I signed up some time after the two of you. I can't remember how log I had been reading the site, and never once thought I should "snag" a login in order to forever have a very low ID. Oh well, at least I'm below a million.
Yes, a wiki-like system with authenticated users is exactly what I meant. I thought that point was obvious and didn't need to be mentioned. I certainly was not advocating a base install of MediaWiki and turning the Deputy Director Skinner and asking, "Can I have my 100 million now?"
Seriously, I have no idea all of their needs requirements, but it seems like a big one is cross-connecting one set of data with another. The intricate connections of intelligence data probably defies anyones ability to design a system that could capture it all. But, a Wiki, which automatically creates links can do it for you, on the fly. So, create some Wiki templates for information about people, cases, incidents, whatever, and create Wiki links on the keywords when you fill out the templates (names, dates, code names, case numbers, and so on) and let the Wiki link everything together for you.
With a lot of data already entered, in no time you'll be typing in a routine report and find out that the name you just typed already has a Wiki page, and lo and behold! some agent in Nebraska is looking for that exact person for a child abduction. Case closed. All praise the Wiki.
Rather interesting choice of words there at the end referring to the talent of the Ximian folks. Makes me wonder his resignation is tied to possible internal power struggles between KDE centric SUSE folks and GNOME centric Ximian developers. From last weeks announcement we know who won those battles, and it's possible his resignation is just part of the fallout.
I'm increasingly seeing the words, "Test Driving" associated with Linux. I think it is all the live CDs out there, as well as these web accessible desktops. Ways to try out Linux without installing anything.
O'Reilly even has a new book called Test Driving Linux: From Windows to Linux in 60 Seconds that appears to be written for people trying out a Linux desktop for the first time. It uses the Mandrake Move live CD as the basis for the book, and practically everything covered in the book can be done using the live CD. That is why it only covers KDE.
Though the book lacks an installation chapter (one isn't needed when using a live CD) it provides coverage of all the other typical desktop chores like web browsing, file management, email, OpenOffice.org, and even GnuCash for money management. It is the only introductory book that I have seen that goes into great detail on how to accomplish tasks or use interesting features of the programs. Most other introductory Linux books gloss over how you actually work with the program.
Okay, it's not a complete rehash. Some portions of the book, for instance on using KDE, Konqueror, Kmail are pulled word for word from the previous book. But, some of that is given a slight business slant. Like connecting to an Exchange server.
The second seciton, Administration and Deployment, is really the new part of the book. Its nice coverage, a little on the easy side. I would rather have a book that was dedicated to administration and deployment.
This sounds like a rehash of his previous book, Moving to Linux: Kiss the Blue Screen of Death Goodbye.
Which wasn't a bad book. But, I don't like people milking something by putting a slight editorial slant on it "for business" and making a new book out of it. Still, I'll have to check it out. I need a good book to give to people switching to Linux and this one, because it is newer and hopefully improved with feedback from readers, should be better than the previous one.
I'll preface this by saying I really know nothing much about patents or patent litigation.
But, if company X really wanted to get a patent for defensive reasons, then why not get the patent through a shell company whose sole purpose is to hold patents neutrally.
I mean, we could have a company called Openpatents. Apple, IBM, Sun, Microsoft, and so on could file for patents through this organization and the organization would be patent holders. The charter of the organization would be to make sure that the ideas of these patents remain open and freely available to everyone. They will "fight" against other companies that try to create infringing patents, but they don't care if anyone else uses the actuall techonology.
So, a company like Apple, in the case of this translucent window thing could file for the patent through Openpatents. By doing so we would all know that they don't intend to be evil b*stards with th e patent, instead they just want to make sure they don't get screwed when Microsoft files the patent next year.
If Apple files the patent through the regular process, then we know that they are reserving the right to sue people latter on who try to impinge upon the patent.
Studies show that people who use plastic (CC, debit, or poker chips) for their purchases inevitably end up spending between 25-32% more than if they used cash. One of the reasons casinos give you chips. Of course, individual vary, but it really points to the fact that nearly everyone who uses plastic will spend more.
So, you get a piddly 1% cash back on your CC purchases, but you bought 20% more than you would have with cash. You do the math.
