Slashdot Mirror
Novell Still Runs Windows
daria42 writes "Despite Novell's internal migration to Suse and OpenOffice.org, the company admitted today that up to 3000 of its 5000 workers still had dual-boot installations with Microsoft Windows. These users are likely to be migrated to pure Linux boot systems in the next year or so." From the article: "Hovsepian's remarks indicate Novell will have at most a few months' experience as a complete Linux and open source desktop shop behind it when, according to the vendor's predictions, the software starts taking off in the mainstream." Update: 04/11 13:25 GMT by J : At the closing OSCON session, August 5, 2005, Miguel de Icaza talked about Novell's progress. My notes read: "novell's moving 5500 employees from windows to linux. first stage, office->openoffice, is complete. second stage, windows->linux, is 50% complete, proj. 80% by Nov."
and still not laid...
Since a fair wodge of Novell's money comes from selling Windows software, I comfortably predict that this won't happen any time soon.
Windows will probably never completely go away, or at least not for a very long time, since they do still develop products for windows.
Inconceivable!
I work for Novell, and of course I have a windows machine. I develop software that has to run on Linux, OS X and Windows. All of our developers are in the same boat. If they don't have Windows code, they have NetWare code that needs to be built on Windows. Very few developers don't have code that needs a Win32 box either for development or for testing.
But ask me what machine I use to read my email, surf the web, write code, etc. It's my Linux box. And most of the developers on my team are the same way. And Novell as a company has been WAY better than anywhere else I have worked about having every business app I need on Linux supported by the IT department, and I even used to work for a company whose main business was their Linux distro (no, it wasn't SuSE).
Just use LDAP, or even NIS.
Novell's shift from Windows and Office to open source software was first begun in March 2004, while microsoft's honey pot was only released on the 3rd of this year?
http://www.livejournal.com/users/metricmusic
They make Windows sound like a controlled substance. "Oh man, we're working night and day to get these employees off such a nasty habit. Please don't let this affect your opinion of Novell as a Windows-free workplace."
Windows is a million times less addictive than nicotine. I kicked the habit on my personal computers in junior high while my peers were just *starting* to smoke.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
You're trying to tell me that a large corporation with 5000 desktops, who develops Windows software might run Windows on a lot of them? I'm shocked I say, shocked.
-- Linux user #369862
i'd generally agree, but this should be less relevant in a business setting (it's a safe bet that those 3000 people are sticking with windows for quake 3). like they said in the article, things like porting macros from MS office probably aren't worth the immediate effort. along with that, any office i've worked in would be stuck with a bunch of legacy MS Access databases that would have to be converted too, and as far as I know there wouldn't be any easy way to handle reports or forms from Access using open source tools.
However, Linux is closer to desktop readiness this year than ever before.
When I was in High School, we just used NIS (and NFS-mounted home directories). When the school decided to "upgrade" (after receiving a contract with Dell) to new WinXP/AD boxes, we actually had an easier time "breaking the rules." The complex system of policies was easily circumvented, although this was all moot since a virus (which, as of my graduation, was still not completely resolved) knocked it all down anyway.
... Quake III Arena. There is a linux version of that available.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quake_III_Arena/
The only reason that Linux isn't viable on the desktop is because Microsoft locks people into their proprietary standards. If you have a bunch of documents in MS Office, or you exchange documents with those who use MS Office, then you can't really get rid of it. You can't expect OO.o to be 100% compatible because they had to reverse engineer the file format, and there's no way to get it right. Microsoft can't even stay compatible with itself across versions, how is OO.o supposed to get it right? Same thing goes for many other things locking people in, like Exchange to name one. The software on Linux is great, and would be a lot better if we didn't have to spend half our time reverse engineering Microsoft's file formats, and implementing proprietary extentsions that Microsoft has wedged into the few standards it chooses to even recognize.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
*nix has been managable across a network longer than Windows has even known what a network is. *nix was designed with the network in mind...
We've just had a vendor pitchfest for a replacement OS for an elderly unsupported RH release in use on about 4000 servers (my employer's a dotcom with piles of machines in many remote datacentres round the world.) We've had Sun pitching Solaris, Red Hat on RHEL and Novell/SuSE. I must say the Novell/SuSE pitch was the most unexpectedly impressive; Crispin Cowan's AppArmor is really, really good (I'm biased: I'm a security geek) and seems to be much more usable than SELinux. Xen also seems to be happier on SuSE than RH.
Sun had a good story now they can say Solaris is really Free, but they seemed very defensive (spent 30 mins showing us balance sheets marked "Sun confidential, internal use only" emphasising they make lots of money and aren't about to go bust. But we would definitely be a relatively small customer for Sun, whereas I'm more convinced that Novell would be prepared to go the extra mile to keep us happy.
Personally I'm going to be trying SLES out on at least one machine at home, alongside OpenBSD and Mandriva, regardless which OS our beancounters plump for.
Face facts folks, Linux still isn't ready for the desktop, and Novell, despite their loads of marketing, knows it.
If Linux isn't ready for the desktop, there's no such thing as "ready for the desktop". I see absolutely NO criteria of "desktop readiness" that (a)applies to Windows, (b) doesn't apply to Linux and (c) is an attribute solely of the operating system.
Where Linux adopters run into trouble is C. The problem is what economists call "network effects": if you need software X, and provider of X only targets Windows, then you need Windows.
The point of a company like Novell migrating to Linux is to help create a Linux market for X, or its competitor X'. But until X or X' is available on Linux, then you're stuck with dual boot.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I get it - they aren't fully converted. But then - they do DEVELOP software that runs on Windows. And their tools will only succeed if they can integrate into a Windows environment.
The accomplishment is that they are all dual boot and they use OpenOffice.org. Period.
Novell is a company that develops Windows products, as well as Linux and Netware. They are ALWAYS going to have Windows workstations there. We have a number of Novell DSEs at our company and they ALL run NLD or Suse 10 on their work laptops, and use Vmware to run Windows as needed.
Other Novell support staff needs Windows boxes around to support customers.
I don't think it's possible for them to be 100% Windows free. Their business demands that they run some Windows boxes.
