Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: How To Start With Linux In the Workplace?
An anonymous reader writes "Recently my boss has asked me about the advantages of Linux as a desktop operating system and if it would be a good idea to install it instead of upgrading to Windows 7 or 8. About ten boxes here are still running Windows XP and would be too old to upgrade to any newer version of Windows. He knows that i am using Linux at work on quite outdated hardware (would have gotten a new PC but never requested new hardware — Linux Mint x64 runs quite well on it) and i always managed to get my stuff done with it. I explained to him that there are no licensing issues with Linux, there is no anti-virus software to deal with and that Linux is generally a bit more efficient on old hardware than operating systems from Microsoft. The boss seems interested." But that's not quite the end; read on for this reader's question.
"Since I am the only guy with Linux experience I would have to support the Linux installations. Now the problem is what works perfectly fine for me may be a horrible experience for some of my coworkers, and even if they would only be using Firefox, Thunderbird and LibreOffice I don't know if I could seriously recommend using Linux as a desktop OS in a business. Instead I want to set up one test machine for users to try it and ask THEM if they like it. The test machine should be as easy and painless to use as possible and not look too different compared to Windows. Which distro and what configuration should I choose for this demo box?"
KDE can be configured to look identical to windows.
This story says it's from the "sounds like Mint works for you" department, and I think that's your answer. If you're going to have to look after them, then it makes sense to go with what you're most familiar with, especially as Mint shouldn't be too alien to XP users.
Every new version of Windows doesn't look like the last, so why does it matter?
I would recommend plain ol' Ubuntu since, imho, they have made the most polished Linux desktop experience for those with no prior linux experience. If you're worried that Unity may be sensory overload for some of your users -- consider installing Xubuntu and doing a little customization to give it the same general feel that your user's XP desktop would have.
Not sure why they'd be trying so hard to save themselves from buying new PCs.. Probably the XP machines run like ass as it is. Linux as a general use machine for people that are so bad at computers they still use XP.... just no.. hell no. tell the boss to stop being so cheap and upgrade to this decade
You will save yourself a lot of trouble by migrating the backend (servers, database) to linux first, and only then start on the frontend (workstations, user interface). You will also enjoy a larger benefit immediately, as the backend is where linux will really save you time and effort (once you have it configured).
The thing is, Windows 7 also runs great on older hardware. I just put it on a Hp ZE2000 from 2005, which isn't at all a powerful machine and it is running smoothly and very stable.
Something like Ubuntu won't run much better (Although Xubuntu or Lubuntu may well), and AV software is not the concern it was back in the day. The free MS Security essentials and a gateway check will be more than enough.
The real issue is software. Can the users rely on LibreOffice and Chrome/Firefox? Or is there windows software they rely on or will need?
Go with what makes sense according to needs and cost restrictions, not because of an ideology....
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
[url=http://lubuntu.net/]lubuntu[/url] is pretty lightweight, and looks pretty similar to windows as far as I can tell. Plus, it's all Ubuntu under the hood (for better or for worse). You know you'll have updates for a looong time coming.
In my experience it's much easier to get Linux in the workplace as a server, and here there's lots of areas where it's as good as or better than Windows. Start with a LAMP server for internal web; use it to host a Wiki for documentation.
Finding God in a Dog
Yet. There are some basics that can easily be dealt with regardless of what his other requirements are. He even mentions some of them in his post.
Basically, he can start out with installing cross platform apps on Windows and seeing how readily the rest of his office can migrate to those. If the rest of his office is left running what is essentially a Linux desktop without Linux itself, then he can ditch Windows.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Interoperability between LibreOffice and Microsoft Office is less than ideal in my opinion. You will always run into some issues, with references, equations, fonts, something. If Linux has all of the software you need to get the job done, then go for it. If you still use programs for Windows, using a VM or dual booting is not worth it in my opinion, better off staying with Windows. If you do go Linux it is better to go full force: change over everyone. Have everyone use LibreOffice and make .odt, .ods, etc standard for your workplace. You should have minimal problems.
