Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Jan 2007 16:56 UTC, submitted by Robert
Novell and Ximian Novell might have signed a patent and interoperability deal with Microsoft Corp but it is not about to give up competing with the software giant and last week released a study that suggests its Linux desktop product is better value than Windows Vista. The company's competitive guide compares SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop with Windows Vista and claims that the Linux product provides 90% of Vista's functionality and 10% of the price.
Thread beginning with comment 204687
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

All I indicated is that maintaining Linux servers requires less manpower than maintaining Windows servers, and extrapolating that one could expect the same thing on the desktop - something which I, as a "family/friends support" technician, can very well attest to.

The fact that you quickly changed the subject to applications availability tells me that you've basically conceded that point...

I'll add a precision to what you said: you don't need the exact same applications on Linux, you need applications that can do the same thing you need. After all, companies do switch from one app to the other even when they stay after Windows (like when we switched from Outlook to Lotus Notes).

Will this suit every company? Of course not, but it doesn't need to. The fact that the MS apologists have renewed their usual FUD with extra vigour is a good indication that Novell indeed represents a threat to Redmond's quasi-monopoly.

Reply Parent Score: 2

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

The fact that you quickly changed the subject to applications availability tells me that you've basically conceded that point...

And the fact that you post a smart ass comment like that speaks volumes to the fact that you didn't read my comment, let alone comprehend what I was saying.

Studies can be bent either way; they're like statistics, you can bend to say what ever you want them to say - if statistics state that the number of reported crimes have gone up, a government will say that due to the increase in spending on law and order, people feel more confident that criminals will be caught; if the number of reported crimes go down, the government will claim that due to its tough stance on law and order, they've lowered the rate of crime due to the tough deterant.

I never said that I believed Linux was cheaper or Windows was cheaper; hence I gave an example as to how one cam claim one is more expensive than another by simply not using the tools that are available by the said software companies, and more importantly, its ignorant to say that there is somehow a blanket one size fits all idea that the cost said in the report can be duplicated in almost ever setting.

I'll add a precision to what you said: you don't need the exact same applications on Linux, you need applications that can do the same thing you need. After all, companies do switch from one app to the other even when they stay after Windows (like when we switched from Outlook to Lotus Notes).

But at the same time, even if they do move from Outlook to Lotus Notes, at the same time, the majority of their applications they still rely on, only run on Windows.

Where is Lotus Notes on Linux (as one example of the lack of application availability)? for me, no trial version simply says to be that its a big fraud; and no, I'm not going to delve through the bloated beuacracy that is IBM to try and plead of a 'trial version' - if they can't put one, smack bang on their front page, without the need of me needing to register myself to their download service, then tough-titty, they've lost a customer.

Customers want a good RAD tool, equal to that of Visual Studio, nothing like that exists on Linux, they want the ability to continue running the same branded applications, be it Dreamweaver, Quicken, Peachtree Accounting, Corel Draw, or what have you - until Novell pulls finger and actually does something about it, things aren't going to change.

Right now, Novell isn't doing a bloody thing about it! ride the horse that is Novell, but you'll realise after trotting for 300km, you'll find yourself again in the middle of no where, wanting direction, and the horse that is Novell, still dazed and confused.

To put it bluntly; Linux orientated businesses suck; they suck at what they do because they have no focus, they have no drive, they have no strong leadership from inside, they're wishy washy when it comes to setting up alliances with other companies, they fail to see the short comings in their own products in favour of bashing who ever happens to be the top dog at the time, and worse still, they can't even understand *WHY* customes choose Windows over their own product! they'd rather use 'vendor lock in' when in reality, "there is no bloody applications!" is the real excuse!

Reply Parent Score: 2

archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Studies can be bent either way; they're like statistics, you can bend to say what ever you want them to say - if statistics state that the number of reported crimes have gone up, a government will say that due to the increase in spending on law and order, people feel more confident that criminals will be caught; if the number of reported crimes go down, the government will claim that due to its tough stance on law and order, they've lowered the rate of crime due to the tough deterant.

Just because studies can be bent doesn't mean they are. Methodology counts for something. It's easy to dismiss all studies off-hand, but that's just excessive cynicism. This particular study (which I'm trying to track down) wasn't particularly controversial or one-sided - in fact I remembered it said the reduced manpower benefit was slightly offset by the fact that *nix admins cost usually a bit more than Windows admin.

I'm sorry, but simply to assume that this study was biased because any study can be biased is not a valid logical argument. You'll have to come up with something else.

I never said that I believed Linux was cheaper or Windows was cheaper; hence I gave an example as to how one cam claim one is more expensive than another by simply not using the tools that are available by the said software companies, and more importantly, its ignorant to say that there is somehow a blanket one size fits all idea that the cost said in the report can be duplicated in almost ever setting.

I wasn't talking about cost, but rather about the amount of maintenance and management needed, and that mirrored my experience, as well as those whom I've talked to. I didn't get into the TCO argument at all - you simply assume that. And then you have the gall to say I didn't read your comment correctly...give me a break.

But at the same time, even if they do move from Outlook to Lotus Notes, at the same time, the majority of their applications they still rely on, only run on Windows.

You completely miss the point. The point was that migration from one app to another happens, therefore you don't need "all the apps available on Windows", you simply need to provide alternatives which offer the desired functionality.

Reading the following paragraph, it's clear the argument went right over your head.

Customers want a good RAD tool, equal to that of Visual Studio, nothing like that exists on Linux, they want the ability to continue running the same branded applications, be it Dreamweaver, Quicken, Peachtree Accounting, Corel Draw, or what have you - until Novell pulls finger and actually does something about it, things aren't going to change.

First, don't pretend to know what consumers want. This is *your* opinion, with all the bias that comes with it, but to claim to be representative of a majority of customers is being quite pretentious.

How is it up to Novell to provide Dreamweaver, Quicken, Peacthree Accounting. Corel Draw? Uh, sure, I guess it's still used in some industries...whatever. It's up to the ISVs to provide these apps, or risk seeing capable alternatives come up.

The fact, however, is that there are quite a few companies that don't need any of these Windows-only apps. These companies can switch. That will mean more people using Linux, therefore more programs ported to it, meaning more people using it, etc.

You seem to have a hard time with the concept of "critical mass", yet it's very important to Linux growth. Contrary to what you claim, Linux doesn't need "all apps Windows has"...it simply needs to continue to gain more quality apps (whether they are ports or original ones that compete with the established one).

Bah, prophets of doom like you are a dime a dozen, but you fail to realize that no empire endures forever, and that they tend to fall very slowly, bit by bit.

Reply Parent Score: 3