Linked by David Adams on Tue 3rd Aug 2010 16:05 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Linux As we mentioned in a previous article, Red Hat advocate Greg DeKoenigsberg claimed that due to the much larger amount of code it's contributed, Red Hat is a better open source citizen than Canonical, adding, "Canonical is a marketing organization masquerading as an engineering organization." A Computerworld blog retorts that that's no insult; and that marketing Linux could be just as important to the cause as contributing code. Updated
Thread beginning with comment 435379
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Meanwhile, in the real corporate world, what matters is management tools that make deploying, updating and maintaining dozens, hundreds and thousands of servers and workstations as easy (read: manpower-free) as possible. Windows and AD and group policies, however crappy they are, do a decent job of providing these things to the average J-Random-DumbAdmin.

... and a big part of appeal of MacOS X and Linux for random user is that those operating systems are out of reach of those management tools. No enforced virus checks.

Almost all the "corporate" stuff is in the intranet, as HTML applications anyway.

Reply Parent Score: 2

sorpigal Member since:

Again, hah.

Meanwhile, in the real world, IT people and management people don't buy systems they can't manage. Most users do not need or have any access to their own systems, not in a corporate environment. Everything is managed and locked down. Most internal apps are with web based or .net-based these days, it's true, but control of user behavior (e.g. installing apps, access control) needs to be manageable.

Reply Parent Score: 2