I find it quite ambiguous when people debate whether Linux is "desktop ready" or not. What does that mean? I have the notion that it means something different to everyone. I've been exclusively running Linux on my desktop for over 3 years, and exclusively on my laptop for over one year. I have a Linux system at my workplace, and so does almost everyone else on my floor. Are there occasionally problems with running Linux on my desktop (including problems related to the fact that I'm not running Windows)? Yes, of course there are. The amount of problems may decrease, but will never be fully eliminated (IMHO). I can usually find a detour or alternative to the problems that I face now though, so its not a huge deal. And I can state for a fact that the amount of time I spend fixing problems with my Linux desktop is much less than the amount of time I used to spend solving similar problems on my former Windows machine.
:p
So I consider Linux is already "desktop ready" for me. I think that for the most part, regular people can do just fine if Ubuntu or another user-friendly distro is completely setup for them and they are given maybe a 30-minute tutorial on how to access the web, e-mail, etc. So who are we talking about here? Who does Linux have to be "ready" for to be called desktop ready? Those idiots that call in to tech support asking which key is the any key? The elderly who don't even know what a mouse is? Or just your normal, average computer user? And if so, who is a normal, aveage computer user anyway?
Sorry for the early morning rant, but this term has been bothering me for quite some time.
Hero of Allacrost, a FOSS RPG for *NIX/*BSD/OS X/Win
I can see why they haven't migrated yet. There are a few business apps, mostly vertical applications for ticketing, billing and invoice, that need to be run on Windows. For instance, where I work, we use a proprietary ticketing system that is unlikely to be ported to anything that isn't Windows. It enters problems on a customer's account, and assigns the problem to the appropriate technician, who then updates the ticket as needed.
But here's the deal... for all of its slowness, awkward GUI implementation, dubious reliability and stratospheric license and support contracts, all it really does is read and update database records. It's a LAMP application with out the L, A or P.
Here's a bigger deal... almost all vertical client/server apps can be replaced by a web-based application. Almost all of them do nothing but update and display database records.
Why not just hire a full-time RoR geek or two to crank out LAMP applications that will be robust, secure, customizeable to meet coprorate standards, easy to deploy and dirt cheap compared to a multi-zillion dollar per-seat license?
Why not indeed.
This is where the new growth in the IT industry is headed. Already, most of the tools I need to interact with the vast and varied store of corporate data are web-based utilities. Admittedly, I work on the technical side of a major ISP, and we tend to be more elightened about such things, but really... Linux on the desktop will be a reality sooner rather than later.
The trick isn't porting applications to the Linux desktop, but to the Linux server.
Touche
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
There are likely some departments within Novell that still are dependent on Windows for third party apps. Like an accounting or payroll department perhaps. Are there enterprise level Linux apps that would support them? Not trying to flame. Just a question.
Exactly which piece of software can't you live without? You said after OpenOffice the choices were limited but for the life of me I just can't think of a single business app without a linux runnable replacement. Perhaps you work in an unusual environment but I'm just a little curious what these mysterios apps are.
If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
What are you talking about? You can do the same things with LDAP and/or Kerberos. For
you old-schoolers out there, NIS and a carefully structured environment will give you most
of the same advantages.
If you serve all your binaries over the network (nfs, snfs, sshfs, afs, etc) and do the same
with home directories and shared data directories, then managing an office of Linux machines
is an absolute breeze. All you've got to do is make sure each machine boots and knows where to
get authentication information (LDAP, NIS, Kerberos). Add netbooting, and you only have to
worry about having a boot image for each hardware set.
Now, if you're talking about an office of Linux computers where each user has root access to
his machine and is allowed to do whatever, well, then it's pretty much like running an
office of Windows machines with no AD and policies in place.
*sigh* back to work...
We have tens of thousands of dollars (US) of Novell software that runs on Windows.
If Novell didn't run Windows, how could they support us and their products?
eDirectory for NT.
ZfDS6.5.
Middle Tier.
Netware Client for Windows.
ConsoleOne
iManager
Zenworks Imaging
OMG - a company that sells both Windows and Linux software has machines that dual boot to both Windows and Linux. Who would have thought such a thing?
The oft-hyped training issue is a complete myth in my experience.
My parents (age 70+) are happily running Fedora Core 5. training was neglible. They e-mail, surf, and play games with no problems at all.
My present company is completely linux-based using thin-clients. Training issues? None, nada. Complaints? None, nada. No issues teaching people to use Linux, no issues teaching people to use OpenOffice.org, or Gaim, or Evolution, or any of the other applications we use.
We are a medical facility. Our staff are trained to treat patients and are by no means computer people. They just want the computer to work so that they can get their jobs done. And you know what? That's exactly what it does.
Linux is not perfect, but neither is Windows. Each is better at some things than the other. Your comments are simply ignorant.
Just because Novell is offering Linux doesn't make it heresy that they have boxes with Windows dual-booted. If they've already bought their licences for Windows, MS is already paid. Not exercising the licences they own out of protest isn't going to make a dent. Meanwhile, their devs need to be able to run stuff on Windows, so it kinda makes sense that they have Windows at their disposal.
Speaking as someone who lost a number of potentially productive days trying to get Windows 2000 SP4-slipstreamed to install on a 250G harddrive without crapping out at boot-time when it saw a partition beyond the 128GB barrier, Linux is looking better every day. In fact, after spending five minutes in Fedora, Ubuntu, and SuSE, the chameleon won and is now installed on my hda4. But I still need Windows to run a few things...yes, mostly games, and a few college websites that just have to have IE6. But I already own Win2K, and I'd be silly not to use it just because MS is an idiot sometimes.
Keeping Windows around for the things Windows is good at makes my computer more powerful. I don't support MS, but I'm not going to rend my nose to spite Bill's face.
Windows, or at least, the Microsoft Operating System, is never going to go away. If Linux seriously erodes Microsoft's position, they'll sink their pentillions of dollars into making a solid, quality, viable OS product. So don't mind Novell, or myself, for installing SuSE and Windows next to each other. You need not be a zealot or a martyr to be a soldier.
