• Jiral@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Given the degrading quality of Microsoft products, I would not blindly believe statements that alternative options are rrally worse.

    • Tess@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I’m not disagreeing with you on that :)
      Personally I’ve been arguing for less Microsoft dependence within my organization for years, and have quietly been doing what I can without without making it too obvious.

      In any case, my point is that counter-arguments like reduction in functionality, increase in expenditure, and so forth, no longer hold the same weight like they used to.
      Here in the Netherlands, there’s been a much stronger mandate given from top-down to look for more sovereignty. Because the risks that come with the alternative are becoming more clear with every passing month.

      • Jiral@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        That is certainly the case. The big hurdle and investment is the transition. Once everything is up and runnung and mostly walked in, I would not be surprised if costs were lower while the software implementaion being actually better tailored to the specific needs. But it is not easy to get there and there are risks of course.