Slashdot Mirror
How Can Linux Gain (Even) More Enterprise Acceptance? (Video)
This is what we asked Jason Perlow. He wrote a Linux Magazine column for many years and now writes for ZDNet. The ZDNet blurb describes him as "a technologist with over two decades of experience integrating large heterogeneous multi-vendor computing environments in Fortune 500 companies." Most recently, he worked for IBM, and for Unisys before that. So Jason knows plenty about Linux and its role in big-time enterprise computing. In this video, he talks about how Linux needs to take another step forward to gain even more enterprise traction in coming years.
All he has to do is say "Look at Windows 8. Now look at Unity."
Oh, wait. Bad example.
John
Lose the beard. Find a shirt. Just sayin...
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Same as the 'big boys' ... hookers and blow.
Let's have people who are not collecting SS with severe COPD conduct video interviews about Linux.
sudo make me a sandwich
Seriously people. Linux is frikken everywhere.
Though we are a "Windows Shop" here at my company, we have more Linux servers than Windows servers. How can that be? Turns out, our storage appliances, our Cisco phone system, our VMWare servers and lots more if you include the multi-function copiers and stuff are all Linux machines. We also have a small collection of Linux machines I put together which just run and run and run...
At one time, we were in a meeting talking about various topics and someone made the statement about Linux being a hobbyist system and blah blah blah... I was silent for a moment and then pointed out the largest professional server deployments on the planet are running under Linux. ... and oh yeah, so are most of our servers... voicemail, virtual hosts, storage and all that. How, exactly, is Linux just a hobbyist system?
Linux, itself, is very widely accepted, used and relied upon. It is very proven.
What is needed now is serious added push for the SaMBa project to embrace and extend on Microsoft's AD. Take it over and make it better. After all, it's a bunch of services. There's a lot of really smart people out there who are quite capable and looking for a good project to get involved in. I'd like to point in SaMBa's direction. One thing it seriously lacks is a dumbass configuration tool.
I get that we can tweak on config files all day long and the SWAT thing is kinda nice. But we need to compete with the Windows domain server GUI tools and all that. The functionality is very much there. Now we just need something that dumbasses can use.
He's always been an apologist for Windows -- even right during his tenure writing for Linux Magazine. This isn't to say that Linux doesn't have its shortcomings, nor Windows its strengths: they both do. But, dammit: when you're writing for a Linux magazine, you eat the dogfood, you don't find reasons to prophesize that Linux will never be a contender. Which he did. Repeatedly.
In a nutshell: I can't be bothered to listen to his drivel. I called him on his antics, both in forums, and directly via e-mail, and he never dignified me with a response. I certainly needn't dignify his verbal ramblings with time wasted on my side.
In my experience, one thing blocking the adoption of Linux in corporate environments are MS-Access applications. Not only legacy ones, that could be moved, but the fact that there is nowhere to move them to. There is simply nothing that remotely approaches Access in the Linux world, and it's a pity.
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
Yet another less-than-noteworthy "news" article, ideal to generate clicks & comments...
You have to beat Microsoft Office.
And that is a game that has been tried, and failed many times. Enterprises aren't hooked to Windows as much as they are the tools they use on it. Excel being probably the biggest one. The amount of power that desktop app has is ridiculous, and while I can applaud all the open source flavors, nothing comes even close. You can't unseat Windows or make Linux more tractable in the enterprise without removing the dependence on Office.
You can make Linux awesome, make Samba a worthy AD competitor, but if you don't have the productivity suite that makes it amazing, the cost of a $90 Windows license is nothing compared to the productivity you'd give up to lose Excel. Here's a hint folks -- people don't look at the price of the OS, nor do they care. They look at the value of the suite of tools that allow an employee to work. If you could make a business case that a Calicovision would make you more productive than Windows, I think you'd see a swell of pilots testing it out.
Linux isn't being ignored because it's bad -- well... partly because it is, but that's more a Samba fix -- it's being ignored because it does not contain a worthwhile replacement to the jobs people are already doing, and the businesses already engrained in workflows that surround and use Office. And you will not break that mold easily, if ever. And it's why I still say Windows Phone is going to do well over time.... but I'll gladly eat my words if I'm wrong.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
It needs an app that can integrate/replace exchange. And no, Thunderbird+Lightning doesn't come close. Just for starters, it needs to allow people to view others' calendars, easily schedule meetings in other peoples' available time, allow booking of resources like rooms, etc.
Secondly, it needs to work with the massive multifunction printing systems out of the box. I realize this is dependant on printer manufacturers more than the Linux devs, but the end-user doesn't care about who's problem it is - all they know is that printers work on Windows, and don't on Linux.
I use Linux at my workplace; these are the two primary functions it can't fulfil.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Businesses don't use Windows just to use Windows. Businesses use Windows to use Office, Active Directory, and Exchange. Linux has competitors to all three but they're not even CLOSE, no matter how much the evangelists puff them up.
What do you get when you put a whole office on Linux? You get a bunch of people sitting around using Linux. But they're not doing anything productive. Nobody's paying them to use Linux. No customers are giving your company money to have an office full of people sit around and "use Linux". Linux is not the product, Linux is the platform. Right now, the Linux platform for enterprise is severely lacking in comparison to Windows. The "Why" is dreadfully simple: there are no serious products that give the platform value.
Focus community effort on building solid competitors to Office, Active Directory, and Exchange. Maybe try creating something completely new, or maybe just try to mimic the MS products as best you can. Mimic might be better, because then you can show them how similar your products are so the switching cost is minimal, yet one costs a whole lot less, therefore the TCO is much lower.
In case you haven't noticed, Microsoft likes to throw around TCO as their metric. That's because most businesses don't care about up-front cost, they focus on what you'll pay over the life of the product. Put the most amount of effort possible into minimizing the switching costs. Linux will become a much more viable desktop platform in the enterprise when you can demonstrate meaningful cost savings that take TCO into account. Until then, Microsoft will continue to give enterprise customers concrete and logical reasons for why they should choose their product over all others.
I *have* had several heart attacks and am in poor health. Mostly retired, just doing a little part-time work for Slashdot and a few others.
Am I supposed to call you an insensitive clod now? Nah. Too trite.
Seriously, in 2010 I had a heart attack, got stents put in, and 5 hours after I got out of the hospital I had congestive heart failure and died. Got resuscitated, but all the tubes the EMS guys stuck down my throat left me with more rasp than voice.