Slashdot Mirror
Desktop Linux Mass Migration
Rob writes "With many Linux vendors attempting to push the open source operating system as a
desktop alternative to Windows, Computer Business
Review reports on Novell's migration to Linux on the desktop. From the article: 'Changing any mission-critical technology is a daunting task, and despite the growing maturity of Linux as a desktop operating system, it is little wonder that the vast majority of businesses are sticking with Windows.'"
is probably the single most important reason to use Windows,
Outlook 2k3 + Exchange/SBS + ACL is a good business solution (even if it is >2000$)
until Linux can replicate the suites functionality and ease of use (for admin+users alike) our enterprise will be sticking with a Windows thanks
of course if *nix can replicate it you will find biz migrating pretty quickly
<conspiracy theory> Microsoft is paying everybody to stay on Windows<conspiracy theory/>
My company (~800 employees) migrated to Linux over the last two years. It was easier for us since before we mostly used Solaris or Irix. The marketing guys still use powerpoint on their laptops, but I think the rest of us get along OK. It took a while for Linux to achieve the stability of my old Sun box, but it's rock solid these days.
We have a windows terminal sever in house in case someone needs to get on Windows for a while. I have never logged into it.
...is explaining why the java-based Linux (and OS X) GroupWise client has reached near parity with the Win32 version in GW 7 (and in terms of caching mode blows it out of the water for its updating speed). I can see where Joe or Jane User would have complained LOUDLY with the 6.5x version.
With the BSD ports collection, the slick Apple interface, many great OSS options being multi-platform anyway, and virtualizing XP for the few XP apps I can't let go of... Why not just go MacTel when I buy my next PC in '06 or '07?
IMO, MacTel could be a Linux killer, or at least help keep it a niche OS instead of a major mainstream competitor.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
Note that AOL builds an ISP dialup client only for Windows, not Linux.
If we expect Linux to make a dent in the desktop market, Linux distributions must change radically. They must be as simple to install as MacOS X, a very-simple-to-install UNIX variant. We need the ISPs to board the Linux train by building dialup clients. Yes. Much of America still uses dial, and in the dialup market, AOL is still #1.
I absolutely admire Linux, and if my ISP would provide the same kind of support, for Linux, that my ISP provides for Window, I would switch my AMD-powered desktop over to Linux. Otherwise, I'll wait for the Apple x86 box and switch from Linux to FreeBSD. I prefer Linux; it's got the cooler icon: the penguin.
By the way, some hackers will likely provide the necessary software patch to enable x86 MacOS to run on any IBM PC clone. If the Apple x86 box garners 10% or more of the market, then most of the ISPs will gleefully provide support for UNIX connectivity. Perhaps, the title of this article should be "Simplicity & Connectivity & A Matter of Time for the UNIX Juggernaut called Apple".
Device Drivers Applications that don't work under Linux Software Installation That's it. If my video card (ATI), Mouse (Logitech), Nostromo (gamepad), all worked under Linux and responded the way they do under Windows, that would be the first step. If I didn't have to find replacements for FairUse, ACDSee, GetRight, XFire, Ulead Video Studio, Photoshop, etc. etc. etc. that would be step two. If I could just double click a file, maybe read a quick note about the software and hit next a time or two, that would step three. Unfortunately, to switch right now I have to deal with substandard drivers (I don't give a $hit that this isn't Linux's fault), a bunch of half finished applications that are ALWAYS betas and typically start with K this or G that, and "installs" that require me to go to a command line, hack up config files, and hope like hell they don't jack XWindows ('cause I'd rather install the OS again as to fight that). There you go. You want the other 98% of the PC's out there to run your OS? Get to work.
My Tech Posts on Twitter
One thing that I think would help a lot is a unified clipboard. And I'm not talking about the X clipboard eithor. There needs to be a clipboard that unifies qt and gtk based programs AS WELL AS commandline. As more people switch there will be better apps, however the unified clipboard needs to be worked out as soon as possible...
You install an in-development package from the experimental Sid distribution - and when it fails say Linux is not ready for the Desktop?
