AT&T Considers Mac OS X, Linux For 70,000 Desktops

hype7 writes "CNet's News.com.com is reporting that AT&T is reconsidering its corporate IT investment in Microsoft Windows - with both Mac OS X and Linux being considered. Although the article notes that AT&T is not actively seeking to replace Windows, there's a wonderful quote on the page from the AT&T guy - 'Any CIO would not be doing due diligence if they are not looking at their options now.'" As with previous mass-migration stories, a cynical (or realistic) viewpoint is also that by "looking into" non-Windows operating systems, they're giving themselves a bargaining chip when talking with Microsoft. Update: 10/06 17:35 GMT by T : Actually, that's 70,000 desktops, rather than 7,000 as originally stated.

Comments

70,000 PCs not 7,000

[hey]

It makes a difference.

From what I can remember

[slungsolow]

From what I can remember about my time with AT&T, every single desktop was running Windows NT. Its not like they were actually using it. Every single desktop was running Reflection so they can access the unix server that maintains their switches.

Granted this was 4 years ago, and I only dealt with two call centers, but there really was no reason for them to be using Windows NT for any of the PC's in the office, whether it be the desktops for the supervisors/managers or the dummy terminals running the ascii based clients that did the backend work for the operators and the directory assistant workers.

Maybe they would be better off just popping in some unix based OS.
The other thing I can remember is all 300+ dummy terminals (from our one office; 1000+ if you counted the sister office) were maintained by one system admin. He would be able to broadcast out a new OS on those bad boys overnight without blinking an eye. One thing AT&T knows is how to network. Those bastards were tight, and the SA knew how to get the job done right the first time, on time.

Corporate Acceptance

[copponex]

I still don't get why Linux development leaders aren't understanding why Windows is so popular, regardless of appplication prevalence. Linux is still asking questions that aren't dumb, but still frighten anyone who isn't very familiar with computers. Modeline and resolution? Swap space? What are ext2, ext3, and reiser!? Does my keyboard have 104 keys or 105?

You have to give big, shiny, easy options because computing shouldn't require that kind of knowledge when people are trying to look at websites and use their e-mail. You've got to sell them the OS first, and then allow them to customize to their heart's content after they can see the utility in what you're offering.

Comparatively I'm dumb to a lot of the slashdot crowd, but I imagine there must be some way to provide full binaries that are LIBRARY INDEPENDENT. Bandwidth is cheap. Hard drive space is cheap. Trying to train everyone how to use symlinks and sort through thousands of libraries using arbitrary command line options is stupid at best. But the first time someone says, "I want to do X and Y is broken!" You can tell them how to do both, and explain to them how Open Source makes it possible.

And I know POSIX compliance is important to everyone, but the directory scheme will have to go someday. What is wrong with /system ("don't touch anything in the system folder!") /users/joecubicle ("Just backup the /users folder, and all your data and prefs are okay"), and /trash? ("you can delete anything in there")

Sad thing is, if OS X were released for the x86 platform, half of the Linux users I know would switch the next day.

Re:Corporate Acceptance

[codepunk]

I admin 200 linux desktops in a corporation and all of your arguments me nothing in a corporate installation. We run thin client X windows 200 desktops being served from a highly available cluster. When a user needs access to software "I put the icon on the desktop for him". All of our users are very less than computer literate but they can click a icon I put on their desktop. The environment is totally controlled they get nothing that I don't give them. To our users the linux box is like a toaster you just click something and get your job done, and I am not removing gator from their desktops all day or running adware or spybot, it just plain works.

Re: Illustration...

[gidds]

OFGS, how often does this ludicrous stupid mouse button argument come up?

Not that it'll make any difference, but just for the record: Mac OS X supports multiple mouse buttons and scroll wheels. It just doesn't get supplied with them, or need them.

If you want a right mouse button, go and buy any old USB mouse, plug it in, and the right button will instantly bring up context menus just as you expect; and the scroll wheel will scroll windows in most apps ditto.

I wish we could see some sensible arguments in the Mac-vs-PC debate. (For example, I fully agree that Mac OS Classic sucked. Or at least, it sucked for people who'd used something else first. From what I hear, most folk who started with a Mac loved it; but people like me who came from other platforms (mostly Atari and X Terminals in my case) hate it -- I fought against it continually for a year or so until Mac OS X came out and I heaved a long sigh of relief!)