I know you're trolling but you're obviously not very knowledgeable in business. It doesn't have to be the year of Linux for Novell to make millions. And guess what? We still haven't had "the year of Linux" and Novell is making millions! In the last year they've signed with a few governments. That alone is enough to drive the company for years. They have plenty of customers. In the last years they've had bigger problems with management than linux, IMO.
Developers: We can use your help.
FUD FUD FUD!
For any mainstream application there are 5 applications of the same type to chose from in any given Linux distro. Most of the software available for Windows are "crap" utilities or program that don't live up to the hype printed on their boxes. If there is an application problem in Linux it is that their are too many applications to chose from...
I'm not knocking Windows though....i'm a Windows Developer. I'm also a avid and experienced Linux user...who always has his FUD radar on...
If you must!
Zenworks for desktop management + red carpet for patch management.
Yes, my only tool is a hammer. And you're starting to look like a nail.
This is only another proof that successful companies don't waste money on removing facilities that are no longer useful but don't get in the way.
An emerging migration strategy from Windows to Linux is
Oh wait... you know that. You're only trolling, right?
[too early-- need more coffee...]
Er... mysterious apps? Just because you don't know of any doesn't mean they don't exist. For example:
AutoCAD - yup, very mysterious this...
StruCAD / XSteel - not quite so well known pretty much the only choices for 3D detailing in this industry.
On top of that we've got our CAD/CAM control software, can't see us moving to a Linux version of that. You need dedicated software to run well over £600,000 worth of machinery, taking data from the above packages. Can't see that running on anything but Windows for the forseeable future.
Since Novell actively supports and develops Client32 for Windows, Groupwise for Windows, Zen for Windows, etc I hope they'll keep[ some Windows boxen around for developing and testing purposes. And since their PSE's support accounts that run Windows, those cats need to be using dual boot and/or virtualization setups as well. I say don't focus on how many desktops they didn't migrate to 100% Linux, focus instead on how many they did. I'm also willing to bet that if Novell weren't an IT company that had to develop and support software on Windows, they'd have migrated a much greater percentage of their desktops.
Yes, my only tool is a hammer. And you're starting to look like a nail.
Until wine is in decent shape, it is pointless to approach general public to switch. While it will never run 100% of the applications,
it is not necessary. It just a larger fraction of the applications than it currently does.
Having said I was surprised to see how far it has come. I tested several niche applications used in the insurance industry with codeweavers. None of them had a problem. While I am not ready to recommend wine as an option in our company, I have a hope that
in future it can become a reasonable recommendation.
I wonder if they are generating a report of the migration (positives and negatives).
And if so, will they publish it?
On a computer or under a hood.
I dunno. 'URPMI OpenOffice.org' seems far easier to me than finding, downloading, executing and specifying paramaters, which is easier again than convincing myself to part with the money for the latest MS Office.
When i made the move over to Linux i wasn't at all a 'Linux Geek' (i still don't think i really am, aside from liking the CL), but maybe that's why i don't see these 'obvious' pitfalls. I switched because my Windows CD was scratched, and it occurred to me that it would be easier to download a Linux one than a new Windows one.
Since then, i've used my PC for exactly what i used it for when i had windows, and i've had no problems installing anything. 'course, i don't try to upgrade the kernel, port software or hack software. I do web-browsing, instant messaging, e-mails and word processing.
I also write HTML and Fortran, which, with Kate and GCC, is far easier and cheaper than anything i found in Windows, but i didn't look too hard in windows (they came bundled with Linux).
This is slightly offtopic....but
First to dispense with TFA: since they are developing stuff for Windows, they will never be rid of it, nor should they. So they will always run Windows in-house to some extent.
But why can't they sell their product to other people? They have all the right parts to replace a Windows/Active Directory infrustructure. They have a desktop (Suse), they have a respected directory server (eDirecotry/NDS), they have general purpose servers (Suse), Zenworks to mananage it all, and they have an entrenched legacy product (i.e. a foot in the door) for which they can provide an upgrade path. Most importantly, they have them integrated seemlessly in their Open Enterprise Server. But they still can't get the sale. Its because their pricing provides no advantage over Microsoft A Novell Open Enterprise Server per user license per year is $230 retail. A MS Win2K3 10 user CAL is $1199 retail (or $119.9 per user). That's retail. MS, being the bigger company, has the ability to come even lower in enterprise or site licensing. Sadly, Novell doesn't seem able to do the math.
They should take the chance that they could make up the difference in revenue by going with volume over price. More licneses for less each, instead of fewer licenses for more each. They have to realize that every Windows installation is going to lead to an Exchange installation instead of a Groupwise installation. If they could build the market share in the network products, the revenue in services and add-on products will follow.
Maybe HP figured since you cheaped out on your OS you'd have a few spare bucks to spend on a printer other than their absolute bottom-of-the-line color laserjet, which isn't "new" by any stretch of the imagination.
HP offers linux drivers for every color laserjet they make starting with the 3600 series and going up. So apparently the only asshole around here is the one who spends $250 bucks on a color laser and expects it to have features no other printer in its class has; and then shits on the company for his own cheap ways.
Douche.
I've just one small suggestion for an edit: Leave out the "Necessary" from the subject line.
Come to think of it, that leaves you with a redundancy: Windows/Evil.
Perscriptio in manibus tabellariorum est.
Having said that, the transition at Novell had its high and low points. I was pleasantly surprised at how quickly the services on the company intranet shifted from supporting WIndows/IE only to generic browsers. I was disappointed in the quality of the GroupWise client on Linux (not that I was wild about the Windows version...), and the lukewarm support for the Evolution client on the GroupWise servers.
Oddly, the thing that made the Linux move easier for me than many of my co-workers was the fact that I am an OS X user by preference. Of course, the terminal was not a mystery, and I was more accustomed to accepting that similar things are sometimes managed very differently on different platforms.
One constructive criticism I would leave Novell with is that they could learn a lot from Apple about making *nix palatable to the desktop user (specific example: printing), but, from where I sat, it seemed as though Apple was completely invisible to Novell.
This has to be the biggest non-story I've ever seen on Slashdot.
Seriously, did ELSE anyone read that summary and just think, "Wow, who cares what Novell is doing OS-wise internally?".