By that argument, Windows XP is not ready for the desktop either, because Longhorn build nr. 1823 b0rked some computer somewhere.
first of all, most of the old people here can barely figure out how to open a file in windows. they are about to retire. if you move an icon on their desktop to a place it wasnt before, they will get confused. it makes absolutely zero sense to retrain these people and waste their time and our time and taxpayers money.
second of all, our 'public' computers connect to several multi-thousand dollar databases, many of which will not work properly on mozilla.
third of all, multimedia has to 'just work'. no fiddling around with installing/running plugins or special players, which i know for a fact is a pain in the ass on linux no matter how much time you spend tweaking it. our users are not there to waste time figuring out how to save a file then open it with some kind of binary compatability layer with a command line program. most of them still dont understand the concept of 'where a file is saved to'.
now the standard linux philosophy is that these people are worthless and shouldnt be using computers. thats fine for nazi germany, but not for america. the people i work for dont have a lot of money and their government denied them a hot shit education like most of you have had, but that doesn't mean they should be denied access to information important to them.
in other words, the number 1 problem of linux is the problem of social class and elitism. this has also been the number 1 problem of computer science over the years, and from the first compiled language to the first open peer protocol (tcp/ip)... it has been the rising tide that lifts all boats, not some genius CS idiot with their pet project or ideology.
now, microsoft is not our friend. its a decent business to buy from, not too shabby in many ways. however, like all kings, microsoft can get a big head and screw things up. so can linux companies and linux 'underground' distros without corporate backing. the ordinary people will just use what they can of all of these things, mixing and matching the way they have always done, and they will be the final arbiters of what survives and what perishes.
"it is little wonder that the vast majority of businesses are sticking with Windows."
Sticking that on Slashdot is like waving a red sheet in front of a bull.
You have tried to support your argument with faulty reasoning! Go directly to jail; do not pass Go, do not collect $200!
Already been solved. Try a nice, recent Linux distribution like Fedora Core 3/4 or Knoppix or SuSE 9 with good autodetection. Running Fedora 3, and even with lots of oddball hardware, the only thing that failed to detect properly was my free webcam from Comcast. Lots of other USB webcams, digital cameras, my Epson C66 printer, various pointing devices, DVD+RW drive, USB flash drives, etc., were all automatically detected and installed.
My blog
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3348057a28,00. html
New Zealand's Ministry of Education has inked a deal to provide GNU/Linux under the Novell banner for public schools.
I feel that this is nothing other than an incredible breakthrough for us Kiwis. By giving our kids the opportunity to become aware of alternatives, we could definitely see some great change coming soon.
...well mostly, not.
I've got a Sales/Service/Repair/LAN Gaming shop in a small (>5k population) town. 18 months ago, I began a test. I sold two of my clients (an 80+ year old grandmother and a mid 40's professional) a custom built box w/ Gentoo installed. (Actually, the formula was a gentoo install w/ a dyndns service so that I could remotely update the system and install packages -- with their knowledge and consent, of course).
To this date, I have not had their system back in the shop.
Two months ago, I began selling low to midrange systems running (k)Ubuntu. The systems are built on Asus mobos and AMD Semprons (higher end CPU's available upon request). The distro detects and configures all devices on install... and auto detects just about every USB device I've thrown at it (from input devices (read gamepads) to scanners).
As far as application support. Crossover Office handles the needs for Photoshop, MS Office (not 2k3, yet...), Dreamweaver, Flash MX, iTunes, IE, etc...
And, using (k)Ubuntu, application installation is easier than ever with Synaptic. Open the app, click an application and install. No depencies, no mucking around w/ CLI's, no problem.
I'm also moving quite a few Thinkpad X21's w/ Ubuntu and Crossover office. At an average price of $350 for a preconfigured linux based thinkpad w/ all the snazzy little thinkpad keys working... they move well.
Anyhow... I just wanted to chime in with the obligatory "Hang on, it's getting there" remark.
#SickNotWeak
The biggest problem facing Linux is the complete lack of integration between the different components. It's no single flaw, it's a collection of small problems, some which would require massive shifts in thinking to fix.
The biggest problems I see facing Linux are:
1. A lack of integration between desktop components, and between GUI world and Console/Kernel world.
X is to Linux as Win 3.1 was to Dos. The Linux console rules, even as a desktop operating system. While bootsplash vaguely attempts to hide startup messages from the user, they can still press Esc. But it's still there. And the SysV init procedure still asks questions of me - for example harddrake2 runs each time the machine starts. If it detects new hardware, woohoo, Console!
Then we have configuration. Configuration is handled almost always using plain text files on the filesystem. Every application handles its configuration differently, with most choosing a semi-structured format. XML may go some way towards solving this, but it's no registry. People also resist XML - it's easy to read, easy to tweak, but not as easy to manage by hand as semi-structured files are. However on the flip side, it's much easier to parse and edit.