The absolute most I would give a non-IT person is an admin account on local machines in their department. I'm certainly not going to give them admin rights to the domain. That is just foolish. What you call being anal, I call prudence.
I don't even give all Windows Administrators domain administrator accounts. I delegate what they can do and don't do. For instance, the lackey I send around to change toner cartridges, reboot user machines, and install software doesn't have any special privledges to the corporate Exchange email server.
I stripped and stacked a hundred Mac power supplies once, for the future, and never had to use one... this could go on. Cringely is right, but there's more to cost of ownership than any one issue. Distractions take time. Time is money. And Macs are built like brick sh*thouses, and function like there's unlimited tomorrows. And function. And...
Experience varies. I totally believe what you are saying. But I can also truthfully say that out of 12 G4 Towers that are 3 years old I've had two blown DVD drives and one failed power supply. Out of 65 HP Vectras 3 years or older I have had no hardware problems.
I can also tell you that out of 12 OS 9 machines I have had to rebuild the OS on 3 of them because it was just acting flakey. Out of 65 Desktops running Windows 2000 for the past year I have rebuilt 1 OS because of flakiness.
Dell Optiplex GX270: Celeron 2.00GHz, 256MB, 80GB HDD, combo drive, 17" monitor, USB WiFi adapter, v.92 modem, XP Pro: $1,352 after $50 rebate.
Apple eMac: G4 1.00GHz, 256MB, 80GB HDD, DVD-R/CD-RW, 17" flat CRT monitor, Airport Extreme, v.92 modem, OS X 10.2: $1,398.
I guess it depends on your definition of "significantly."
That's funny. I come up with a price of $1094 for the dell vs $1567 for the eMac. See, Dell comes with various levels of 3 year support, I think you stuck with the default, and pricier 4 hour same day response, instead of the next business day. The eMac, by default, only came with a 1 year limited warranty so I added Applecare onto it. I could have lowered the price more by saying the employee will continue to use their existing 17" monitor for 3 more years, instead of paying $150 for a new one. With the eMac you don't get that choice.
Also, the eMac is forcing you to accept certain options you might now want. For instance, I don't want a DVD drive, RW or otherwise, or a CD burner on every employees desk. I certainly don't need a modem in a networked machine, but the eMac won't let me not get it.
Dell's webpages don't have all the options. When you call in with a large enough order you can get things tweaked even more. With Apple, I suspect, because I don't know for a fact, you can't really modify the configuration much. Apple is dependent upon having models that are the same. Your order would probably have to be very significant before they will change default configs.
The $800 eMac is closer to what a corporation would want. So, let's spend $50 more on memory, and call it $850. Wait, gotta add AppleCare (3 year warranty is important to a business) so it is $968. Can I build an equivalent Dell Optiplex for that price? I can only get it down to $787. Closer on the lower end.
Of course, if you are going that low you can go Dimension, which is more what the eMac competes with (be honest). So, the Dimension option would be about $758. Damn, I just found out that the Dimensions are closer in price to Optiplexes than I thought. I wonder if I priced as a home user if it would come out cheaper, the options are differet. Don't have time right now.
Anyway, point being that Apple is more expensive than a Dell for these and similar configurations. A dual processor Apple G5 however is very competitive with a similiar dual Dell Xeon.
Re:Still not good enough for enterprise...
on
Opengroupware
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It's a misconception that small and medium sized businesses do not have needs every bit as complex as those of large companies. They still have things that need to be done that are critical to their business, and messaging may very well be one of them.
Also, a mid-sized business was hit no harder than a larger businesses by Microsoft's license 6.0. In fact, Microsoft lowered the entry requirements for Select and Enterprise agreements, which means more mid-size businesses could participate in that particular brand of extortion.
Microsoft does not have a FORCED upgrade. You're not the only person I see writing that they do. Microsoft introduced Software Assurance which entitles the licensee to the latest versions during the length of the contract. Entitles. Read that? Entitles. Not force, entitles. You are allowed to upgrade to the latest version.
Microsoft is just now stopping support on Windows NT 4.0. That OS is about 7 years old. To use your comparison you are saying Microsoft will release Windows XP Version 3 and tell you that they won't support Version 2 anymore. That is wrong, and you know it. Version 2 will be supported until its end of life which is at least 5 years after it was first released. Yes, I'm aware that there really isn't any version 2 or 3 of XP, I'm using your own versioning numbers as an example.