Do not recommend Linux to someone if you're not the IT guy and it is not your job. You will be blamed for everything that goes wrong and will waste time fixing or explaining differences. Do use a spin creation system for your distro of choice and have all of your software pre-installed for your tasks to minimize customization and difference between workstations.
Zorin OS is claimed to be designed specifically with Windows XP refugees in mind. They try to get the GUI essentials similar to Windows. It might be a smoother transition to Mint and eventually Arch (I'm kidding about Arch, of course).
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
Observe the desktop users, see what they're doing, investigate FOSS alternatives that run on Linux. Find a distro that has all that working out the box. Customise the distro so that the default user setup has all that ready and waiting in the desktop menus. Congratulations! You're now a sysadmin on top of whatever you were before. If you like the sound of this, make it happen. If not tell your boss to employ a sysadmin to make the above happen, maybe you can get yourself in on the interview, maybe you can be his manager.
Why UNIX?
First, I'd recommend going with XFCE for your desktop. It's simple, looks kinda like windows and doesn't change looks constantly with each release.
If you are going to be managing these things, you might want to go with some sort of thinclient architecture with a beefy server, serving the old ex-XP boxes. This will reduce the configuration hassle long term, and make those crappy XP boxes seem pretty snappy. The downside, and it can be a doozy, if the server goes down or the networking is lousy, no one will be able to work.
Since I am the only guy with Linux experience I would have to support the Linux installations.
You're going to be the new Sys Admin. On top of your other work, which I am just assuming is not a Sys Admin role.
Let IT worry about IT.
Since when does being a Socialist mean 'someone who has a different opinion than me'?
employment is only income if your time is worthless
It is worth something to someone. That's called your salary or wage. Now if you do nothing this value decreases very rapidly to minimum wage by 6 months
http://saveie6.com/
What are they doing with the computers? Digital design? Publishing a newspaper? Handling invoices? Controlling a nuclear power plant? Software development? Defense work? Managing a taxi service?
The answer will depend entirely on the type of use.
The largest barrier to getting anything in the workplace but windows is a common ground with which you can collaborate and work. If you want to replace say, sharepoint, you can expect to have to sell everyone on the idea. your replacement needs to work seamlessly, just like sharepoint.
if you have a vmware deployment, linux is pretty much a non-starter as anything but a guest OS. you cant administer vsphere from linux, at least not in a way that wont make you hate your life. Many timecard systems and in house software packages might be predicated entirely on windows Internet Explorer, so the loss of ADP might piss off accounting. determine your userbase and its needs first.
Switching people from exchange is a daunting task, but egroupware and others can step up to the plate with a web-based UI. its also a huge cost saver. Whether or not your office wants that is another matter entirely. your linux systems will have to authenticate to AD, and never the other way around because windows just cant. while Libreoffice sure is a nice replacement for a new office, its a disaster when it comes to some of the finer points of complex excel spreadsheets, pivot tables, and the latest doc format. Lync, er, microsoft communicator as it was once called, has tentative support in linux but you lose helpful features like auto away and auto populate and that "call this person" feature I wonder if anyone ever uses..
doing this isnt easy. Ive spent 5 years of my career doing it, and the biggest hurdle is going to be your users. They want features like desktop sharing for meetings and gantt charts for planning. Linux doesnt really 'get' it like microsoft. The key is to make sure the channels of communication between windows users and linux users, be they desktop application level or enterprise, is uninterrupted. sometimes a quick switch from say lync to jabber is best. in other places you might want to phase things like sharepoint out over time. make sure you know how they work, and have a plan to provide a service that helps them achieve what theyre being paid to do.
another pitfall to be wary of is Microsofts jagged edge. Decreasing site licenses will beget unforseen costs like losing your Azure discount or more expensive license seats overall. the purchase terms will also change randomly and rapidly in an attempt to kill your linux idea from the management down (they do this to force meetings with your managers, who in turn dont invite you because its about a budget and not a computer to them.) Once I weaned a prior company off lync and exchange, I had microsoft representatives drop in entirely unannounced and ask for a meeting with almost every manager they could find (and me.) They will hound you with phonecalls, bombard you with junk mail, and chew up your time like never before. They do not like being shown the door.