Neither Mac OS X or Windows handles startup or configuration in the way Linux does. It would be an almost impossible task to write a GUI to manage all the disparate Linux components as elegantly as Mac OS X or Windows does.
Linux needs some integration, some elegance. Hardware detection should happen in the background, configuration should happen within a GUI. More of a Windows approach would be nice.
A device management framework is needed, to detect devices, manage hotplug events, store details of present hardware, and to fetch and store hardware configuration options. This should include graphics card options.
It should be trivial for a user on any Linux distribution to manage hardware.
Look to Mac OS X. Perhaps by adopting Launchd, and implementing a "Registry like" configuration system, may help. Here's a thought - make the configuration system have a "storage API" for storing/retrieving configuration data. Users can then select where the configuration data gets stored. XML Files. Database. You name it.
2. Developing on the Desktop
At present, there are simply too many widget toolkits and desktop environments present. Motif, GTK, QT, KDE, Gnome.. and none of these are strong enough for there to be a clear winner. They are all tied to X, and perhaps that in itself is a problem.
A single, unified, high quality toolkit is needed, that makes development on Linux as attractive as it is on Windows or Mac OS X. While choice is good, sometimes it can cause more problems than it solves. Perhaps a solution such as Y Windows (http://www.y-windows.org/) may help.
To emphasise the problems facing developers.. GTK looks terrible. QT is nice, but it's a fully blown development environment. Most OSS QT apps are KDE apps, which places a dependency on KDE, which is also undesirable. Developing GUI apps on Linux is far from ideal.
The Linux platform is excellent when developing non-gui based programs. It's an excellent server based platform. But as a desktop solution, it's weak. I use Linux every day, and I can tell you, I fully understand why people hesitate to adopt it - despite the fact it's free.
"if my ISP would provide the same kind of support, for Linux, that my ISP provides for Window, I would switch my AMD-powered desktop over to Linux"
And what exactly would that support be?
Everybody who uses Linux has Internet connectivity. Linux is a network OS from the ground up. What doesn't work on Linux concerning the Internet that you need ISP support for?
Are you saying your ISP doesn't provide help desk support for Linux? So what? When have you or anyone else ever needed that?
Any current Linux distro will connect via dial-up/DSL/cable in a matter of minutes (once you figure out the stupid little connector app with the cable plugin icon in the System Tray, which seems to be a really stupid interface that I wish they'd fucking get rid of since it's brain-dead.) After that, I've never needed any sort of ISP support for Windows or Linux.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Good point, accountability is important. Let us keep in mind, however:
1. Proprietary software vendors (including Microsoft) limit their liability to a considerable extent. The EULA basically stipulates that they are not responsible, and that, for instance, the software should not be used in life-and-death applications, etc. This limited liability can be modified by buying increased support and coverage from some company (which is often the company selling the proprietary software). Thus, you can pay Microsoft and they will provide certain guarantees, with a contract, and this will create a chain of accountability.
2. If you download a linux distro and install it on your computer, you do so at your own risk. The license clearly states that the software is free, and provided as-is, with no guarantees. However, you can purchase additional support and coverage from companies. For instance, you can pay Red Hat to give you a linux distro that they support, and they will provide certain guarantees, with a contract, and this creates a chain of accountability.
So I don't think the situation is any different in Windows vs. Linux when it comes to accountability. In both cases, if accountability and liability are important for your application, then you will pay some company (Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Red Hat, etc.) to provide you with guarantees. The company will analyze your mission-critical application, make recommendations, and state whether or not their support and suggested software can run your application properly. You have to pay for the support, for insurance, and for their guarantee of functionality. This is the same for proprietary and F/LOSS solutions.
You pay for accountability in both cases, with professional Engineers signing off on everything... but in one case you can save money on the cost of the raw licenses (and associated administrative hassles). Plus, linux is at least 10 times better.
Most office drones that I know and work with seem to have rather simple needs on their business PC. They use Word for documents, Excel for spreadsheets, Outlook for email and IE for surfing the Web.
As long as those programs work and the navigation is similar to Windows, they're happy. The fact that they don't have to worry about virus infections, spyware, random crashes is a bonus.
From the CIO standpoint, it's a win (as long as all your core applications work and people can transition easily to the new "look and feel." The CIO/CFO are now off the forced upgrade merry-go-round each time Microsoft decides to foist "upgrades" on their customers.
