people) have access to Windows sources, right?
Re: (Score:2)
In all honesty (Score:2)
Every single Country on this planet should have already been taking steps to remove US hardware
and software from their networks the moment the Snowden revelations about how pervasive US spying
really was became public information.
Hell, you can't even pin the blame for this on Trump as Obama was President when Snowden showed the
World what the NSA was really doing. ( and HAD been doing for quite some time )
Re: (Score:1)
And instead of Cisco, they should all buy Huawei?