The main point is that Microsoft does not FORCE you to upgrade. As a matter of fact, the business licensees have the right to downgrade if they want.
It has been my experience that all of the type 1 users don't actually understand the OS anyway. They don't know about screen resolutions, they don't know how to create copies of programs vs shortcuts, they don't know how to create a share to a new machine, they don't know how to change their default printer.These people are very intimidated about switching to an OS, they will whine and gripe about how they don't understand it, and they will be very reluctant to admit that they never understood the previous OS either.
These Type 1 people end up being easy to switch, because they are not power users. They only use the most basic features of the OS and of the applications. After a couple of weeks, they wonder what they were afraid of.
I want to know what happened to all the secretaries who knew WordPerfect 5.1. The people who used all the function keys by touch and typed 80 WPM. Where did they go? Do they all work in law offices?
If you hire a printing press operator you either expect them to know how to use a press, or you train them very thoroughly. They either get good or they get fired. They are a cost center and a revenue maker. The printing company cannot afford to have incompetence in a press operator. If they were to say, oh, I can't do that you do it, printing presses intimidate me, they would be fired.
Why, oh why, does the same not happen to computer users? They are given a tool, they should be expected to know how to use or, it actually learn from training about how to use it. They should be as proficient with the use of that machine as a violinist with their instrument. But, they hardly ever are. Users are scared of their machines, they don't understand how they work, and they never know how to get a given task done efficiently. You show them, you show them again, you write instructions for them, but they never really grasp the concepts. They claim computers are hard and claim that computers are your job (sys admin) and that is why you know them so well. I tell them, knowing this program and using this OS is their job, this is what they are paid for. They are expected to enter these orders or create this presentation, and they are expected to do it as easily as a concert violinist performs a rehearsal. But, users that can do this are far and few between.
I think it is a shame that we got rid of the professional office worker who understood WordPerfect 5.1 or the IBM Selectromatic III. These people got the work done, they didn't struggle over the silly formatting of an Excel spreadsheet for 3 hours, they just formatted it. They understood the structure of a business letter without using a Template, and they knew which saluation to put at the end when the letter was sent to a potential customer vs an existing one.
There is no upgrade path from Windows 95 to NT. They are incompatible licenses and full cost would have to be paid for NT. Non one would consider such a thing as a cost saving measure.
Just because MA might have hardware powerful enough to run NT/2000/XP doesn't mean they would spend the money on the upgrades. The machines might have been purchased as recently as 1999, but they still had Win 95 installed on them because they wanted a common OS on all desktops. That is allowed and in Microsoft's Licensing terms (when you get Select or Enterprise agreements which any business with 3500 desktops would).
Linux will run on hardware that Windows would balk at. Until you put a DE like KDE and Gnome on it. Then you are right at the same level that Windows 9.x requires, and even Win 2000 will run just dandy on a PII 233 with 128MB. The Linux on low end hardware is really only an effective argument when you are talking about headless servers that don't need the resources to support a GUI. Not when you are talking about an end user desktop that needs a full graphical environment (like KDE or Gnome). Note, I am not talking about WindowMaker, Fluxbox, blackbox, or any other WM, and am talking about a complete desktop environment that a Mac or Windows user would not find strange.
Your final point is mostly correct. The thin client X client/server model, particularly as shown by LTSP is a very smart way to deploy workstations. However, this model does not equal Active Directory, nor the other way around. They are two totally different things. AD is more like LDAP that is used as an address boook, authenticating server, profile/home directory repository, and machine inventory. Sure, LDAP can do these things, but it is difficult to setup for all these purposes, and it is a bolt on solution. Linux was NOT designed to do this from the beginning no matter how much you might want it to be so.
Microsoft also has a thin client model using Terminal Services. Using this you could get practically all the benefits of LTSP plus those of AD.
It is obvious from your post that you are choosing to lash out at someone who posted a very relevant experience of theirs. Even though they did not quantify "costs were manageable" they were really just stating that they had a smooth migration from one OS to another because the interfaces were very similar and the deployments could be automated.