Yes, I realize that this story is here for the purpose of reporting on another company converting to a pure-linux environment but the way the story reads, at least to me, is that Novell should be ashamed of itself for not doing it sooner or something.
Not trolling, just saying...
Zen 7 does a fine job of managing Linux desktops and Servers.
"All those moments, will be lost in time...like tears in rain..."
If that's true, it's good enough. Something that works better but costs the same will take market share. TCO is probably better on the Novell side and your data and employee's time is way to expensive to leave to Microsoft. By now, you have to have a hole in your head to use Exchange or any other M$ server.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I can't imagine why they would even want to dual boot if they could run something like VMWare and just virtualize Windows. Rebooting just to run a piece of software seems a little odd, unless it is a game that doesn't run well in VMWare. Something is fishy about this claim, methinks.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
The migration away from Windows and Microsoft Office was always a phased approach.
Office --> Open Office first (Novell is now standardised across the company on OpenOffice 2.0)
Windows --> Linux workstations for those that can; based on business function, application needs and the 'savviness' of the user
Right now I'd say that a large proportion of development, test and technical people are using Novell Linux Desktop as their primary desktop. I can see this just by working with people in meetings.
I can't comment on the overall number of people using single boot Linux, dual boot or just Windows; all I can share is what I see - lots of people using Linux on a daily basis.
The next phase is 'filling the gaps' - seeing how knowledge workers and those with specific applications can move. The release of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10 in mid-year should help with a lot of these issues.
Remember - just like any project choose the visible, realistic goals - that's what Novell's IS&T team have done.
Evil ZEN Scientist
Novell uses Novell ZENworks Linux Management internally to provide updates and patches to servers and desktops running Linux.
http://www.novell.com/products/zenworks/linuxmanag ement
for details.
Evil ZEN Scientist
But how are Novell's middle managers going to play with their Gantt charts from Microsoft Project?
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
Unix geeks would cross their eyes, scratch their head and wander away mumbling about "what do you need that Windows crap for anyways?" I mean, Unix is an IDE. Most of the Windows IDEs back then were little more than a limited-environment port of some subset of the standard UNIX development tools.
I've had 'login anywhere' Unix experience since the '80s and cross-platform login support in the early '90's (IBM's AIX was the worst back then for cross-platform admin work).
OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
No shit that they have to keep windows boxes around to develop with - for the developers. Maybe, just maybe, they are talking about all their NON-development activities like accounting, CRM, the receptionist, etc... converting to Linux. This is SO not worth the elevated BP to debate any further.
Perhaps if Oracle bought Novell they would then have the power to give MS a true run for its money. Novell's Desktop Linux, OpenExchange with an Oracle DB back end and Evolution as the email client. OpenOffice/etc for the office suite. Opera or Firefox as their browser and Oracle, while still supporting Unices and Windows, has their own tuned Linux distro (SLES) to push their databases out on. This would be good competition for both Redhat AND Microsoft.
I thought the whole point of an alternative to Windows was to have a choice. Why are they in such a hurry to eliminate Windows from their company? Keep it for the win32 developers and remove it for all the others. No big deal. If all your developers do win32 and POSIX development, then paying the "Microsoft tax" is the cost of doing business. But if you want to get down and dirty, you could take a play from the Microsoft playbook. Make the POSIX version of a program as good as the Win32 version, and then gradually improve the POSIX version over the Win32 version, and then make up some BS excuse like "Windows can't handle it and Linux can," which may be true, but it doesn't have to be.
I don't know about StuCAD/XSteel but the home platform for AutoCAD used to be AIX. It ran really well on IRIX. It was a very long time before it could run on a PC at all.
Hey, no fair! How come you get a higher score than I do... I mean the original post I replied to wasn't even talking about the future... :-p
To be honest, even if you do look to the future I don't see the situation changing much - our environment is going to be a tough one for Linux to break into. Ok, office applications are covered, e-mail is covered, our intranet will need converting (time consuming but doable). The problem lies with the specialist packages.
Now here, you've got an entire chain of processes, each using a dedicated program, and we're not going to be the only company with processes like this. For us the process is design, CAD detailing, production scheduling, and then to the CAM software on the shop floor.
Now each of these steps has it's own dedicated software, some steps use literally dozens of packages all working together, each step is reliant on the data coming from previous ones, and every single one is a windows package. In addition, you usually have 2-3 competitors producing software for each stage. Put all that together and it's going to be very difficult for any one company to justify the extra expense of developing for a new OS. Why should they when their entire market is running windows and all their competitors are developing for that same market?
It's a catch 22 - without an established user base running Linux and needing their software, there's no market for these companies to develop for and hence no benefit to them doing so. However without them to develop the software, that market won't get chance to develop since it's stuck running windows.
When windows first arrived on the scene all those years ago, it didn't have all these problems to contend with. I'm not going to argue that on a technical note, Linux is more than ready for the desktop, but it's facing the same kinds of problems that kept OS/2 and MacOS as niche products for years. The problem is that it's got to break into an already established market. That's a tough nut to break any way you look at it and I think you'll find it's one of the main causes for the slow adoption of Linux.
Now for a traditional firm to combat this would be nigh on impossible. The advantage Linux has and the reason it's been the only OS to really present a threat to MS is Open Source. Quite simply Open Source software doesn't have the traditional costs & risks for developing software. It doesn't need an established market, just a few interested folks to get things started. Development costs can be distributing across hundreds or thousands of interested parties, and can be distibuted across time too. Without Open Source I doubt Linux would even be in the position it is today, but with it, slowly but surely a user base is building.
Eventually we'll reach the stage where it breaks that catch 22 and there's a big enough market to attract the traditional software houses.
Of course, one extra bonus is that Linux is an ideal environment for software development, so it's possible that many of these traditional developers will already be running Linux themselves by the time they start to develop for the platform.
Now, if you really want to speed up adoption of Linux what we need is a really, really good application development environment; one that can compile for Linux *and* Windows. It's not going to be easy, but if enough people can get behind a project like this and make it good enough, you could get to the stage that it's easier for developers to write software that runs on both platforms than it is to develop just for windows. Create that and you could turn the entire situation on it's head.
