Joel Spolsky doesn't like the City of Munich switching 14,000 desktops to Linux:
There are probably a lot of people with custom Access databases. How do they access their data?Joel is right on one count: in the interim, the city will be using VMWare and Windows on a large number of desktops (~80%?) to run Windows applications. I haven't been following this story, so I don't know if this is a long-term strategy or a short term migration path.[...]
[T]hey'll simply be unable to do their jobs, and, like bureaucrats everywhere, they won't tell anyone, while the municipality quietly falls apart.
What about the Excel spreadsheets, Word documents and Access databases: that technology is soooo 1993. Migrating to Linux will catapult Munich to 1998-era technology.
Jim Willis, Director of eGovernment for the State of Rhode Island (and Providence Plantation), has some firsthand experience in this area. What users want isn't access to their Access databases. What they do want is a pretty interface to a database-backed application. Using Access (or Filemaker, or dBase, or FoxPro, or ...) makes jobs harder, not easier.
Back in 1993 or so, it was an acceptable solution. The most advanced technology in the day was some client-side database application with a pretty front end (like Access) using data stored in a file on a fileserver. What's the state of the art today? MySQL plus PHP. Or PostgreSQL plus Perl. Or anything that approximates LAMP.
Why is Access a bad idea today? Jim says it's because using these database apps fragment the data used within an organization. Each database is an island, with duplicated data, unknown quality control and uncertain ownership. Migrating away from Access (or Filemaker, or ...) to MySQL is a huge step forward, because it allows data to be federated, development to be consolidated, increases data integrity and reduces or eliminates data duplication.
In Jim's case, that translates into less money spent to make a more effective government.