When they are mentioning automation, they are talking about a computer booting from the network and downloading its entire install and setting itself up with all applications and settings. They are not talking about wandering around with a CD that they are sticking in each drive to configure, nor are they talking about cloning hard drives. I've automated Windows installs, and I've automated Linux installs. The Windows installs were much easier to do without prior knowledge, the Linux ones required a lot of research, but also went very smoothly.In the end I would rather have a Linux desktop.
I am not one to bash MS for the sake of doing it. Nor do I speak without knowledge of large computer deployments.
Licensing v6.0 has a few different elements that you are not distinguishing between. You can purchase the upgrade license, such as going from Windows 2000 to Windows XP, or you can purchase Software Assurance, or you can purchase a full license. You are speaking of Software Assurance which entitles the licensee to upgrades for the term of the contract (2 or 3 years depending upon license program).
See, it entitles you to upgrade. You are not forced to upgrade, the big hand of almighty Bill G does not reach down and strike your computer with the blight that is Windows Longhorn. However, if at the end of your term Longhorn was the latest version available, but you were still running Windows 98 you are entitled to make the switch to Longhorn whenever you want. Meaning, if 5 years pass since your Software Assurance expired you can still upgrade to Longhorn, because it was the latest version available when your Software Assurance contract expired. However, if you want to upgrade to the version past Longhorn, you will have to pay full price, there are no upgrades because you didn't continue your enrollment in Software Assurance.
The reason people go with Software Assurance is because it is the cheapest alternative if you do upgrade with each OS release. However, if you are like DOR in MA you haven't upgraded since Win 95. Therefore, you probably don't want Software Assurance. You just want a regular upgrade.
But, DOR missed out on the chance for a regular upgrade price, that deadline ended last July 31st. Now they are in the time period where they must pay full price (minus volume discounts) for a switch from Win 95 to XP.
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society?
on
The Future of Money
·
· Score: 1
It's been proven that, on the average, people who use plastic will spend more money than those who use cash only. Obviously I'm talking about grocery shopping, mall shopping, and eating out, not paying your bills.
This might not apply to you, but there is a really good chance that you are spending about $50 more per week than you would spend if you only used cash for the above transactions. Needless to say, that is a large chunk of change gone each year.
You may find that the app your company depends on has changed. This is all well and good, until the license for the old one runs out. After that, it is technically illegal to run the old one when the new one is accessible. I think generally company's allow you 2 versions 'grace' period to upgrade before licenses are withdrawn
What the hockey puck are you talking about? I have never used any software that required a license to be renewed in order to continue using it beyond a particular time period. Windows is not this way, Office is not this way (yet), the 5 different database systems the companies I've worked for have used to run their business (think ERP, MRP) were not this way, no Adobe product is this way....
Now, what I will give you is that support is paid for and you might not have support beyond two years, or if you are two versions behind.
I'm labeling this portion of your post FUD until you can tell me specific products that are in widespread use by a business that are licensed the way you speak. I'm talking MRP systems, Office suites, operating systems, accounting software, groupware systems...not some obscure scientific application that 5 labs around the US actually use./P
I wonder if this guy, and his team, felt it necessary to review the source code in order to make their network more secure.
I mean, did he just accept the binaries as is and curse the fact that he didn't really know what was going on inside.
Did he give feedback to developers so they could improve exactly the points he was finding most valuable. By this I mean a very closed loop that allowed for much tighter interaction with developers than the Network Administrator at an outside company could ever dream of happening.
Or, did his guys regularly review software code in order to insure that nothing odd was happening. If so, how valuable was this to making sure the network was secure.
Point being, if it is te last one, then even Microsoft sees the value of Open Source and many eyes.
A publisher like Pearson has many divisions, some of which compete against each other. Inside each division they might release several titles that on the same subject that compete with each other. They are throwing a lot at the wall and seeing what sticks. These titles also compete with titles from the other divisions of Pearson. So, at any given moment Pearson might have 9 books on Linux System Administration in print, all competing with each other. This is why Pearson publishing groups think 5k is a good run for a technical book.
compare this to O'Reilly which prints only one title per subject (their failing is that they divide subjects into very small bits sometimes). If you are the author of Running Linux, you are not competing with any other books from O'Reilly for that subject matter. Thus, you get to sell 40k plus copies per edition.
If you think you can write the definitive work on the subject, O'Reilly is the place to be published. If you think your book idea is pretty much an also ran, then you might as well publish with a Pearson group, because it won't matter to your sales one bit.
