I wrote:
The referenced article <http://www.techrepublic.com/article/open-source-pioneer-munich-debates-report-that-suggests-abandoning-linux-for-windows-10/> is well worth a read.
As are some other related articles on TechRepublic. Here’s one from just over a year ago <http://www.techrepublic.com/article/heres-the-one-major-problem-facing-munich-after-switching-from-windows-to-linux/>: "Most people don't really realize that they have Linux and they do not really care," said Jan-Marek Glogowski, a developer in the IT team at the City of Munich told the DebConf Debian developers meeting earlier this month. "Even when some people were complaining about Linux we were looking at their PCs and there was actually Windows XP running on it," he said of the early days after the move. And another from I think 2013, when the LiMux migration was finally deemed complete <http://www.techrepublic.com/article/how-munich-rejected-steve-ballmer-and-kicked-microsoft-out-of-the-city/>: Munich says the move to open source has saved it more than €10m, a claim contested by Microsoft, yet Hofmann says the point of making the switch was never about money, but about freedom. You wonder how Microsoft and HP would know better than Munich how much money Munich was spending... The time taken to complete the project is one of many reasons that Microsoft has attacked Munich's move to LiMux. A report criticising the project, produced by HP for Microsoft, claimed the Redmond software giant could migrate 50 to 500 desktop PCs per day if upgrading to a Microsoft OS and office, suite compared to the eight per day it said was being achieved under the LiMux project. However, by Hofmann's reckoning, that slow and steady migration is one of the reasons the project has largely managed to stay within its budget with minimal disruption. The project finished within budget in October 2013, with more than 14,800 staff migrated to using Limux and more than 15,000 to OpenOffice. How many IT projects have you heard being described as “finished within budget”?