Good people go to bed earlier.
I'm always encouraged to see Linux in the workplace, but it might or might not be the right answer.
The catch here is that no matter how much you save by upgrading to any new OS, the cost of support and usability issues will be much greater than than the cost of the OS even if new PCs are included. Focus on total life cycle cost, and it may be cheaper to upgrade the PCs to windows to avoid the training, ongoing teaching and hand holding required to shift to Linux of any flavor. Of course, if you've got a capable group of users the lifetime cost of Linux could be much lower. Without knowing your situation in detail, it's hard to say.
...but the price of hardware should probably not be driving the cost/benefit analysis.
If you're working with people who are comfortable with technology, then making such a transition should not cause too much pain. Annoyances yes, especially with file format compatibility issues, but nothing too serious. You'll be answering lots of questions, but the questions themselves will be from a position of needing some details filled in, not failure to understand basic concepts.
On the other hand, if you're working with people for whom computers and technology are PFM (Pure @#%$ing Magic) then ANY CHANGE, no matter how trivial, will lead to nervous breakdowns. For such people, use of a computer involves memorized incantations (if not outright prayers) based on mouse movements, clicks, and magic words typed into the screen. If these change, even slightly, they will be utterly lost and terrified -- and they'll blame YOU.
If this is the case, then you're going to have to create a standardized installation of Linux with a normal desktop interface (Cinnamon, KDE) and then TRAIN your employees on how to use it. Mint is a good choice. I'm using the KDE version of Mint 16 on all my workstations. The cinnamon version is also perfectly usable. There are of course other options. The key is to create an environment that is as close to what they know as possible. Not necessarily in terms of how it looks, but how it BEHAVES.
Even so, there will always be some differences that will trip such users up. You guys might have to hire a temp worker whose sole job will be to train and support your employees until they learn the new incantations.
The good news is that moving from XP/Vista/7 to a normal desktop Linux distro will actually be easier than trying to retrain these employees to use the malware that is Windows 8.
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
Instead I want to set up one test machine for users to try it and ask THEM if they like it.
I guarantee that in this form, the result of the test will be that THEY won't like it. People fear the new and unknown and need positive incentives to change.
So, offer THEM the choice of one person, to be drawn at random from a hat, being fired to pay for e cost of new PCs vs switching to Linux and everyone keeping their jobs. Then you'll find they like Linux lots.
Also, keep in mind that 'supporting' users takes much more time than you might naively guess. Make sure that your efforts to 'support Linux' don't turn you into the unproductive member of the office.
You are getting yourself in a world of pain!
XP users will bitch and moan enough already if they have to use Windows 7 or 8. Giving them Linux would be much worse.
Here are some common misconceptions about end users:
1. They are stupid and only do stupid thing with there PC: Firefox and libreOffice is not the limit to a persons PC usage. They are going to do more complex things even if they don't realize it. They will want to share files over the network, they may want to attach their Camera to their PC, Video Conference, Do some graphics manipulations, even sometimes do basic system admin on their PC, such as updates or putting in a driver. You need to give them more credit then most people do. Linux for the desktop tends to have a doughnut hole in usability. You get Granny Open your program and browse the web. You got advanced user where you can script and program all you want... The hole is in the Moderate user category.
2. Their PC's will work great with Linux: Who really fully checks the Linux compatibility list when getting a PC. Especially if you initially get a windows PC. Even old PC's you may find that a network controller isn't supported, or a video driver never really worked right with that screen. Hardware makers usually make sure their stuff works on windows first then perhaps in Linux if they feel like there is a market for it.