I have converted my company to the following:
CentOS 3 (clone of RHEL 3)
OpenOffice
Thunderbird for email
Firefox for web browsing
We have a few people with Compaq presario laptops that didn't seem to mix well with Linux (driver issues) so we're swapping in Linux friendly notebooks and donating the Compaq units to charity. The tax credit for the charitable donation makes the purchase of the new notebooks pretty much a wash. We also had to punt a couple of printers and replace them with Linux friendly postscript networked printers. That was rather painless and surprisingly cheap. (Again, we donated them to charity and took the tax credit.)
The next step is to migrate all our servers off of Win2K server. That includes office file servers and web servers. We migrated mail and DNS to Linux a few years ago so that will be a painless move (to CentOS). So every system in the company will be running the same OS and we'll maintain our own internal yum repository to keep things in sync and up to date.
Prior to this, we were probably spending a few hundred thousand dollars a year just in software licensing fees. The IT folks are pretty happy about the change since it makes their life easier in terms of support (we sent the entire group for "RH linux certification" as an incentive to be good sports about the change. After some initial grumbling from the hard core MCSE guys, the overall mood seems to be one of relief...both from the "guys on the ground" and from the "guys who pay the bills."
Cheers,
Debian Unstable is labeled "Unstable" for a reason.
It summarizes the article with "despite the growing maturity of Linux as a desktop operating system, it is little wonder that the vast majority of businesses are sticking with Windows." and then provides two examples.
The first states "Novell had made savings of $900,000 on Microsoft Windows and Office licences as well as maintenance costs from the move." and "A voluntary migration also saw the company beat its goal to get 50% of users onto Linux by the end of October 2004." and the second says ""We came to the conclusion that our requirements are really only met by a commercial distributor" - that commercial distribution being RedHat.
How the fuck did any of this get spun as 'vast majority of businesses are sticking with Windows'?
-- I care not for your foolish signatures.
First off let me say that the desktop situation is abysmal on _every_ OS. Their are fundamental decisions stemming from the earliest GUI's that slow the speed of the interfaces and allow for entirely unneeded errors.
All this is _provable_. Speed of an interface can be modeled using the GOMS framework. If you are new to GOMS do not argue its accuracy here, there are several newbie mistakes that have been explained and would only serve to cloud the debate. Ever get annoyed at how fast the terminal is to use, and GUI's only seem to get in the way? GOMS explains it, typing is much much faster than the _multiple steps_ involved in using a mouse. Not to say that GUIs or mice are bad, but poorly implimented. GOMs can show when to use mice, when to use typing, and how to structure the size and conceptual model of an interface to be as speedy as possible.
But GOMs in and of itself is only a tool. Not a guide on how to create an interface. Liken this to racetracks. Once can sure build a fast car when their motive and only measure is speed, but can be more expensive, unsafe, unreliable, etc, etc, etc.
So where can one reliably make an interface that works well with humans? Most use "intuition." But this "intuition" is genrally nothing more than familiarity. And familiarty does not fix the current, demostratable problems.
So where does one turn? To the science of how humans think, their limitations, and the subset focusing on human computer interaction. Cognitives cience
Using this one can construct an interface based on what humans can do. It has exposed our limits and abilities. What mental models we handle better. Folders and Files? A model based on our desks, not a model based on how our brains handle information and computer interactions.
Using these tools we can end up with an interface faster than the terminal, easier to use, and less error prone than either GUI or terminal based programs. Don't believe me? Try Archy. It is a nearly total departure from standard interfaces. Thus for anyone familiar with comptuers have to retrain their muscle memory. One will constantly reach for the mouse in a vein effort to select text. It will piss you off. If you habituate it's use you will find how much harder and more complex the other text editing interfaces are.
Interfaces are a thing we can fix that Windows and OS X can't without major losses. We have upserped Windows in security and stability. Things Windows _cannot_ fix without breaking everything. OS X has poor performance. In fact horrific proformance thanks to the MACH core. The interface is one of the last major thing in OSS software that MS and Apple are beating us at.
BUT ITS FREE!! Which is a lie. Yes, it is not their higher costs of administration, vendor support, and retraining. It is also the worst selling point. Ask any professional sales person. The only people that hooks are people you don't want to deal with. Just reimagine that mangager that was a cheapskate manager who pinched every penny and lost dollars in lost productivity. The old pinch pennies, trip over dollars.
We have to beat them where they are sore, and believe me, their interface sucks. I use OS X. It is only less annoying than windows or UNIX.
Okay, I really have to go, this thing needs to be edited in half, correct the spelling, etc. but I have dinner calling me. Agree, disagree but interested? Email me, we can bitch over the finer points : ) aal357 REPLACETHIS sent dot com
Is there anything better than clicking through Microsoft ads on Slashdot?
if you move an icon on their desktop to a place it wasnt before, they will get confused. it makes absolutely zero sense to retrain these people and waste their time and our time and taxpayers money.
