It would seem that the upcoming release of Microsoft's Windows Vista does not seem like a good thing for the desktop Linux community. After all, this update to Windows XP is going to focus on two attributes which have pushed users to Linux for years- security and stability. Upon closer inspection though, the move to Vista may be the perfect time for the Linux community to make headway on the desktop and increase its user base dramatically. The number of features which Microsoft has cast aside since Longhorn and the hardware requirements of Vista have set the stage for a large scale move to desktop Linux. 
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:So reading from your post, there is a problem with installation. But you don't identify what the problem actually is
It is far easier for me to install and configure lots of open source software on Windows, get it up and running and keep it up to date.
How so? On Windows, you have to find it, download it, click on it, click next, next, next etc. On linux, find it in repository (index locally stored), click install, done. Seems to me to be pretty similar. Then there's update - on windows, work out there's an update, go find it, downlaod etc etc etc. On Linux, issue single command/press update button - programme goes and finds updates to ALL your apps in one go. How can you say Windows is easier?
It doesn't need to do squat - Linux in the server room is mature, accepted and doing just fine without your advice.
Yes it does. I love the 'we're perfect' attitude.
I didn't say it was perfect, I said it would do fine without your stupid advice. I notice you snipped your advice; I would have too if I were you. However, your advice that linux should emulate what you describe as Windows' "not the greatest" admin tools will get linux nowhere. As I said linux will do fine without your advice - as it is already.
Furthermore, server administration isn't a product, just like security isn't a product. You can't package it in a box or a gui. The admin has to actually know what to do with it. In my view, the CLI is a far more powerful admin
Yada, yada, yada. For some thing you need to save time, and good admin tools save you that time.
A good admin tool is a customised script you wrote yourself to do exactly what you want, and will do it for thousands of users, over and over again. A good admin tool is not a gui that you have to configure for every single user, cannot automate, and cannot script to your own needs. Hence the fact that MS is now implimenting Monad to catch up to that kind of usability and time saving.
Linux has great server administration tools, and they're not YaST or Red Hat tools, they're universal tools like Bash, Perl, Text Editors, and a thing called training, reading and thinking. Servers should never be administered by people who don't know what they're doing...
You're not tackling the real issues.
See above. Lets take an example - backup. How come on my Windows 2003 Server, I have to spend big $$$$ on a backup program plus get add-on agents to deal with open files; when on linux, I can do a custom backup with a 10 line bash script. That's a real issue. Ease of administration and TCO my arse.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Linux is different - if you don't want different, then butt out. Linux is not for you, and your view on it is irrelevant.
My view on it is relevant since I do use alongside Windows servers as well. Both have pros and cons. If Linux can eliminate the cons which makes people use Windows in some scenarios you're going to see Windows waving goodbye to the server world.
So reading from your post, there is a problem with installation. But you don't identify what the problem actually is
It is far easier for me to install and configure lots of open source software on Windows, get it up and running and keep it up to date.
It doesn't need to do squat - Linux in the server room is mature, accepted and doing just fine without your advice.
Yes it does. I love the 'we're perfect' attitude.
Furthermore, server administration isn't a product, just like security isn't a product. You can't package it in a box or a gui. The admin has to actually know what to do with it. In my view, the CLI is a far more powerful admin
Yada, yada, yada. For some thing you need to save time, and good admin tools save you that time.
Linux has great server administration tools, and they're not YaST or Red Hat tools, they're universal tools like Bash, Perl, Text Editors, and a thing called training, reading and thinking. Servers should never be administered by people who don't know what they're doing...
You're not tackling the real issues.