Hmm... it appears I've done an about turn while writing this. Ok, I'll admit it: in time it may be possible for Linux to break into this market, but this is going to be a long, slow process. For now, just be grateful that progress is being made and that open source just may be the thing to do it.
Myx
Novell will have to keep Windows around for as long as they have to:
- produce Windows software
- support existing product
- maintain support contracts with legacy clients (see previous point)
- need to interoperate with Windows (although based on SuSE 9.3 and 10, they did little testing of KDE/Samba integration with Active Directory in recent release, it took a fair bit of tweaking on my part to make it work)
- Need to make Evolution work smoothly with Exchange
- Need to work out migration paths for clients who wish to move away from Windows
In other words, their support reps, development staff, and quality assurance labs will always need to keep Windows kicking around, very likely everything dating back to Windows 98 up through the current Enterprise Server, along with associated peripheral products like SQL Server, Exchange, Sharepoint, and so forth.
Sales folks? Receptionists? Accountants? IT staff? They can very easily get away with running only Linux or UNIX variants.
Changing your focus of business away from an antiquated product like Netware, acquiring the rights to UNIX AND becoming a Linux solution provider takes guts and a lot of pain goes along with it. They're lucky staying with Netware as their primary focus for so long even after Microsoft used their monopoly status to gain entrance into the server environment (and made Netware integration a bit difficult) didn't kill them. Now their main threat is that they're going head-to-head with IBM in the marketplace now in several areas, and personally I hope that Novell wins because Novell has real products to offer, while IBM is surviving primarily on services now.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
I'd be surprised if Novell do manage the transition to Linux desktops. They sure as hell won't be using their own products on the servers: Many Novell web products only work with IE on the client. Last time I checked, M$ don't produce IE for Linux
Who does Linux have to be "ready" for to be called desktop ready? (...) The elderly who don't even know what a mouse is?
Well, why not. Indeed, a french company has developped a linux based computer aimed at those who have nether touched a computer in their life, and especially the elderly. It's called Ordissimo ("ordinateur" means "computer" in french). It's sold only as a piece of hardware running their custom distro (eliminating instal and driver problem), run a simplified version of mozilla, features basic word processing, file management and even extra unsuported feature such as skype or gaim. It is secure, features online update and the company provides paid remote support. The only obvious drawback is that you can't install additionnal software of your choice, but in our days of online Web 2.0 services covering most of the needs, why bother.
The cost is 400 (320 $) without the screen. I grabbed one for my spouse grand mother, and being a Windows user myself, I feel more secure knowing that she runs a stripped down version of linux that she can't break, and a limited set of tools aimed at doing simply and efficiently what she needs (check email, occasionnal surfing and word processing, manage digital photos).
Quickbooks Pro.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
If MS Office were to disappear completely Linux still wouldn't become the standard desktop operating system.
Graphic artists need their Photoshop and Engineers need their Auto Cad. Grandpa needs a machine that will run the new craptastic greeting card software that he bought at the local XMart and junior likes to play games on the computer. I like to have the ability of going out and buying any computer on the market and know that all of its hardware will have Linux drivers.
Linux might be getting better and better, but it is still very far of being a desktop OS for the masses.
For hardware and software vendors to support Linux it needs to be profitable. It will not be profitable until Linux becomes a mainstream OS. Linux will not become a mainstream OS until hardware and software vendors support Linux.
It is not Microsoft's fault. In fact, had they made a better OS with better licensing Linux wouldn't be as widespread as it is today.
I'm afraid you are in the grip of a fantasy. I'd suggest you read up on Novell's recent financials before talking about them "making millions". Or ask your parents to read them to you when you are out of short trousers. You may be surprised at the real situtation, which makes the stream of announcements, interviews, etc., from Novell all the more fatuous.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
i wonder how much your company would have to invest to develop similar software for linux. if you think about it, let's say this company has 100 computers, all running windows and this specialist software. specialist software tends to be expensive costing many hundred dollars per license. windows comes with the machine, but upgrades are expensive. anti-virus software costs a certain amount each year. software upgrades cost a certain amount. could not some of this money be invested in developing free software (in collaboration with other companies in similar fields)? how long would it take, and how much money would have to be spent? would it be possible to develop it using a couple of full time programmers and a bounty system?
i can't see this not saving money in the long run.
Windows is a great operating system, despite all its problems. Let's not forget how many machines run Windows. Linux is cool, and if you are a programmer, maybe it is better, but for everyday use, Windows is fine.
erhhh.... no that has linux replacements. see here for a list.
http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/269/
some of those are even commercial.
If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
Novell turned over just around $50 million in pure Linux products last year (as disinct from its Linux netware replacement products which you won't need if you don't want netware). Novell itself is capitalized at around $3 billion. Why should Oracle pay £3 billion to acquire a revenue stream worth $50 million? Explain please.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
You ought to take a look at IBM's actual annual reports. IBM Software Group has a large portfolio of software products, and pulls in billions of dollars of sales every year. (And yes, it's profitable.) Less than IGS, but not exactly peanuts.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Far, far, far more than it's worth.
You're coming right back around to the old system of everybody running bespoke software. You just end up with a huge internal team troubleshooting and bug fixing your own releases.
The reason these software companies exist in the first place is simply because we don't have these kinds of skills. It's far cheaper for us (and our competitors) to pay our money to these companies and have their development team do all the work.
Even if I was interested in doing this, I doubt I could get our competitors interested, and even if I could, Management would throw a fit at putting a team together for the sole purpose of working with competitors...
Nope, I don't see anything happening until our software providers releasing versions for Linux.
hrmmmm again there are linux replacements for Autocad. Not sure about the controlling software. Thats a specialized case though that many businesses in America don't need to worry about.
i ndex.html/
http://www.linuxcad.com/
http://www.ribbonsoft.com/
http://www.adina.com/
http://www.lx-office.com/LX/products/architektur/
So far the only responses to my question seem to be making the mistake that industry standard software means irreplaceable software. That's not what I asked though. Still waiting for someone to name a windows business app that doesn't have a working linux replacement.
If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
Face facts folks, Linux still isn't ready for the desktop, and Novell, despite their loads of marketing, knows it.