Slashdot Mirror
I signed up some time after the two of you. I can't remember how log I had been reading the site, and never once thought I should "snag" a login in order to forever have a very low ID. Oh well, at least I'm below a million.
Sounds like a project for the economic stimulus package to me. 100 ships, crews of 30 or so, that's employment for 3000 persons for 2 years.
Yes, a wiki-like system with authenticated users is exactly what I meant. I thought that point was obvious and didn't need to be mentioned. I certainly was not advocating a base install of MediaWiki and turning the Deputy Director Skinner and asking, "Can I have my 100 million now?"
Seriously, I have no idea all of their needs requirements, but it seems like a big one is cross-connecting one set of data with another. The intricate connections of intelligence data probably defies anyones ability to design a system that could capture it all. But, a Wiki, which automatically creates links can do it for you, on the fly. So, create some Wiki templates for information about people, cases, incidents, whatever, and create Wiki links on the keywords when you fill out the templates (names, dates, code names, case numbers, and so on) and let the Wiki link everything together for you.
With a lot of data already entered, in no time you'll be typing in a routine report and find out that the name you just typed already has a Wiki page, and lo and behold! some agent in Nebraska is looking for that exact person for a child abduction. Case closed. All praise the Wiki.
Rather interesting choice of words there at the end referring to the talent of the Ximian folks. Makes me wonder his resignation is tied to possible internal power struggles between KDE centric SUSE folks and GNOME centric Ximian developers. From last weeks announcement we know who won those battles, and it's possible his resignation is just part of the fallout.
I'm increasingly seeing the words, "Test Driving" associated with Linux. I think it is all the live CDs out there, as well as these web accessible desktops. Ways to try out Linux without installing anything.
O'Reilly even has a new book called Test Driving Linux: From Windows to Linux in 60 Seconds that appears to be written for people trying out a Linux desktop for the first time. It uses the Mandrake Move live CD as the basis for the book, and practically everything covered in the book can be done using the live CD. That is why it only covers KDE.
Though the book lacks an installation chapter (one isn't needed when using a live CD) it provides coverage of all the other typical desktop chores like web browsing, file management, email, OpenOffice.org, and even GnuCash for money management. It is the only introductory book that I have seen that goes into great detail on how to accomplish tasks or use interesting features of the programs. Most other introductory Linux books gloss over how you actually work with the program.
Actually, WordPerfect Offie 2000 used WINE as well. I was a beta tester.
Only WP 7 and 8 (and I think 8.1) ran as native Linux apps.
Okay, it's not a complete rehash. Some portions of the book, for instance on using KDE, Konqueror, Kmail are pulled word for word from the previous book. But, some of that is given a slight business slant. Like connecting to an Exchange server.
The second seciton, Administration and Deployment, is really the new part of the book. Its nice coverage, a little on the easy side. I would rather have a book that was dedicated to administration and deployment.
This sounds like a rehash of his previous book, Moving to Linux: Kiss the Blue Screen of Death Goodbye.
Which wasn't a bad book. But, I don't like people milking something by putting a slight editorial slant on it "for business" and making a new book out of it. Still, I'll have to check it out. I need a good book to give to people switching to Linux and this one, because it is newer and hopefully improved with feedback from readers, should be better than the previous one.
I'll preface this by saying I really know nothing much about patents or patent litigation.
But, if company X really wanted to get a patent for defensive reasons, then why not get the patent through a shell company whose sole purpose is to hold patents neutrally.
I mean, we could have a company called Openpatents. Apple, IBM, Sun, Microsoft, and so on could file for patents through this organization and the organization would be patent holders. The charter of the organization would be to make sure that the ideas of these patents remain open and freely available to everyone. They will "fight" against other companies that try to create infringing patents, but they don't care if anyone else uses the actuall techonology.
So, a company like Apple, in the case of this translucent window thing could file for the patent through Openpatents. By doing so we would all know that they don't intend to be evil b*stards with th e patent, instead they just want to make sure they don't get screwed when Microsoft files the patent next year.
If Apple files the patent through the regular process, then we know that they are reserving the right to sue people latter on who try to impinge upon the patent.
I don't know whether to mod Dan's article as +1 insightful or -1 Redundant.