People who are truly this computer-illiterate won't even notice the difference between Windows and Linux because they are only scratching the surface of their OS anyway. If IE disappears and is replaced with Firefox, their web-browsing experience doesn't change (except for the lack of pop-ups). Power users obviously have no difficulty adapting to a new OS. What I think you're trying to say is that intermediate users will have grown accustomed to certain aspects of their OS (actually their GUI), and will thus find it hard to switch. Still, there's no reason to believe they are not up to the task. Moreover, isn't it good to see that private companies are testing the waters? (i.e. NOT wasting your time or your tax dollars...)
second of all, our 'public' computers connect to several multi-thousand dollar databases, many of which will not work properly on mozilla.
I don't understand this at all. If by mozilla you are referring to their web-standards compliant browsers, I really don't understand what the problem might be.
multimedia has to 'just work'
Well, speaking from real-world and recent experience, I would not say that multimedia "just works" on windows. On a recent XP box, I downloaded an avi, tried it in WMP, it didn't work. Then I downloaded DivX, still didn't work, but at least DivX told me the problem was with DirectX. Updated DirectX, tried again. Didn't work in DivX. Switched back to WMP, and it worked now that DirectX was updated. Windows, out of the box, does not have full support for all codecs and filetypes. You have to put in some work to get it all working properly. Is the situation better on linux? Well my recent installs of Mandrake were able to play most file types without any issues. Using the command line to get new software may seem arcane, but by and large it "just works" if you know what you're doing.
the number 1 problem of linux is the problem of social class and elitism
There's some truth to that. But honestly, it's only a portion of linux users who are snobs and make others feel stupid. The elitism (or perceived elitism) is one thing that made it a bit difficult for me to make the switch... but once I did, I found a huge community of volunteers that were willing to help out and contribute. In truth, the majority of linux users now are not snobs... they are passionate about linux, and are eager to help. You just have to give it a chance.
Anyways, just my opinion(s).
Not really the same argument, in my opinion. The same version of Xorg works fine on other distributions, thus the software itself is not a "beta", merely the configuration of it.
Part of the problem with distro's like Debian is that if you want all the same good stuff everyone else has, you'r stuck with "experimental" branches.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
This article (and reality) are about converting enterprise desktops from Windows to Linux. In a 5000+ seat environment, "simple to install" and AOL compatibility are just not issues at all!
Linux at home is not going to be at all common for a long time yet. But in big business, Linux on the desktop would be very interesting. The lack of viruses and needing to keep track of licenses could save a lot of admin headaches. Of course, the current love affair with Exchange and MS Office, the lack of native support for big enterprise software, and reliance on VBScript-filled apps in Access and Excel are the real reasons for difficulty in migrating a big company to Linux on the desktop.
Look at the tomato! Isn't it sad? He can't dance! Poor tomato!
I have no idea what release of Linux you are using, but I figured I'd try out a couple of things you mentioned in your post. Our desktop machines here at work run SuSE, they haven't been upgraded in a while so mine is still running SuSE 9.2.
i on.jpg i on-after.jpg
I went and hunted about in the server room here at work for a USB mouse, and found an old microsoft one in a box of junk, I plug it into the front USB ports on my PC. A dialog box pops up which I have taken a screenshot of here:
http://db.osoal.org.nz/screenshots/new-mouse.jpg
The mouse is actually working at this point, and I can use it to click on the "Yes" button.
Okay how about changing resolutions, I click on the "Screen resize" applet in the tray and choose a resolution, it changes and a second later I'm looking at 800x600 rather than 1600x1200.
http://db.osoal.org.nz/screenshots/change-resolut
http://db.osoal.org.nz/screenshots/change-resolut
I agree adding USB devices and changing resolutions used to suck, it doesn't anymore.
I used to be quite mystified by people complaining about copy and paste on Linux until I went and used a windows machine for a few days. People in windows have to highlight, right click and select copy ( or the corresponding keyboard shortcut ). I have been using Linux for about 10 years now and for the whole time I have been highlighting text to copy and clicking the middle mouse button to paste. It works in just about everything on Linux. I can see that the windows method is totally busted across most Linux applications.
Configuring printers I agree is rubbish in Linux I have no problem with editing the cups config to add stuff, but the GUI frontends SuSE provide had me absolutely bamboozled the last time I tried.