Either this guy is a troll or doesn't know Novell at all. Since when has Novell been know to do a lot a marketing? Or even a little for that matter?
It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.
Huh? So how exactly does industry standard software not equal irreplacable? And how is the software I mentioned not a business app that doesn't have a working linux replacement?
Our business cannot work without these CAD packages. Yeah, sure there are alternative CAD packages to AutoCAD - now show me the steel libraries our suppliers produce for these. They don't exist, and since we're not big enough to force our suppliers to write software just for us we're stuck with AutoCAD.
Ditto StruCAD and XSteel. Since when are these not irreplacable? Sure, they may be a specialist case and most businesses don't need to worry about them, but that doesn't mean it's not an answer to your question.
You seem to be making the mistake that industry standard software does not mean irreplacable software, well sorry but sometimes it does.
You are thinking small. I am not saying "Aquire Novell for Novell's current assets and asset structure. I am saying use Novell's assets along with your own to become greater than the sum of the parts. You could sell the pie and the pie plate with the fork too. SuSE could easily become the defacto standard for Oracle Databases. OpenExchange with Oracle DB back ends would be sales of more databases, etc; a real viable chance to take on MS in that arena.
I have their annual report on my desk here. Thanks for the useless comment with a total lack of any information to back it up.
Developers: We can use your help.
this is one of these things which amuses me. i sometimes do some freelance work for a foundation building company in town and am amazed by the number of computers sitting about the place. everybody has at least one. even the secretaries at the front desk have two each. i haven't yet worked out what a secretary needs to do with a computer apart from read and answer e-mails. i don't believe that secretaries have become more productive since the computer became common-place. i know that if you give a secretary a new word processor, their productivity will go down sharpy for a long time while they are trying out the fonts and pretty colors and stuff.
what i'm trying to say, is, that using computers can be a two-edged sword. yes, it is nice to have a huge database programm helping the office workers look stuff up, but don't be surprised if their memories get worse and they forget how to work efficiently.
another thing i'd like to say, is, that in certain fields development of proprietary software results in software which is under a beautiful surface far worse than open source stuff. i recently had the chance to compare the print-outs of finale with lilypond. now lilypond hasn't even got a graphical user interface, but you can write music for it to set using any text editor you want and you can read the files it saves (it's a sort of mark-up language in ascii 7-bit). finale on the other hand has the most beautiful graphical user interface i have ever seen (apart from some problems with updating backgrounds after you've moved a window, which probably have more to do with windows than with finale). when you save a file it gets encrypted and zipped. when you print it it's full of mistakes. lilypond's print-outs are often indistinguishable from a generic handset print.
finale employs full time a team of many hundred and the software costs many hundred dollars a shot. lilypond employs a team of i think it's five people part-time and the software is free.
my point is, software is not necessarily difficult. yes, operating systems are difficult. if you want to do everything multi-threaded, that's difficult too. but a cad application which you can train an educated, knowledgeable person to use to help them design whatever it is they design - that's not impossible. lilypond of course stands on the shoulders of a particular giant (latex). i don't know anything about the field of cad. where would one start? a development of vector graphics? i dunno.
try to understand how the software you use works. once you've understood that, you can in theory write it yourself.
howie
no it doesn't. You could find a different supplier perhaps. I don't know as much about the structural steel industry as others that's true. However it has been my experience that the software is never a deal killer.
I'm curious though what exactly do these steel libraries do? Are they custom models already completed with structural and density variables programmed in? If so is there a possiblity you could work a deal where you provided the supplier with those same libraries in return for a break on product? There is always a way. What your really saying is that you just don't like the other options and prefer the windows route. That's perfectly fine but don't justify it with "I have no choice." Because that's just not true.
If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
Those are comparable to Quicken or M$ Money, not Quickbooks.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
My experience with an IDE was with QuickBASIC. You could/can get help on any feature of the language just by placing the cursor on a word in your program and pressing F1. If you put the cursor on a variable and pressed F! it told you what type it was. If you pressed F1 on a user defined type, you would see all of the elements of that type.
You're correct about PhotoShop and AutoCAD - until someone finally developes the equivalent on Linux, which is inevitable at some point (and not that many years from now.)
As for the crap bought at CompUSA, that stuff will eventually disappear as more developers realize they can do the same crap as OSS or shareware and distribute over the Net.
Hardware drivers are an issue, but s declining one except for wireless devices and of course the latest and greatest video cards most people actually don't buy unless they're gamers. In fact, the gaming issue is probably the biggest holdback for Linux. That will fold too eventually.
The only issue on all this is when, not if.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Nonsense, Microsoft's proprietry lockin is one of the reasons that Linux is yet to make it on the desktop. There are others such as inertia, lacking hardware support & lacking software support.
Of course all of this depnds on your idea of 'the desktop' and 'make it'.
"Put all that together and it's going to be very difficult for any one company to justify the extra expense of developing for a new OS....Eventually we'll reach the stage where it breaks that catch 22 and there's a big enough market to attract the traditional software houses."
You don't get OSS, do you?
"Ok, I'll admit it: in time it may be possible for Linux to break into this market, but this is going to be a long, slow process."
Okay, maybe you do. Just remember there's a difference between "long, slow" and "never."
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
The information is in their recent financials which I take it you have not read if you do have it. Novell announced a 22 per cent rise in the growth of their pure Linux products to $13 million. While that may sound impressive, Novell's annual turnover is just over $1.2 billion, and a huge proportion of that is their netware side which is declining since many netware customers are migrating to other platforms. No one has yet explained how a product line currently turning over $50 million is going to replace turnover worth $1.2 billion before the whole thing goes tits up, especially as Red Hat, Novell's main Linux competitor, are growing their own Linux market at twice Novell's rate which means less opportunity for Novell.
Like many people, I suspect you have been taken in by the SuSE story without realizing that it comprises not even 10 per cent of the whole company picture. In addition, no one has yet demonstrated that there is a market for SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, Novell's much-touted new killer distro, or that Mono is ever going to be something Novell will make money from.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
Until someone with an itch sits down and scratces it and replaces your two banking clients with one Linux client that does both...I could probably replace your export documentation package in a couple months using modern software.