3. Vendors/Customers/Partners will bend backwards to help you keep supported. I am sending you a DOCX with a Macro in it for you to view. Are you really going to have them redo their work so you can view that document. A vendor may give you a crappy convert. The customer will defiantly give you lip. A partner may question you.
4. We don't use Legacy Software: There is always that piece of legacy software that you have that makes porting expensive.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Income is only worthless if you're time.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
If you want to know how to start, your first step would be to audit all the software that people use to get their jobs done. Once you have a complete list, ask these questions for each piece of software:
If you get to the end of those questions and the answer is "no", then you should probably cut your losses and accept that you'll have to stick with Windows. If you can answer "yes" to at least one of these questions for every piece of software on your list, then select some users to be in a pilot program. You should find at least a couple semi-influential but fairly patient power users and set up a new test machine for them.
You don't even say what the fuck your company does or even what industry you're in ...
That shouldn't much matter. What the employees are engaged in and what they do might be useful information. If you can surf the web on Windows, you can do it with any OS, but if these are engineers needing Matlab or Autocad, or graphic artists needing Photoshop, it may be an uphill struggle doomed to fail miserably.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
10 boxes on windows and a least a couple semi-power users of one or more office applications with defined workflows that help them get their job done. If all they use is webmail and surf the web then yeah but what 10 box office does that. Nobody there manages their everything in outlook?
I tried many flavor of ubuntu and now I always use Xubuntu. Simple and fast. Set automatic update and make two users, Administrator and User. Never give away the administrator pwd. Install vino and set permission for remote desktop. Be clear on one Thing!!! You are not the one to ask for it, they asked for it! They can change any time they want and pay for!
There is some valuable information in here. The problem the submitter made was talking about the cost of the hardware and software and ignoring any support costs. His company doesn't want to spend money upgradeing hardware or moving to windows 7. Do you think the boss wants to spent money on someone to support linux? What's going to happen is the submitter is going to get stuck supporting it and probably not get a pay increase for doing so while starting to get bitched at for not getting his work done.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
I've done this.
You will have the following problems:
#1 - some business users will be totally unable to function without microsoft outlook. They will have ZERO interest or patience in learning thunderbird (or whatever) and will become INCREDIBLY vocally disgruntled that it doesn't do the fonts/alarms/animatedsigniatures/auto-invite-replies/whatever the way "it always worked in outlook"
#2 - file sharing. If your in a typical "business" environment, the functionality (not saying it's good or bad) of windows SMB/CIFS sharing will be incredibly difficult to replace. I've used NFS to achieve similar results with a graphical file browser, but you will be surprised how many users copy/paste files instead of drag/drop and the minor UI differences will cause them to clam up FAST.
#3 - proprietary business apps. Not even niche line-of-business apps - but stuff like the UPS Worldship client. It's possible to operate without them, but would/will take SERIOUS business realignment and shake-up to do.
#4 - Welcome to the IT department, you're the new system administrator and helpdesk guy. Your job will vanish if the linux deployment has any speedbumps.
#5 - If your network uses radioActive Directory, prepare for pain. Several years ago, I successfully built a gentoo fileserver running samba, extended file attributes, pam plugins etc that was 100% "integrated" into the company active directory - you could even right-click a file from a windows box and play with the fine-grained permissions with individual user ACLs and stuff, and after some trial and error it even worked - but it was a SERIOUS pain in the ass. Getting a bunch of desktops to not only authenticate against an AD server, but to handle things like home directory creation, user ID translation, etc, intelligently will be a pain in the rear to setup and maintain. Security patches to your AD server _WILL_ break the duct tape.
#6 - You will very quickly learn exactly how scared of computers 50% of end-users are. They perform their tasks by rote, and if something (say, plugging in a USB stick) doesn't behave in a way they expect it to, you should expect constant show-stopper-sounding complaints to the boss. Get used to hearing things like "Ginger says she can't do her job." on a weekly or daily basis.
