Linux Makes For Greener Computing

An anonymous reader writes "The UK Government reckons that servers with Linux installed are greener than those running Windows. " The reasoning is that Open Source software tends to have lower hardware requirements and requires less frequent hardware upgrades to "keep up with the Joneses"; the Tory shadow chancellor has estimated that the UK could save ~600 million pounds per year by switching to Linux.

Comments

Packaging

[essence]

Another thing is that Linux (or the BSD's) can be downloaded off the internet, while Windows requires that you buy a fresh new disk packaged in cardboard and plastic wrap. Clearly if everyone could download software and not use the packaging, that would save a lot of resources.

Opposition party vs Ruling party

[Per Abrahamsen]

The opposition parties tend to support the "alternative" solutions, while the ruling parties tend tend to support he "established" players. When the opposition parties win an election, they immediately betray their former friends and start supporting the establishment.

Not sure why.

Re:One Piece of a Very Long Report

[jimicus]

I once upgraded the system for her and accidentally made GNOME the default display manager, and she said to me that GNOME was much easier to use. That came as a bit of a surprise to me.

Each to their own. One thing Gnome does have over KDE is it doesn't present you 100 options for every little thing. For a lot of people, "not being inundated with options which I don't really understand or care about" is a big plus.

Re:One Piece of a Very Long Report

[curious.corn]

If it ain't broke don't fix it, isolate it. If an obsolete application matches business requirements there would be no reason to overhaul it so some new platform if it were isolatable, decoupled from the OS and application platforms deployed on corp desktops. There's a big problem when maintenance of said software requires the conservation of a whole, disperse environment (under one, guess which, monoculture). That's the strategy, fault and guilt of certain companies that tie in beneficial products to the acceptance of a whole package that will, eventually, become a liabitily and hindrance.