Anyway just trying to add some more data points.
I am a lawyer and this constitutes legal advice and I shall indemnify you against any losses arising from taking it.
There's a difference between "Accountable" as in "I can sue you if your stuff breaks" and "I can blame you, and not get fired if your stuff breaks".
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Woah man, what year are you from? This was fixed so long ago, I can't even remember when...
Oh well, what the hell...
the blame for linux's lack of desktop maturity and lack of driver support for nvidia etc, lies squarely on the pre x.org group, XFree. nvidia were submitting patchs as were ati and they were being ignored. just look at how the whole project stagnated for YEARS, people screaming out for features, developers submitting patchs, wanting cvs commit access, and it was all ignored. the whole linux/gnu/bsd desktop situation would be years ahead if it wasn't for those turkeys
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The average American likes Windows because it is relatively simple to install
The average American doesn't install Windows. They buy the computer with Windows preinstalled, and when their copy of Windows gets to the condition that it needs to be reinstalled, they throw out the computer and get another one.
On normal office desktop machines, the graphics are just too slow, at least the one I have. I have run SuSE 9.1/9.2, since it became available, at the office and it is perfect except for the graphics.
:D). It was like I got a much faster PC.
I run 1600x1200 on my 21" screen and the graphics are just too slow.
We run all our MS apps via Citrix so I have all the programs I need. Although the Citrix graphics performance are horrible under Linux, I could live with that(and the flaky cut'n'paste between MS apps and Linux, that only works sometimes), if just the graphics speed were OK with Linux apps.
After 2 years on Linux, it was refreshing/less stressful to boot up on Windows again(note that I do not run our windows network
And that bothers me because now I got used to Linux on the desktop, and I would REALLY like to run it, but the graphics just annoys me so much. It is just too slow that makes me think sometimes that I work on a 500MHz machine and not 2.6 GHz.
I don't mean that as a silly statement. Look at OS X - Apple has created a very strong image for their product. It's 'sexy', 'stable', 'lickable', etc. Every John and Jane Computer User knows what Windows is; it's the software which runs computers. But what's Linux? Is it a kernel? An operating system? A series of distributions? A free operating system?
To me, marketing this is the biggest weakness of open source. Now, we all know that marketing has nothing to do with which OS is better, but in a market in which the actual differences between operating systems from the view of an average computer user are growing smaller and smaller, Linux doesn't have the kind of mindshare OS X and Windows do. What Linux really needs is a Steve Jobs, someone who will obsessively proselytize the OS to any and all.
I am a believer of momentum and curves.
It's ok, you can get one of the nice Mac PPC machines, dump the crappy OS that comes with it and install Linux, and you'll be all set. Future-proof! :)
The tobacco industry also employs lots of people but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to get people to stop smoking
Pre-canned Evolution Links for all those Slashdot holy wars.
I don't know others but I have been trying OpenOffice.org with high hopes every time a substantial new release is out. And every time I was disappointed. Like it or not, we need (and expect) excellent MS Office import/export capability. We are doing business at the end of the day and most of our biz partners are using Word/Excel/PP. Until now, I still see lots of glitches here and there when I am importing some MS files. How can I expect my users to accept these glitches when they switch over to Desktop Linux or even just OpenOffice.org on top of Windows?
The thing is you're confusing Windows already set up for your hardware with Linux being installed on your computer. It's a common mistake for newbies.
We don't really blame you... you're used to having systems set up for you by HP or Compaq or Dell, and it all just works. Have you ever tried installing Windows just by itself, though? OEM copy, without all your hardware specific drivers? It takes a long time to google all the drivers, half the companies have since gone out of business or don't offer drivers online, all kinds of fun trying to figure out how to get things working.
My point is that you (and some sympathetic, clueless mods) have gotten your ill-informed comment modded up. Or perhaps it's well-informed, and you're just trolling...
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Their product is sub standard, their business practices are harmful, and their power to eliminate innovation and dictate what their users can and cannot do with their computers is dangerous. So, No. It isn't. Any other questions?
3 answers ;)
./ ;)
1. Ubuntu does provide a build of wpasuplicant (latest version is 0.3.8, I believe), which provides WPA support.
2. When I have them. I picked up a lot of Thinkpad X21's (700 MHz PIII's) and a handful of NC4200's (1.8 GHz P4 Compaq subs). I'm down to the last of the 4200's right now and am searching for my next supply. Regardless of the OS installed (Linux or Windows), any laptop we sell is ready for war flight.