#7 - connecting to printers/scanners/whatever shared off some windows box will end up being a LOT more problematic then you think.
#8 - If users can't load their comet cursor, change their background to some animated waterfall, or have other specific desktop tweaks like they're used to, expect "Ginger can't work like this" complaints, no matter how trivial it is to you and me.
#9 - "My excel macros don't work with this openoffice calc thing" turns out to be more of a actual show-stopper then you think.
You will experience the following pros:
#1 - Up-front short term cost savings on licensing. Your boss will love that.
I'm not suggesting you hold back, and I've converted 3 small companies to desktop linux myself, just giving you some fair warning of what to expect.
#2 -
just tell him this is the year of desktop linux.
never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
So? Run LibreOffice everywhere, Windows and Linux. MS Office is arguably more vulnerable to attacks than the core of Windows XP.
The distro is up to you. The desktop is up to them. Give them all the possible options.
If you use a distro like openSUSE, you can easily add KDE, GNOME, XFCE, LXDE, Enlightenment and others. I would probably stick with the main three, with a personal like to XFCE.
Alxso see if there are people who use excel intensivaly, because that could be tricky.
So you choose the distro, they choose the desktop. Takea distro that you already use. The desktop should be available for it.
And don't forget that installing it is the easy part. Maintaining it and the next 10 years (with upgrades and new hardware) will be the hard part. One last tip. Don't talk about free as in gratis, because management will then asume that there is no cost and the moment anything computer related shows up on budget, it will be confusing and you will be called a liar.
You can also play around with SUSE Studio so you easily can make images that contain not all applications, but only those that you need, including anything you made yourself.
The builds could be used as beta for the final release for yoiur company.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
You're going to spend way too much time trying to get Samba to do all the funny stuff that an ancient farm of XPs has set up to share. You're going to have to do this in stages, which means replicating the exact sharing structure of the old machines. The users won't be able to do this themselves. ("After editing /etc/samba/smb.conf, restart Samba for the changes to take effect." - Ubuntu documentation)
Then you have to get everybody converted from Microsoft Office to OpenOffice/LibreOffice. They're not that compatible. Some documents and spreadsheets will be broken. Templates won't transfer very well. Everyone's workflow will be disrupted. The overhead of doing this for a small shop will be higher than the savings.
The small office environment is where the Microsoft environment does best. Upgrade to Windows 7, one machine at a time. Windows 7 is a good OS. (The solid Microsoft OSs were NT 3.51, Windows 2000, and Windows 7.)
Xubuntu. Nice tidy and easy to maintain remotely.
You can easily make a standard deployment from it and easily deploy new software or updates without ever touching the machine.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
As soon as they scratch the thinnest surface they will get very confused. In my experience, configuring KDE like Windows results in rejection after an initial period of brief comfort.
The boss needs to understand he's going to have to spend money no matter what. Either the money goes to Microsoft, or it goes to an additional support person, and possibly a service contract with Canonical or Red Hat. The difference is partly ideological: as a company do you want to support free(dom) based software; whose flavor of that ideology to you want to support? And partly technical: Choosing the right strategy for the users' present and future use cases. So the dilemma here is it sounds like the company doesn't have a person filling the BT role, it's just a CEO who maybe thinks this is just a way to save money and the IT person who really isn't in a good position to make this decision because he's an implementer rather than a resource acquirer and allocator. You need a mandate and a budget to do this no matter what.
The most amazing thing about this discussion is that I don't feel so alone. I'm an experienced software developer who started with V7 Unix and worked on the development of several Unix platforms during the 80s before switching to Windows development. In recent years, I've tried a few Linux desktop distributions, but I always seem to have trouble with them right out of the box. I'm not using funky hardware or trying to do anything weird, but every distribution seems to do something dumb. I installed Mint and ended up working around problems where the desktop wouldn't appear. The last straw was when Eclipse would go larger-than-fullscreen which made it impossible to do any work. I asked around and was told to try Fedora, and I can't put anything on the desktop or on the menus. I'm beginning to wonder if I could ever find a distribution that would just let me get my work done.
