Vista Licensing Speeds Linux Move

Stephen Samuel writes "Australia's NSW Office of State Revenue is speeding it's transition to a Linux desktop due in part to a lackluster interest in Microsoft's attempt to lock them into the Software Assurance Program, reports LinuxWorld. The agency's CIO and manager of client services both confirmed they would start scoping for a move to a Linux desktop within six months. Manager Pravash Babhoota seemed satisfied with a Linux move in their back office, citing Linux costs as being just over 1/6 the projected cost of a Windows upgrade, while processing doubled."

Comments

I can see it now...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ballmer just striped his shorts.

Microsoft is a company hell-bent on self destruction.

Re:I can see it now...

[MassacrE]

Linux is *not* user friendly, and until it is linux will stay with >1% marketshare.

Even if it got up to 50%, that would still be > 1%.

Re:I can see it now...

[NickFortune]

Linux is *not* user friendly, and until it is linux will stay with >1% marketshare.

You know, it strikes me that saying "Linux is not user friendly" is like saying "computers are not user friendly". I mean, I can see where you'd get such an idea, and in some cases it is certainly true. On the other hand, when I think of all possible environments on offer, it seems to me that such statements say more about the speaker's inexperience in the area than anything else.

I mean Linux embraces everything from pure command line distros to virtual windows clones of the windows interface. You have ubergeek distros like gentoo, and you have ones where people have spent some serious time and money making it simple, like Ubuntu and Linspire. To say nothing of Knoppix which you don't even need to install, and famously Just Works.

User: "How do I get Quake 3 to run in Linux?"

OK you got me. It's a bit of a pain getting programs written for windows to run under Linux. I expect there are Mac apps that give similar problems when you try to make them work under windows. If getting windows games to run on your computer is your highest priority, then it makes sense to have windows installed. You can even dual boot Linux and youse the windows partition as a gaming environment.

On the other hand, the New South Wales Office of State Revenue maybe have more important priorities than Far Cry compatibility. But, hey! the way game studios are ignoring the PC in favour of consoles these days, it's going to be a moot point before too much longer anyway.

So, I guess the point I'm trying to make is that what seems easy and natural to Linux geeks is definitely not what regular people consider easy and natural.

Oh definitely. It's a mistake made by highly skilled people in all fields - to assume that just because something is everyday and routine to them, it can be glossed over for others.

Hence, the preference towards Windows.

I don't agree with yout "hence" nor with your assumption of a preference. Winodws' widespread deployment has more to do with the fact that MS make it damn near impossible to buy a linux box from an OEM channel, and the fact that most people never having tried anything else, tend to think windows is the way things ought to work.

This is not necessarily an endorsement of Windows, just human nature. People tend to think what they're used to is they way things ought to be. For myself, I came to windows from Unix in 1990 and thought Unix was they way things ought to be, purely because that was what I was used to.

Of course, fifteen years later, I still do, and with rather more basis for comparison.

Re:I can see it now...

[slashflood]

Always the same post:

• Comment 1
• Comment 2
• Comment 3
• Comment 4
• Comment 5
• Comment 6

The guy is called ClintJCL: one of his posts. You can find the same post in his blog, but he says, that he just copied it from /.. Some research at Google reveals a lot about this guy.

Re:could these people be on collision course with

[Anonymous Coward]

You assume the public feel compelled to "trust" Microsoft. In fact, Microsoft has become the company that everyone loves to hate. They haven't released a major offering in years, and continue to depend upon new computer purchases as its main source of OS revenue (i.e. highly discounted). Meanwhile, you've got a public tired of the lock-in -- espeically when it serves no purpose other than to extract more of their hard-earned dollars. And I haven't even mentioned the lackluster attempts at beefing up security.

Meanwhile, Apple seems to be gaining market share -- based on what? A freakin' MP3 player! "Gee", folks wonder, "Are all Apple products this good?"

And last but not least, there's Microsoft's crown jewel -- Office. Who has $400 to spend on an office suite when Open Office is delivering the same value for FREE?

Which brings me back to the origainal point --- Microsoft wants us to trust them. What have they done to earn that trust?

Lower TCO using Linux

[totallygeek]

I spoke with a company about lowering TCO by moving to Citrix or Terminal Services and Linux workstations. The licensing benefits and security at the workstation was one factor, but the big kicker was the workstation OS needs were removed, giving them 1-2 extra years in their replacement rotation and depreciation.

So, the company agrees and begins to move forward. To my dismay, they put in Citrix, and proceed to replace workstations with Winterms! So, they spent a fortune replacing workstations, instead of just replacing the OS with Linux and featuring new workstations purchased without any OS.

Management types looked at the skyrocketed costs and went back to the original documentation. They actually tried to blame Linux for the costs. The board report reflected this, even though no Linux was installed. Once this was discovered, to save face, they started buying Linterms (still expensive, still replacing workstation, still with 3 year depreciation and replacement cycle).

So, I hear of companies complaining about Linux costs and have to take it with a grain of salt because I know that many people have their numbers inflated or do not really realize what they have. For example, a company buys a Linux box running Oracle for a 25-Windows-workstation network. They classify all the workstations and Oracle, the whole kit and kaboodle, as a Linux project. All associated expenses become Linux's fault, even though the Linux costs were low or none.

Microsoft committing corporate suicide

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, welcome our new overlord Tux.

Thank you Microsoft, as you push more and more customers away, hardware manufacturers will be providing more and more support for open-source driver development - unhindered by DRM, even! :)

I used to be a Microsoft fanatic. Hell, I used to WORK for Microsoft! While I was no stranger to Linux (I ran it back when it was just a floppy-based installation and if you wanted X you had to FTP and compile it yourself) my job obviously required the use of Windows (Duh, working for Satan, you have to use his OS). When I moved on during the dot-com boom thinking that other tech companies' stock options would fare better (STUPID decision on my part. I worked for two dot-coms who tanked) I quit running Linux for a while. It wasn't until Microsoft began to outright attack their own customers (Suing college students for reselling unopened software after Microsoft refused to honor their unconditional 30-day money-back guarantee, suing customers who resell used but retired software license, and hell, even suing customers when they choose competitors' products) that I began to look seriously at Linux again, and when I began testing various distros last year I was shocked awed at how much and how quickly is matured. I use Linux 99.9% of the time now. I only use Windows to pull photos off of my cellphone, and to play an occasional game of Return to Castle Wolfenstein.

I still consider Windows to be an excellent tool for most average users, but I have been moving more toward recommending Linux to non-gamers. OOo has matured, and while its file I/O still sucks, it is usable for 99% of users, and what's more, when they come home to {write term papers/draft business plans/write proposals/edit small flyers} Linux and OOo won't hinder them in the least, and most user-friendly commercial distros of Linux are under $100, and to get the equivalent amount and calibur of software for Windows would be anywhere from $20K on up.

Microsoft you're shooting yourselves in the foot, and with every suit you file against a customer choosing a competitor's product, you're gaining bad press and driving thousands more away. With every bit you tighten the noose on your licensing scheme, you're driving more and more schools, municipalities, and large corporations away from your product line entirely, from desktops to workstations to servers.

Keep it up, and you'll go the way of SCO in a few years.

Re:Customer Lock-In

[ben0207]

" like they're playing chicken against a cement wall with a tank."

I'm not sure how many metaphors you got there, but it's probably too many.