There's nothing rocket science about any of this. It's merely a matter of someone deciding to do the software. After that, it's a matter of when the moron in charge of using the software realizes that free and updateable is better than expensive and fixed.
Nobody said it was easy, given the morons in charge of using the software. But "not easy" is different from "never".
It's pathetic how few people can comprehend any change.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Why does the incorrect get marked as insightful, I wonder? Because it better matches the prevailing groupthink than the truth does? Unix was developed on a standalone PDP box, and it wasn't for ages that a network was glued on. And then it wasn't redesigned with the network in mind, the network support was designed with an extension of the s[tream|ocket]s-based IPC in mind. If you want an OS designed around the network, try looking at UCB Sprite.
Until five minutes later when someone decides to replicate its functionality...
This isn't rocket science. People are assuming this crap is somehow magical software that can't be reproduced.
Maybe Adobe PhotoShop is tough to reproduce, as the GIMP isn't doing it (yet), but especially business software is usually pathetically easy to reproduce since all it does is shuffle dollars and cents around. Any decent programmer could reproduce QuickBooks in six months using modern software tools and libraries. It's the marketing end that would slow adoption - in other words, how long would it take the moron in charge of buying QuickBooks to realize there was a better alternative.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
"Lots of accountants rely on macros that are hard to port over."
For whom? The accountant? Any programmer who knows any macro language can probably do it in minutes.
This is why the real issue is IT policies. Mission-critical stuff should not be done in macros on a proprietary platform. It's just fucking stupid.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Uhm, Linux Terminal Services Project...
Troll.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
I don't need to stoop to your level to post a response. Please take the time to read the reasonable, cogent reply to your missive from a decent concerned citizen... ([OT] HP LJ2600"N" )
*** Don't be dull.***
or even better: Touché
:^)
ALT+0233 on the keypad.
If you are posting to Slashdot from a VT100, you may have trouble finding the Alt key.
I think your original post's -3 score speaks for itself. If you need a few bucks to buy a low-end color laserjet that supports linux, my lawn needs mowed. Let me know.
Allow me to fill you in a bit: the reason for the choice of hardware is that I'm building a Linux server http://www.k12ltsp.org/ with some old, dumb work stations for a computer lab at a school of disadvantaged kids. This on my own time and my own dime. The idea is to end up with a model that can provide easy, cheap, reliable horsepower while leveraging some existing hardware. Laser printing has a net-net lower cost per page.
So, flame away. But remember that you're flaming someone who is giving kids a hand up, not a hand out. I'm just wondering what your contribution to society is.
*** Don't be dull.***
Donating linux hardware to schools doesn't make you a saint, it makes you an activist. The distinction is important. And furthermore, even if you were St. Peter Incarnate, i'd still bust your ass for flaming HP when they did nothing unethical, immoral, or in opposition to any promises they have ever made. The "N" in 2600N designates the presence of an ethernet port. Nothing more. Had you read their website before you bought the printer, you would have known that it didn't have linux drivers, saving yourself both the $250 and getting called out by me on an internet site over your misinformation. So by all means, congratulations on boosting your own e-political agenda by giving some kids access to linux. That has nothing to do with this post, but since you seem to need validation on the subject, there it is. My contribution to society is that by virtue of being a high-earning republican, my copious tax dollars end up paying to replace your crappy donated hardware with expensive Macs after the system realizes there is no legitimate basis for linux in elementary or middle schools. Further down the road, my copious tax dollars will pay for your disadvantaged children to eat and watch cable TV while they serve their jail sentences. No need to thank me, I'm forced to do it by the government.
What do people need policies for?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect in the vast majority of cases it's so that they can still use ActiveX but not get viruses from untrusted sites, or so that badly written applications can run as Administrator without the user having to have full administrator access.
iow I've always had the impression that people complaining about Linux's lack of AD and Policies was in much the same category as people complaining that Linux doesn't have any decent antivirus or antispyware or disk defrag applications.
455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
It's funny how little linux fanbois understand that employees HATE change, not just managers.
I write fairly simple software for an accounting package we sell. This sytem has a DOS version and a windows version. For one customer, we ported the DOS version to windows a few years back and there were people contemplating retirement rather than learning the new system.
When the software you use is a tool and not your life, people don't give a rats ass what it is, as long as it doesn't change. I've seen it over and over again with various customers and in our own office. They don't want the look of their windows to change, their icons to change, or their frickin' wallpaper to change. Now you take them into an enviroment where nothing is familiar and you'll have morale problems and decreased productivity.
Anyone who modded this as a Troll doesn't deserve their friggin mod points.
I'm a Linux weenie, but the points above are very very true, and no manner of indepth analysis of the "rights" and "wrongs" of how things are done today will change the reality of what and how computers and their OSes function. We have reached a point where a computer is not a difficult device which requires a degree to operate. It is able to function as simply as a "device". I don't need to know "how" a microwave oven functions to be able to use it, and use it safely and easily.
And, this mentality is the vast VAST majority. Rattling the sabre about "you should *understand* the workings of your PC" rank up there with "you should *understand* how microwaves function" so I can use my oven. If I *wish* to learn, then I can - but nobody should be forced to do such, and this unrealistic expectation to do such will only continually to hamper the cause.
Every wondered why Ubuntu has rose to where it is today?
Robert Anton Wilson
I was teasing and joking with you when I made the quip (Hey Mods, look at the smilie next time!
I've got raftloads of karma from prosaic and interesting commentaries on posts and other comments- so my posts typically come out of the gate at 2...
Anyhow, it seems you actually DO see what I was getting at for the most part, but you lack something else that I happen to have- if things go right with my company's funding, I've got inside info that's relevent to all of this- let's just say that things are about to experience a sea change, much like the one from DOS to Windows or from all the CP/M machines over to DOS.
Linux is either going to be going ballistic or going slowly into those areas. I'm thinking more the latter than the former- but it's going to hinge on a few key things happening. If my company gets funded, that'd be one of those key things.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Mormonic anagramics aside
The world keeps on spinning around
Inter-layer enhancements
Middleman
Jazz
Hot CA Novell brothel gasp sigh stew
What's a little Mormon boy to do?
