Distributing Windows Programs to Linux Desktops?

prell asks: "Our company has approximately 250 Linux desktops, and an array of Linux servers. Recently, we've been presented with the possibility of migrating all or most of these machines to Windows to support one industry-specific application, and we do not want this to happen. Coming to mind immediately were: Wine and CrossOver Office; some sort of multi-user VNC setup; Ndiyo; and VMWare. Keeping in mind that the desktop machines are low-spec (~350MHz CPUs on average), what are our options? How can we preserve our Linux install-base in the presence of a non-canonical Windows program?"

Comments

Avoid the application

[Mind Booster Noori]

The best way is really try to avoid that Windows App. Emulation works (sometimes) but it's a fix, not a sollution. If you're to stick with a good Linux-based solution, now it's the time.

Isn't there another solution besides that Windows Application that does the same thing?

Your company's priorities

[NitsujTPU]

Your company is apparently willing to incur the licensing costs of Windows, Windows applications, and this new app, but is unwilling to upgrade its desktops to hardware worth more than $10.

I think that your company is going to fold. You guys really need to figure out a lot more than how to obviate the need for an OS migration.

Re:Your company's priorities

[kernelfoobar]

Whaaaa? Now THAT'S rare: someone admitting that they are wrong, here...

You sir are commendable, my salutations!

Don't defeat your main purpose!

[fm6]

You can probably use Wine to support your one Windows app. Not easy, but doable.

Crossover Office won't help you. It's just Wine pre-configured to support a lot of standard apps. People buy it to save themselves the (severe) headaches of hand-configuring Wine.

All the other choices you mention are ones you absolutely must not consider. Why? Because they defeat your primary purpose. Which is not just to get this one Windows app working. It's to maintain Linux as your primary desktop environment. If keeping Linux supreme in your workplace is your primary goal, then you must find a way to allow your users to run this app under Linux. If you force them to fire up a separate Windows environment just to run one program, you're telling them that Linux can't meet their needs. Eventually, they're going to say to each other, "Why are you using this stupid system that the geeks like, but doesn't run all the programs we use? Why don't we just run Windows?"

Re:Don't defeat your main purpose!

[fymidos]

>Crossover Office won't help you.

No, but Crossover DEVELOPERS can.

consider porting it

[cahiha]

For the amount of money that it's going to cost you to do this (easily $500k), you may be able to create your own version of the application. Of course, I realize that that may not always be possible, but it is worth considering.

There may be a web-based version of the application.

You may be able to outsource the application and have your users access it through rdesktop.

If you only have a few users using it at a time, then accessing a bank of Windows machines through VNC should be enough.

If it's a high-powered application that can't be ported, then you're in trouble. If you are really, really lucky, you can run it under an old version of NT on VMware on your current hardware and under Linux. If it requires a new version of Windows and/or significant resources, you need to upgrade all your hardware, no matter what you do. I'd still get a site license for VMware and run Windows under Linux--that way, at least you more easily avoid the costs of downgrading to an all Windows server infrastructure and retraining everybody, and you can more easily distribute and lock down the (virtual) Windows desktops.

Don't blame your decision of using Linux up to now for your predicament--consider yourself lucky that you have been able to save money so far. The cost of dealing with Windows now (hardware upgrades, licenses, installation, system management, etc.) is the cost you would otherwise have been paying roughly every two years as the cost of doing business.

Consider ROI

[Zarf]

The specific numbers are what have to drive your decision. I've read the other posts and most folks are quoting numbers between $150,000 and $500,000 which is a pretty small range considering we have no idea of exactly what software you need on all those linux desktops. I expect that $250,000 is a fairly good SWAG ... but again, we have no real idea of what you need license/support wise.

An interesting comment made by a boss o'mine was along the lines of, "Why pay my programmers/techs to support a program that is practically a commodity?" The logic goes: If Operating Systems have vendors why write your own? If Word Processors have vendors why write your own? And so on. You focus your IT crew on the unique problems that your particular organisation faces.

I would push one level farther. Why pay for an OS/Word Processor/Browser if there is one that is free? Pay for the support contracts if you need support. Don't pay for software that there exist perfectly acceptable free substitutes for.

Keep in mind the stuff is free as in speech not just free as in beer. That means if you have an Open Source support guy on staff who contributes into the community, the whole community wins... you get better support... and you still employ the same number of IT staff. Yes, you lose one guy from your core IT goals... but you still lose one person to Anti-Virus stuff and pay-per-year software issues.

If you can do one of the following you might want to consider a Linux/Open Source strategy:

1. Use an Open Source Community project to replace most of the functions of your pay-per-year software. You might use Open Office instead of MS Office for example. You could use a universal document format that would work across a variety of platforms.
2. Create and maintain a replacement that is platform independent or SOA based. The replacement could be used as a platform for your business' future development. If you go SOA you can then support platforms such as PDAs, Cell Phones, and Kiosks. This only makes sense if you get a good ROI
3. You could decide to use Wine/CrossOver/Lin4Win or whatever to provide emulation of Windows. In my personal experience only "stuff" that works with Windows 98 will work properly on Wine.
4. I would put VNC or Citrix at the bottom of the list, but it could be a very cheap alternative. You just show the application where you need to. You could potentially get away without having to rewrite/retool anything. (except for the VNC server/client or Citrix server/client)

If none of these ideas offer a big enough payoff or offer a significant savings... I hate to say it but... you really might be better off as a windows shop.

Most companies pull money from different "pools" and many companies think that purchasing windows computers is a one time capital expense. It's not. You end up having to purchase new software annually from Microsoft or third parties to keep your systems running and patched.

Make sure you make the decision fully educated about recurring costs and the life-cycles of all your systems. Pay-per-year systems will cost you more in licenses and still require staff to support them. Open Source will require either service and support contracts, additional "expert" staff (or staff training), or both.

You can control whether OSS shifts underneath your company. You cannot control whether a vendor pulls support or shifts technology. If you go OSS you free your company from "Data Hostage" situations where other companies control your business' data.

If you go with Pay-per-year software you can get cheaper staff and supplement them with service/support contracts reasonably cheaply. That will change as more and more IT folks become experts with OSS.

The choice is: commit to a vendor and keep them happy since they essentially hold your data and your company hostage. OR commit to a community and quality employees who will hold expertise that is hard to replace.

Re:It would help....

[MerlynEmrys67]

Well, being that the origional poster said he needed 250 copies - I'd assume 250 licenses are fair.

Basically this boils down to how much does the labor cost. Assume 100 bucks an hour, then for 250 licenses that is about 40 cents/hr for a license to do the work.

If you are saying you will do this for free - well, pony up the resources and make a counter offer. This seems like a perfect answer to the OP, and might be just what the OP wanted.