Studies show that people who use plastic (CC, debit, or poker chips) for their purchases inevitably end up spending between 25-32% more than if they used cash. One of the reasons casinos give you chips. Of course, individual vary, but it really points to the fact that nearly everyone who uses plastic will spend more.
So, you get a piddly 1% cash back on your CC purchases, but you bought 20% more than you would have with cash. You do the math.
The absolute most I would give a non-IT person is an admin account on local machines in their department. I'm certainly not going to give them admin rights to the domain. That is just foolish. What you call being anal, I call prudence.
I don't even give all Windows Administrators domain administrator accounts. I delegate what they can do and don't do. For instance, the lackey I send around to change toner cartridges, reboot user machines, and install software doesn't have any special privledges to the corporate Exchange email server.
Experience varies. I totally believe what you are saying. But I can also truthfully say that out of 12 G4 Towers that are 3 years old I've had two blown DVD drives and one failed power supply. Out of 65 HP Vectras 3 years or older I have had no hardware problems.
I can also tell you that out of 12 OS 9 machines I have had to rebuild the OS on 3 of them because it was just acting flakey. Out of 65 Desktops running Windows 2000 for the past year I have rebuilt 1 OS because of flakiness.
Read my post. I did my calculations with the Optiplex.
Then I did them again with the Dimension and didn't find an appreciable difference with the Optiplex.
Most businesses do not use the eMac, but that didn't stop the poster from suggesting that as being comparible to the Optiplex.
Apple eMac: G4 1.00GHz, 256MB, 80GB HDD, DVD-R/CD-RW, 17" flat CRT monitor, Airport Extreme, v.92 modem, OS X 10.2: $1,398.
I guess it depends on your definition of "significantly."
That's funny. I come up with a price of $1094 for the dell vs $1567 for the eMac. See, Dell comes with various levels of 3 year support, I think you stuck with the default, and pricier 4 hour same day response, instead of the next business day. The eMac, by default, only came with a 1 year limited warranty so I added Applecare onto it. I could have lowered the price more by saying the employee will continue to use their existing 17" monitor for 3 more years, instead of paying $150 for a new one. With the eMac you don't get that choice.
Also, the eMac is forcing you to accept certain options you might now want. For instance, I don't want a DVD drive, RW or otherwise, or a CD burner on every employees desk. I certainly don't need a modem in a networked machine, but the eMac won't let me not get it.
Dell's webpages don't have all the options. When you call in with a large enough order you can get things tweaked even more. With Apple, I suspect, because I don't know for a fact, you can't really modify the configuration much. Apple is dependent upon having models that are the same. Your order would probably have to be very significant before they will change default configs.
The $800 eMac is closer to what a corporation would want. So, let's spend $50 more on memory, and call it $850. Wait, gotta add AppleCare (3 year warranty is important to a business) so it is $968. Can I build an equivalent Dell Optiplex for that price? I can only get it down to $787. Closer on the lower end.
Of course, if you are going that low you can go Dimension, which is more what the eMac competes with (be honest). So, the Dimension option would be about $758. Damn, I just found out that the Dimensions are closer in price to Optiplexes than I thought. I wonder if I priced as a home user if it would come out cheaper, the options are differet. Don't have time right now.
Anyway, point being that Apple is more expensive than a Dell for these and similar configurations. A dual processor Apple G5 however is very competitive with a similiar dual Dell Xeon.
It's a misconception that small and medium sized businesses do not have needs every bit as complex as those of large companies. They still have things that need to be done that are critical to their business, and messaging may very well be one of them.
Also, a mid-sized business was hit no harder than a larger businesses by Microsoft's license 6.0. In fact, Microsoft lowered the entry requirements for Select and Enterprise agreements, which means more mid-size businesses could participate in that particular brand of extortion.
Microsoft does not have a FORCED upgrade. You're not the only person I see writing that they do. Microsoft introduced Software Assurance which entitles the licensee to the latest versions during the length of the contract. Entitles. Read that? Entitles. Not force, entitles. You are allowed to upgrade to the latest version.
