A CIO's View of SUSE's Enterprise Viability

onehitwonder writes "As part of an ongoing quest to find a viable alternative to the Microsoft desktop in the enterprise, well-known healthcare CIO John Halamka spent a month using Novell SUSE 10 as his sole operating system. His conclusion? It's good enough for the enterprise. In Windows vs. Linux vs. OS X: CIO John Halamka Tests SUSE, he explains how SUSE stacks up against RHEL, Fedora, XP and OS X (in a life-critical business environment), and which issues should influence an enterprise-class organization to adopt it."

Comments

Re:Why listen to this guy?

[ozmanjusri]

I have no idea how people manage to make Windows 2000+ "unstable".

Using it.

Anyone with any real-life experience with Windows has suffered plenty of problems with 2K/XP's bad behaviour. There's an illusion of stability because by default, XP'll reboot instead of bluescreen, but that's just spin control.

yep: not viable

[r00t]

History is littered with the corpses of those who entered into technology partnerships with Microsoft.

Some people learn from the mistakes of others. Some people need to learn the hard way.

Buying from a doomed vendor is often a bad move.

Re:Now That's a Good Viewpoint

[bl8n8r]

>..life-and-death of people on his hands

This is why they are running windows now, right? And nobody is using the internet on these stations, right? And nobody is getting email and they are all free from spyware and malware, right? And they have checksums checking in place to make sure files have not been modified since the install, right? bullshit.

There is nothing in Suse that makes it any more ready for the desktop than any of the other mentioned distros besides Fedora, which is a testbed. Unless of course you figure in the nice wad of cash novell paid out to have this article written.