The government has used open source for years, Los Alamos started implementing Linux on their supercomputers (thousands of clustered nodes that used to use expensive Unix licenses) quite some time ago.

I'm a huge proponent of open source, but I know that in the current climate it's really only appropriate in technical environments. Everybody knows how to use Windows, and if every desk jockey in the US government needs 10 hours of IT help to save a $120 VLK license, you run into problems. The government, and most organizations, should be using open source for their backbone and certain mature open source applications (open office is a great example) in day to day operations. But the average office worker is not ready for Linux... It will scare them.

Tax payers shell out lots of cash for s/w licenses from Microsoft.
Govt spots an opportunity to save cash, stops buying expensive licenses and goes open-source.
Profits at former multi-billion dollar companies plunge.
Former multi-billion dollar companies with a now broken business model for the new world go cap-in-hand for a bail-out.
Tax payers shell out lots of cash to - well, you know the story by now.

Salem -
I presume you're not advocating public support of badly run companies in order to generate jobs and tax dollars. That's what the bailouts appear to be to some, but these are just another example of govt subsidizing industry to generate theoretically greater rewards. Though the consequences are dire either way, hopefully we have chosen the cheapest solution. The argument for the banks would be they aren't readily replaceable in the short-term, whereas MS is pretty disposable ~immediately. Less money to MS means more money to other IT companies like hardware and Saas support. Rather than spending on a PC + MS tax, spend it on a better PC. Or spend it on a faster ISP, or on more effective support staff. Or, if you're the govt on the taxpayers or reduced taxes - take your pick. We're best off cutting our losses as soon as possible.

Great post, Ken. Loved it. Nice job.

Ron

Don't forget that the NSA maintains SELinux (maybe someone should tell the British Navy). I would guess that a study is the first step in the process towards moving away from expensive, proprietary software. A member of Congress would not really stand up and say "I think we might save a few bucks if..", but would say "This official study by an officially recognized studier says...".

Government workers (especially those in State/Local govenments) are generally not the most tech-savvy, so the issue of having to spend more supporting OS desktop users vs MS desktop users is a wash - doesn't matter what you give them, they'll still needs lots of hand-holding.
Can't understand why State/Local govts don't adopt OS? The obvious - using free software doesn't garner much in the way of political campaign $$ !!!!