Microsoft is just now stopping support on Windows NT 4.0. That OS is about 7 years old. To use your comparison you are saying Microsoft will release Windows XP Version 3 and tell you that they won't support Version 2 anymore. That is wrong, and you know it. Version 2 will be supported until its end of life which is at least 5 years after it was first released. Yes, I'm aware that there really isn't any version 2 or 3 of XP, I'm using your own versioning numbers as an example.
The main point is that Microsoft does not FORCE you to upgrade. As a matter of fact, the business licensees have the right to downgrade if they want.
It has been my experience that all of the type 1 users don't actually understand the OS anyway. They don't know about screen resolutions, they don't know how to create copies of programs vs shortcuts, they don't know how to create a share to a new machine, they don't know how to change their default printer.These people are very intimidated about switching to an OS, they will whine and gripe about how they don't understand it, and they will be very reluctant to admit that they never understood the previous OS either.
These Type 1 people end up being easy to switch, because they are not power users. They only use the most basic features of the OS and of the applications. After a couple of weeks, they wonder what they were afraid of.
I want to know what happened to all the secretaries who knew WordPerfect 5.1. The people who used all the function keys by touch and typed 80 WPM. Where did they go? Do they all work in law offices?
If you hire a printing press operator you either expect them to know how to use a press, or you train them very thoroughly. They either get good or they get fired. They are a cost center and a revenue maker. The printing company cannot afford to have incompetence in a press operator. If they were to say, oh, I can't do that you do it, printing presses intimidate me, they would be fired.
Why, oh why, does the same not happen to computer users? They are given a tool, they should be expected to know how to use or, it actually learn from training about how to use it. They should be as proficient with the use of that machine as a violinist with their instrument. But, they hardly ever are. Users are scared of their machines, they don't understand how they work, and they never know how to get a given task done efficiently. You show them, you show them again, you write instructions for them, but they never really grasp the concepts. They claim computers are hard and claim that computers are your job (sys admin) and that is why you know them so well. I tell them, knowing this program and using this OS is their job, this is what they are paid for. They are expected to enter these orders or create this presentation, and they are expected to do it as easily as a concert violinist performs a rehearsal. But, users that can do this are far and few between.
I think it is a shame that we got rid of the professional office worker who understood WordPerfect 5.1 or the IBM Selectromatic III. These people got the work done, they didn't struggle over the silly formatting of an Excel spreadsheet for 3 hours, they just formatted it. They understood the structure of a business letter without using a Template, and they knew which saluation to put at the end when the letter was sent to a potential customer vs an existing one.
There is no upgrade path from Windows 95 to NT. They are incompatible licenses and full cost would have to be paid for NT. Non one would consider such a thing as a cost saving measure.
Just because MA might have hardware powerful enough to run NT/2000/XP doesn't mean they would spend the money on the upgrades. The machines might have been purchased as recently as 1999, but they still had Win 95 installed on them because they wanted a common OS on all desktops. That is allowed and in Microsoft's Licensing terms (when you get Select or Enterprise agreements which any business with 3500 desktops would).
Linux will run on hardware that Windows would balk at. Until you put a DE like KDE and Gnome on it. Then you are right at the same level that Windows 9.x requires, and even Win 2000 will run just dandy on a PII 233 with 128MB. The Linux on low end hardware is really only an effective argument when you are talking about headless servers that don't need the resources to support a GUI. Not when you are talking about an end user desktop that needs a full graphical environment (like KDE or Gnome). Note, I am not talking about WindowMaker, Fluxbox, blackbox, or any other WM, and am talking about a complete desktop environment that a Mac or Windows user would not find strange.
Your final point is mostly correct. The thin client X client/server model, particularly as shown by LTSP is a very smart way to deploy workstations. However, this model does not equal Active Directory, nor the other way around. They are two totally different things. AD is more like LDAP that is used as an address boook, authenticating server, profile/home directory repository, and machine inventory. Sure, LDAP can do these things, but it is difficult to setup for all these purposes, and it is a bolt on solution. Linux was NOT designed to do this from the beginning no matter how much you might want it to be so.
Microsoft also has a thin client model using Terminal Services. Using this you could get practically all the benefits of LTSP plus those of AD.
It is obvious from your post that you are choosing to lash out at someone who posted a very relevant experience of theirs. Even though they did not quantify "costs were manageable" they were really just stating that they had a smooth migration from one OS to another because the interfaces were very similar and the deployments could be automated.