3. Not really. Our website is sorely out of date and doesn't currenty handle any commerce. I'm just beginning to focus on sales. If I can move another 5 to 10 units as quickly as this last lot... I'll look into the whitebook market. At this time, it's primarily EOL and rebuilding for local clients.
However, if you'd like some help moving in the right direction... I'd be more than happy to offer any assistance I can. Pop me an email at serviceATcompletepcDOTbiz.
Funny thing about all this... I just spent nearly an hour on the phone Friday w/ MS propoganda division. The nice lady on the other end of the phone was trying to make sure I had all the information I needed to help convert any Mac and any Linux clients over. Everytime I look at my MS Action Pack, I get a wee shiver down my spine. But I suppose it's good to have one foot in the shadows... if for no other reason than to bring it up on
Nice site, btw. Love the "Got Evil" bags. Might have to pick one up for my wife.
#SickNotWeak
Joking aside, though: Sure, if you want to use your special webcam, blinking USB cupwarmer or the supermouse with three scroll wheels that you bought on Walmart, Linux may well have a problem.
However, for almost any kind of mainstream hardware, drivers aren't a problem in Linux. You'd have to go to pretty serious lengths (like the things mentioned above) to not get your hardware detected by the latest and greatest distros.
All in all, it sure wouldn't hurt having a good way to distribute drivers for Linux without requiring having a compiler installed on the target system and so forth, but for the most part, it really isn't a problem anymore.
It is much more complicated to install XP than my favorite distro, SuSE. SuSE is largely a point-and-click-and-voila! (but you can go to advanced options and change pretty much anything). It installs in 75 minutes on my old laptop- slow for Linux but smokin' fast compared to XP. XP has a pure text-mode installer until the base system (PE) is installed anyway, few Linuxes besides Gentoo and some Debians don't have a fully-GUI installer. With Windows, I have to dick around finding drivers. It's darn near impossible if I don't have my restore CD because my Ethernet NIC (Intel PRO 100/VE intergrated) is not supported in XP out of the box. So I have to either find the bloody CD or get somebody to get me the driver on a floppy or CD from the Intel site. Can't download it myself. In SuSE, everything fired up perfectly right from the start. Which is easier for you?
Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
This is actually great, if they switch completely and "stick to it". One prerequisite, though, is that they should allocate significant R&D resources to fixing the problems with this migration and afterwards. FOSS developers, PLEASE take their patches and merge them in. This trial by fire is invaluable, and may uncover problems that are not obvious to you.
1. Apps: I won't claim any Windows application got a counter application for Linux, but most does - and most have more alternative for Linux than for windows.b le.shtml
check up this table http://linuxshop.ru/linuxbegin/win-lin-soft-en/ta
2. again, the situation is better than it seems.
windows XP is 4 years old, currently, Linux support out of the box many things windows does not.
for example, try to install windows on serial ATA drive. you will need a floppy (!!) disk with drivers during the setup phase. (as if the early 90's are still here!)
the thing is, situation is improving constantly, and the better it gets, the better the incentive for vendors to support Linux.
3. The problem with fonts is most likely due to a mix with GTK and QT applications, that uses different configurations.
say, supposed someone would port a MacOS X application to windows, what are the odds that the windows fonts control would work for it?
there is a solution for it, however:
I use KDE, which uses QT, this cause a problem with GTK applications (regarding fonts etc). the solution is to use a small application called "GTK Style and fonts".
you can tell it use make GTK use the same font settings QT uses, which enable consistently changing fonts.
I don't know if there is a similar solution for users who runs Gnome (GTK) and use KDE applications. (QT).
about copy paste, works fine for me.
better than windows, actually, with the nice ability to copy by selecting with the mouse, and pasting with the middle mouse button.
Omry.
if I had someone to help me when it breaks. I've dallied with Debian and now Gentoo, but each of them has ended up broken (due directly to my own ignorance) to the point where fixing it to make it usable was beyond my knowledge. I'm not a stupid person. I know how to google, and I know that the best answer to a question is a source of information, rather than a set of instructions, but it's not always easy to know what to ask or how to get the responses you need, and even if you do, often you're ignored anyways. I'd love to see a distro step up to address this, maybe with some kind of voluntary mentor/buddy system, where an experienced user 'adopts' a newbie and offers periodic, light email or chat help when needed, till the new user gets sufficiently knowledgeable to fix things herself (at which time, said user could become a mentor for a newer user if they so choose, perpetuating things). This is what keeps me on Windows, and a bit of my soul dies every time I turn the thing on, but I can fix it if it breaks (which, of course, it does).
