From Microsoft to Open Source: How One German State is Rewriting the Rules of Public Sector IT

In the north of Germany, nestled between the North Sea and the Baltic, something radical is happening, and it’s not just the bracing sea air. Schleswig-Holstein, a state better known for its coastal towns and rolling countryside, has become ground zero for a digital revolution that could send ripples across Europe’s public sector.

The mission? Replace 30,000 Microsoft Windows and Office government computers with Linux and LibreOffice by 2026.

No, this isn’t just another cost-cutting measure or some open-source idealist’s dream. This is a calculated move for digital sovereignty, the right to control your own IT destiny without being tied to a single tech giant’s roadmap, pricing whims, or data collection policies.

The Break-Up

It started with a realization that many governments are slowly arriving at: relying on proprietary software from multinational vendors like Microsoft comes with strings attached. Licensing fees skyrocket, cloud policies shift, data control gets murky, and suddenly your public infrastructure is at the mercy of a company boardroom in Redmond.

So Schleswig-Holstein decided it had had enough. LibreOffice will take over word processing. Thunderbird will handle email. Linux will power the desktops (we’re guessing SUSE, but not stated). And yes, they’re doing it gradually, with pilot projects, user training, and internal development support to smooth the transition. This isn’t an overnight rip-and-replace. It’s a long game.

But make no mistake, it’s bold.

Other case studies

Schleswig-Holstein isn’t an isolated case. Governments across the globe are increasingly seeing open-source as not just a cost-saving option, but as a strategic imperative.

• France’s National Gendarmerie began its move to open-source in 2004, switching 37,000 desktops to Linux by 2013, saving millions in licensing fees while increasing control and security.
• Italy’s Ministry of Defence replaced Microsoft Office with LibreOffice on 5,000 machines as part of a broader effort to transition to open platforms.
• Eyüpsultan Municipality in Istanbul migrated to Linux desktops and open-source server infrastructure to improve transparency and data control in local government services.
• China, facing geopolitical pressure and sanctions, has leaned into open-source development with its HarmonyOS, aiming to reduce reliance on U.S. platforms like Windows and Android. As of 2024, it’s already overtaken iOS in China’s mobile OS market.

These aren’t fringe cases, they’re a potential signal of wider global trend. Too many companies are locked in, but only few have the courage to break out. Could open-source become the default posture for governments seeking control, resilience, and innovation in their digital ecosystems?

The Trade-Offs: Microsoft vs. Open-Source Alternatives

While the benefits of switching to open-source are compelling, it’s not without challenges. Here’s a look at the key trade-offs:

Sure thing, Alex. Here’s the updated Pros and Cons Table, now expanded to include feature comparisons between Microsoft’s stack and open-source alternatives like LibreOffice and Linux. This version is more actionable for public sector IT leaders or SAM strategists weighing the functional impact of such a migration.

Category	Microsoft Stack	Open-Source Alternatives
Cost	High licensing and subscription fees; additional cost for enterprise tools	Free or low-cost licenses; higher internal costs for support, integration, and training
Control & Sovereignty	Limited control over roadmap, telemetry, and data residency	Full autonomy over updates, data governance, and customization
Security	Enterprise-hardened, but closed-source; data often processed in U.S. data centers	Transparent source code; stronger data localization; faster patching in some cases
Support	Dedicated, enterprise-grade support via SLAs	Community support or third-party vendors; may vary in depth and responsiveness
User Experience	Highly polished UI/UX with deep ecosystem integrations (Teams, OneDrive, etc.)	Varies by tool; LibreOffice less polished, UX inconsistencies across tools
File Format Compatibility	Native support for legacy Office formats; flawless integration with .docx, .pptx	Can open MS formats, but fidelity issues remain (especially with complex formatting/macros)
Collaboration Features	Real-time co-authoring, OneDrive/SharePoint sync, Teams integration	Lacks native real-time editing; collaboration relies on third-party tools (e.g., Nextcloud)
Customization & Extensibility	Limited by proprietary APIs and license restrictions	Fully customizable; strong plugin ecosystems, open APIs
Compliance & Licensing	Centralized EULAs and audits; clear but rigid licensing model	Varied open-source licenses (e.g., GPL, MIT, Apache); requires tracking and understanding
Integration with Legacy Systems	High compatibility with ERP/CRM platforms (SAP, Dynamics, etc.)	Integration possible but requires custom connectors or middleware
Performance & Stability	Optimized for enterprise environments; highly stable under load	Depends on distro and configuration; generally stable, but requires tuning
Innovation Pace	Slower due to enterprise release cycles	Faster iteration; innovations often emerge from active community contribution
Cloud Readiness	Strong Azure ecosystem integration (Microsoft 365, Intune, Entra ID, etc.)	More fragmented; integration with open-source cloud platforms (e.g., Nextcloud, Matrix)
Accessibility Features	Industry-leading accessibility tools built-in (narrator, dictation, screen reader)	Basic support; improving but generally not as mature as Microsoft’s offerings

---

• Microsoft delivers a polished, enterprise-ready experience with unmatched integration and support, ideal for orgs with minimal in-house IT resources.
• Open-source offers cost savings, control, and extensibility, but requires a mindset shift, stronger internal capabilities, and a willingness to navigate complexity.

---

This breakdown helps set realistic expectations when evaluating the path toward digital sovereignty. For SAM, it means tools need to be more flexible, license-aware, and capable of tracking hybrid environments. And that’s exactly where Licenseware delivers value.

Let me know if you’d like to visualize this in a comparison chart or turn it into a downloadable asset for the blog.

Understanding these trade-offs helps organizations approach the transition not just as a switch, but as a strategic shift—one that requires investment in training, cultural change, and internal capability building.

SAM in the Age of Open

This trend toward open ecosystems transforms the landscape for Software Asset Management (SAM). The rules of engagement are different:

• Compliance isn’t only about license counts, it’s about understanding license types and limitations (GPL, MIT, Apache, etc.).
• Cost tracking must consider operational overhead, not just licensing.
• Tools need to adapt to decentralized, containerized, and modular infrastructure.

At Licenseware, we’re already helping clients navigate this with license intelligence, usage analytics, and custom-fit integrations across both open-source and traditional environments.

---

A New Standard

Schleswig-Holstein’s move is likely just the beginning. As public institutions reevaluate their digital strategies, expect more to follow suit. The message is clear: open-source isn’t a compromise. It’s a competitive edge, if done right.

And as public systems evolve, SAM must evolve with them. We’re not just keeping up—we’re building ahead.

---

Want to talk about how SAM fits into your open-source strategy? Let’s make it modular, measurable, and future-proof together.