Genius misdirected but
Locked in by guilt and shame
Set that bastard free I say
Give me printership by USB
Don't diddle with your daddy
Don't think so much about money
Take a lesson from the Red Man
Screw 'em with their own hand
Milk the bull
All coffers full.
When all is said and done
And patents racked and rolled
It's a proprietary scheme
That's gotten old and stale.
Roll out your bed partners
Close your accounts
This is divorce, fool
And Utah is on the outs.
i don't read slashdot that much, but even then i have noticed the exact same post in some 5 or so places. even at articles that have nothing to do with linux, userfrendly computing or computers at all. so yes, that particular post was clearly a troll.
Rich
rofl, sorry bud, didn't mean to get you modded as flamebait... guess the mods didn't see my smilie either :)
Nope, there's no alternative supplier for some of this stuff. Where there are alternatives, they all work to the same systems.
And I'm afraid in this industry, the Design and CAD software *is* a deal killer. We have a legal requirement to ensure the safety of the buildings, that means calculating the loading, stresses and strains on hundreds of tons of steel, right down to the last bolt. Now that's not possible without either specialist software or laborious hand calculations. Doing it by hand would make us uncompetative and would quickly put us out of business.
It means we have a very limited choice of software available, and all of it is currently written for the windows platform.
You're about right about the steel libraries - they mean we can import the exact details into the CAD program. Problem is we don't create the library, nor the CAD program, we're wholly reliant on the steel suppliers producing the data in a format the CAD software can import. They realised quickly that they'd do more business if they provided this data, so they simply provide it for the most popular CAD systems in the industry.
You suggest we could work a deal where we supply the libraries?? How? We don't produce the library nor the software, we're an end user in each case.
And it's not that I prefer the windows route, I'd love to move us to Linux here - I've had to lock down every workstation to prevent us getting infested with viruses & spyware. The problem is that there is no way at all I could achieve it right now.
To move us to Linux would mean funding development of specialist CAD software for Linux, would mean providing financial incentives to our suppliers for them to provide steel libraries for that software, would mean checking compatibility of dozens of programs, re-training all our staff... The simple fact is that the costs of doing this would put us out of business.
This is what I was getting at with another of my posts - individually it's very tough for any company to move to Linux. My hope is that with Open Source, given time these specialist applications can be developed by numerous companies across the globe. Once that barrier to entry's gone I'll gladly start our move, until then I'm afraid I do have no choice, not if I want to keep my job.
I concede then. In your case Windows does make more sense. I do notice that no one in any other industry has raised a valid point however.
If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS
"When the software you use is a tool and not your life...Now you take them into an enviroment where nothing is familiar and you'll have morale problems and decreased productivity."
What's contradictory about these statements?
The issue is quite simple: motivation and training - neither of which corporations do worth a squat, admittedly.
First of all, it is a known fact that ANY change in a working environment INCREASES productivity, not decreases it. This has been known in industry for the last seventy-five years. Even painting the walls increases productivity - for a short time.
Any company can make the switch - it's been done. The only problem is how to make it with the least agony. That's a business problem like any other.
People saying NO change is permitted are just itching to go out of business - but business processes change ALL THE TIME in any common business in reaction to new business goals, competitor actions, new regulations, the economy, etc., ad nauseum.
I work for City College of San Francisco - the epitome of "we will never change no matter what". Still, they do, occasionally, when enough pain is applied to make it happen. Usually this requires external regulatory activity or internal politics - but it does happen.
It's bullshit that people can't be made to change or that this reluctance inevitably means that one way of doing things will always remain on top. It's simply counter to the entire thrust of human history and is a really stupid concept.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Ok, let's drop the gloves. I'm a right-wing pinko-hater too, but, sir, are dead wrong. The reason for using Linux is in no way evangelistic nor is it about propagating some sleazy activist agenda. It's about value, plain and simple. As any decent wealth-builder knows, the way you make money is by spending it efficiently on something that will give you a higher return that the initial price. Commodity hardware depreciates faster than fame in a one star movie, so leveraging used equipment that would otherwise need to be scrapped and re-purchased makes imminent sense. Add to that: minimal downtime, significantly reduced virus threats, lower maintenance and longer up-times etc. etc. The end goal being that the return comes from giving kids an edge who would not otherwise have it. A hand up, not a hand out.
What you fail to see is the bigger picture: your government does not have a fundamental belief in education, as is evidenced by your obvious ignorance.
The entire well-educated Pacific Rim is frothing at the prospect of pumping cheap products at a prodigious rate into the debt-shackled American economy. India is out-educating Americans in software development and taking market share there. Europeans consistently out-perform American educational standards. I don't think even you can argue that China will surpass the U.S. G.D.P. between 2035 and 2050. So, if you're going to put your hard-earned wealth anywhere and really make a difference, do the right thing: improved education will equal improved competitiveness. Hell, even Bill and Belinda Gates have figured that one out!!
*** Don't be dull.***
Educating the lowest common denominator doesn't help anyone out. It is precisely the disentegration of the socio-economic status quo that is responsible for American "dirty work" jobs being outsourced, fostering new economic prosperity in places like India, who can now afford to educate their people in a way that was strictly a western practice 30 years ago.
If you want the American GDP back up, focus on steering talented kids (there's plenty of them) toward innovation in science the way their grandparents were steered, pre and post ww2. History has shown that if you lead technologically and socially, economics will follow suit. Let your underpriveledged kids get desperate enough to work for a living like THEIR grandparents did, and maybe we can get some of our jobs back from overseas. Life's too easy for the middle and lower middle class these days.
The cost of linux vs. its competitors has been more than exhausted here and everywhere else too many times in the past 10 years to even bother addressing again. All i'll say is this: market share walks the walk, philosophy talks the talk.
When it comes to MY hard earned money, it's being put to use really making a difference in MY standard of living. When I have Gates dollars maybe i'll start worrying about everyone else.
oh really did you read all the way down the list or just scan the first 3? Cause I saw a whole Accounting/CRM/ERP package on there and I'm pretty sure that neither Ms Money or Quicken have that kind of functionality.
If you see spelling or grammatical errors don't blame me. I tried to preview but IE here at work borked the CSS