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.'"
<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.
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.
...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
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.
"between GUI world and Console/Kernel world."
And Windows has this integration exactly how?
"X is to Linux as Win 3.1 was to Dos." Not even close. X is a display server. Win 3.1 was a shell on DOS. X can run remote displays. Try that with Windows 3.1. (Not to say X doesn't have its problems, but they're being debated and addressed as we speak, supposedly.)
"But it's still there."
You've never looked at your Windows boot log, have you?
"it's no registry."
Thank God, the Windows Registry is the dumbest fucking idea Microsoft ever had. A nightmare single point of failure with no documentation and apparently no rules.
Text config files are infinitely to be preferred over such a thing. Especially when there are now numerous GUI tools that front-end them and do vetting of your choices so you don't have to worry about typos.
"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."
Never heard of Webmin, have you?
And since when is Windows "elegant" in handling its component configuration? You've never used Windows Server 2003, have you?
"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."
No, you're a Windows astroturfer trying to convince people that Linux has fatal flaws and covering your ass with that lame remark.
This is the latest gambit from Windows trolls - pretend to be Linux users "dissatisfied" with Linux or only wanting to suggest "improvements" to Linux. You see it everywhere now on the Linux boards. They give themselves away by their lack of real knowledge about what is available on Linux and how Linux works.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
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
Funny that you mention Exchange for a couple of reasons...
First because MS decided that Exchange 2003 was going to be their new cash cow. So 2k3 is licensed *per client*. Which means if you have 5000 clients you are going to be paying through the nose! $2,000? Hah! That'll run ya ~$200,000 for a few thousands clients or so...
Second because you have OpenXchange (from Novell) which will emulate an Exchange server and talk to Outlook clients. Not to mention Evolution (Novell again) which will talk to an Exchange 2k/2k3 server with their connector software.
G. Washington on Government "it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."