When they are mentioning automation, they are talking about a computer booting from the network and downloading its entire install and setting itself up with all applications and settings. They are not talking about wandering around with a CD that they are sticking in each drive to configure, nor are they talking about cloning hard drives. I've automated Windows installs, and I've automated Linux installs. The Windows installs were much easier to do without prior knowledge, the Linux ones required a lot of research, but also went very smoothly.In the end I would rather have a Linux desktop.
I am not one to bash MS for the sake of doing it. Nor do I speak without knowledge of large computer deployments.
You're right, you dunno.
Licensing v6.0 has a few different elements that you are not distinguishing between. You can purchase the upgrade license, such as going from Windows 2000 to Windows XP, or you can purchase Software Assurance, or you can purchase a full license. You are speaking of Software Assurance which entitles the licensee to upgrades for the term of the contract (2 or 3 years depending upon license program).
See, it entitles you to upgrade. You are not forced to upgrade, the big hand of almighty Bill G does not reach down and strike your computer with the blight that is Windows Longhorn. However, if at the end of your term Longhorn was the latest version available, but you were still running Windows 98 you are entitled to make the switch to Longhorn whenever you want. Meaning, if 5 years pass since your Software Assurance expired you can still upgrade to Longhorn, because it was the latest version available when your Software Assurance contract expired. However, if you want to upgrade to the version past Longhorn, you will have to pay full price, there are no upgrades because you didn't continue your enrollment in Software Assurance.
The reason people go with Software Assurance is because it is the cheapest alternative if you do upgrade with each OS release. However, if you are like DOR in MA you haven't upgraded since Win 95. Therefore, you probably don't want Software Assurance. You just want a regular upgrade.
But, DOR missed out on the chance for a regular upgrade price, that deadline ended last July 31st. Now they are in the time period where they must pay full price (minus volume discounts) for a switch from Win 95 to XP.
It's been proven that, on the average, people who use plastic will spend more money than those who use cash only. Obviously I'm talking about grocery shopping, mall shopping, and eating out, not paying your bills.
This might not apply to you, but there is a really good chance that you are spending about $50 more per week than you would spend if you only used cash for the above transactions. Needless to say, that is a large chunk of change gone each year.
What the hockey puck are you talking about? I have never used any software that required a license to be renewed in order to continue using it beyond a particular time period. Windows is not this way, Office is not this way (yet), the 5 different database systems the companies I've worked for have used to run their business (think ERP, MRP) were not this way, no Adobe product is this way....
Now, what I will give you is that support is paid for and you might not have support beyond two years, or if you are two versions behind.
I'm labeling this portion of your post FUD until you can tell me specific products that are in widespread use by a business that are licensed the way you speak. I'm talking MRP systems, Office suites, operating systems, accounting software, groupware systems...not some obscure scientific application that 5 labs around the US actually use./P
I wonder if this guy, and his team, felt it necessary to review the source code in order to make their network more secure.
I mean, did he just accept the binaries as is and curse the fact that he didn't really know what was going on inside.
Did he give feedback to developers so they could improve exactly the points he was finding most valuable. By this I mean a very closed loop that allowed for much tighter interaction with developers than the Network Administrator at an outside company could ever dream of happening.
Or, did his guys regularly review software code in order to insure that nothing odd was happening. If so, how valuable was this to making sure the network was secure.
Point being, if it is te last one, then even Microsoft sees the value of Open Source and many eyes.
5k copies is a poor run for a technical book.
A publisher like Pearson has many divisions, some of which compete against each other. Inside each division they might release several titles that on the same subject that compete with each other. They are throwing a lot at the wall and seeing what sticks. These titles also compete with titles from the other divisions of Pearson. So, at any given moment Pearson might have 9 books on Linux System Administration in print, all competing with each other. This is why Pearson publishing groups think 5k is a good run for a technical book.
compare this to O'Reilly which prints only one title per subject (their failing is that they divide subjects into very small bits sometimes). If you are the author of Running Linux, you are not competing with any other books from O'Reilly for that subject matter. Thus, you get to sell 40k plus copies per edition.
If you think you can write the definitive work on the subject, O'Reilly is the place to be published. If you think your book idea is pretty much an also ran, then you might as well publish with a Pearson group, because it won't matter to your sales one bit.