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
Lx 13:2 Behold! The salvation of thy system is at hand! Of the operating systems that shall be sold both from within and amongst the nations around you, of them none shall ye buy. 3 For thou shalt be but one way to enter the Kingdom of Heavenly Operating Systems. Thou shalt purchase thee a disk burner and keepeth it close to thine heart, just as thy keepeth thy karma close to thy heart. 4 From thy fattest data pipe, which is known as broadband amongst the heathen, shalt thou download and burn thy Linux the Christ, for Linux redeemeth almost all hardware. Thou can't worship Linux the Christ until thou first install thy Linux the Christ and Savior CD onto thy computer. 5 From thy computer shalt thy wipe the most evil and depraved Microsoft from thy hard drive, infested with more diseases than all of the harlots of Babylon! 6 Once thou has cleansed and purified thou hard drive from the evils of the Satan Gates, then shalt thou install thy Linux the Christ and Savior CD onto thy computer and the Kingdom of Heavenly Operating Systems shall be yours forever and ever, at no cost with no support. 7 If Linux the Christ shall not be installable on thy hardware, thou shalt follow BSD for he is risen! Thus saith Father Torvalds. Amen
I agree. Let me tell you of a (small) application I was responsible for about 10 years ago with a major bank.
... [long explanation]"
We wrote some integration stuff - take the data from here, stick it in a file, massage it, then load it into this other database here; cron it so it runs every hour or so - very, very vanilla.
We wrote it in perl.
Then when we came to deploy it, some compliance guy became very concerned: "what's perl? Who supports it? Do we have a licence? What happens when it does wrong? We can't put unsupported software into production you know."
Believe me, compliance is a really, really big issue in banks. Rightly so.
There was no way I was going to get this deployed with those questions hanging over my head.
So I rang my friendly Sun salesman and had the following (somewhat bizzare) conversation:
Me: "You guys use perl in Solaris right?"
Him: "Of course"
Me: "For which we're already licenced right?"
Him: "I hope so - else we shouldn't be shipping those boxes to you"
Me: "So do we have support for perl?"
Him: "Ummm. Maybe not, you should speak to Larry Wall and the perlmonks for that. But why are you worried? How often do you have problems with perl?"
Me: "Hardly ever, but
Me: "Can you sell us a support licence? You just forward our emails to the perl guys, and send back their responses"
Him: "Sure, what do you think will work?"
Me: "How about $5,000, perpetual, one off"
Him: (laughing) "Ok, I'll send you the invoice"
The application got deployed. For $5,000 more than it should have cost, but it did go in, and deliver it's business benefits.
Thankfully, people are much more switched on about open source these days and I haven't ever encountered the problem again.
Quite honestly, all this guff about licencing, accountability, responsibility is just plain, flat out FUD
You can *always* find a way to mitigate and manage your risks, and there are *always* people who will help you do it.
Does the parent poster really believe that MS has a monopoly on trust and accountability? Really?
A convicted monopolist who paraded fabricated evidence in front of the court?
(I think my eyes just popped out of my head)
When the article deals primarily with Novell and what Novell is doing regarding their desktop solution, it's really a waste of my time to wade through responses regarding Debian or Ubuntu or whatever else. Are those designed for an office enivronment? Not that I've seen.
When we talked about users in an office enivronment, we're primarily talking about a bunch of people who use an office suite, perhaps instant message others, and access a lot of web-based apps. Assuming that those web-based apps are platform-independent (i.e. not dependent on Internet Explorer), then the majority of people in an office setting will be perfectly fine with using a Linux desktop.
Having managed an IT infrastructure, I can tell you that I would not want users to be able to do most of the things people complain about with Linux. I do not want them playing Sims 2 at work. I don't want them playing Doom 3. I don't want them trying to install new programmes at all, let alone new drivers.
I have SUSE 9.3 at home and it works very well. Can I do everything I want to do at home yet? No. Did I have to tweak my install? Yes. But would I have needed to do that to do office-related work? No.
For the business desktop scenario, I would say that Linux IS ready. With proper user security (don't give them all root), Linux would actually cut down the number of support requests for supported software (because they wouldn't be able to install unsupported software).
Linux - because it doesn't leave that Steve Ballmer aftertaste.
Can't say that I agree. I advocate dual booting and a slow transistion from Windows to Linux - there is the problem of Windows applications which the user has the habit of using in order to be productive. I try to have Linux from the start on new sites though.
How many beans make five, anyhow ?