The only downside to using Linux in the workplace doesn't become apparent unless you regularly exchange documents with people in other locations, be they coworkers, clients, or what have you. At that point, you will discover that people outside your office will send you Microsoft format documents and not only expect you to be able to read them, but that you will be able to modify them and send them back.
While a pure linux shop can just use "Libre Office" and whatever other tools work well for a given circumstance, that idea just flat out fails when you're collaborating with folks who are using current Microsoft tools. The people in the home office don't like being told their document doesn't look right because they used a feature that's standard in Microsoft Office 2013, but that LIbre Office doesn't implement or doesn't get quite right. They *REALLY* don't like it when they send you a document and you send them back something forced down to Word 98 compatibility format.
So, that's the headache you're setting yourself (and your boss) up for if you switch the office (or part of it) to Linux. If you're all internal, it's easier to work around, but will still become an issue from time to time. If you don't share documents often, then it's a moot point.
Windows starts to become more useful once you get Cygwin installed on it. Not quite as Good as Linux but it is a start.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Powershell is just a shell. Does it have SSH? tar? bzip? awk? sed? a real grep alternative (findstr doesn't count)? rsync (robocopy doesn't count as it can't work over SSH)? tr? a million other tiny commands that can be linked together in novel ways?
Linux is only free if your time is worthless
There is a fallacy in your statement. Buying Windows doesn't get you any more than using free linux. Both Microsoft and linux distros provide updates, so that is a wash and both require somebody to maintain/support it, so that cost, too is a wash. In either case, your time is of the same value and not dependent on the operating system in question.
Powershell handles pipes stupidly. Really? No inter process communication using pipes?
I run Windows, Linux and even a couple of Unix servers. I do not use powershell, I sure as hell have no use for Cmdlets. If I need to on Windows I will still use batch or WSH. Powershell wants to be a programming language and that want wrecks it as a decent command line. If you think that Powershell is a good replacement for a powerful and flexible Linux command line then it is obvious that you have no idea what can be done with a Linux command line.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
IPC sucks in Powershell and you are thinking like a programmer. When you do work on servers you do not need or want a "Proper programming language" you want something that ties your entire system together and allows you to quickly make use of it all. Not just IPC. Linux command line runs cirlces around powershell in IPC (Which to those of us who do work on servers know is very important) the difficulty in starting up stuff in the background and tailing stuff you start up. grep, awk and sed. Then lets ad in the fact that most 3rd party tool in Linux expect to be able to be called in the command line. I have to tell you the ability to pop up a command line and tell GIMP to grab every .png in a specific directory rotate it 90 degrees and resize it to 900x900 then rename the file by appending it with "_900x900" and sticking them all into a new directory, then edit the permissions of the directory itself to allow others to see it, hit enter and move on to something else is pretty fucking useful. And it is soo much more powerful than that. It is not just for administration. Although the linux (everything is a file) system makes this much easier.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
What is wrong with pipes working to give you power? What is wrong with massive third party app support for command line. I don't get you. I have Windows servers where they work well, Linux servers where they are best and a couple of SCO Unix servers that I can not get rid of. I use Windows servers and am able to get work done on them. Powershell though is unused. Tried it, played with it, worked with it. Hate it.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Then run like hell!
Wile the AC made this into a joke it really is the best advice if you do this badly.
Rather than be the person who is going to be perceived as the one who pushes Linux into your workspace I would recommend getting in a consultant from a reputable firm and get written recommendations on "how" or even "why not to". If this is done properly then everyone looks good. A Professional Consultant could come up with relevant recommendations in less then a week (assuming a small organization of say less than 100) contrary to what some would say.
Another thing don't be the person who is going to be stuck supporting a Linux environment unless you really have had experience, one or more support personal and get paid accordingly.
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.