To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I mean support for your users, you care about your users, right? The OP was talking about replacing WINDOWS, not IE or Office.
If you replace apps piecemeal, then sure, support costs are low, but to replace the entire software stack, well then yeah, you are going to incur training and support costs.
You would have to change your user management because if you were standardized on Windows, then you are probably using AD. You would have to switch to LDAP and some other bits to support your new OS.
Hardware is hardware, but if it ain't broke don't fix it, If your current system is running just fine, why replace it?
So yeah, that is pretty much what I meant.
Edited 2011-06-09 21:25 UTC
Last time I checked, RHEL and Fedora and pretty much any other distro could authenticate against AD out of the box. Lets face it, switching over is not that hard. eWeek did a recent survey. It used to be that the number one reason for switching was cost. Now the number one reason is to avoid vendor lock in. People are tired of being bent over a barrel when its time to upgrade because all their data is locked in some application.
As for the article, this is the first time I have seen Microsoft promote Windows CE as a desktop product. I didn't really think of thin clients as the same as in the same market as these though. These seem to be able to be self sufficient versus just a remote for terminal services or citrix.




Member since:
2005-07-07
Free is not always free.
support? i guess windows run without it. guess malware is just in our minds.
retraining what? unless you are dumb and intentionally promote wrong way. in all my cases where i moved some company... firefox/chrome here, firefox/chrome there. OO.o here, OO.o there. thunderbird here, thunderbird there. same custom software here and there. people didn't even notice or care. except problems being gone, there is no difference
rebuilding your entire user management structure? why would you do that? linux plays well with windows way, it is other side that is problematic. move can be really gradual, without pains and automated
cost of hardware????? windows will run on air to be cheaper?