IT decision-makers should avoid ‘platform religion’ and rule out Linux on the desktop until at least 2005, says analyst Giga Information Group. Research fellow Rob Enderle told delegates to the GigaWorld IT Forum at Disneyland Paris this week that experimenting with alternatives to Windows could prove a costly mistake.
Rule out Linux on the Desktop Until 2005, says Giga
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
On how much compatibility you need with Windows, and if you can achieve that compatibility using samba, OpenOffice, wine, etc.
The hardest conversions will be for businesses that are using Windows-only apps (especially custom built ones) that don’t run under Wine and have no Linux equivalents (yet).
Otherwise, for your basic ‘bread and butter’ apps, assuming Linux can deal with your hardware (or vice versa) and assuming you’ve got at least one person who is at least somewhat familiar with Linux, I don’t really see a problem.
I agree completely with Darius on this issue. Such a blanket statement as this article makes is ridiculous. If I were opening any sort of business today or preparing to pay another licensing fee to Microsoft the first thing I would do is examine linux as a prospect. If the apps aren’t there yet, then that’s too bad, but for a lot of shops I think it would all work out fine.
I think the Giga Analyst needs to reanalyze his conclusions.
On one hand, you are dealing with a monopoly market in the US.
How can you squeeze a better price from Microsoft? You can’t, Microsoft dictates the desktop price, and with Version 6.0 of the licensing, you can take it leave it.
I prefer to leave it.
There are plenty of completely viable Linux desktop solutions available now with the latest releases of RedHat, Susa distros.
To wholesale say “avoid Linux on the desktop” is not only premature, but if your competitors manage to get Linux integrated into thier infrastructures, before YOU DO, you can bet they are going to have money left over in IT and for other things (R&D, Health Insurance, bigger war chest).
I am not talking about small savings either. Cutting out all that money you send to Redmond in large organization can literally make or break the balance sheet for a business quarter, affecting stock prices, investor confidence in your company.
The desktop, is far more expensive than the server end of things, and it is were you will save the most in any Linux desktop deployment.
Whole nations are making the switch, and to say Linux is really risky is a bunch of bull.
If you want risk software, try reading this web site:
http://mattschwartz.net:9000/msversus/index.php
Then evaluate EXACTLY which is MORE RISKY, Linux or Windows.
-gc
There are places, like brazil, where people are already using linux for their everyday needs. A city as huge as Munich joins next year. The naysayers can keep saying its unwise, but that’s not going to stop people who are ready to migrate from going ahead anyway. It is possible that Giga is giving advice that it sincerely believes. But then again, you never know who is paying for what thesedays, so, my advice is: don’t take anybody’s word for anything. Want to see if linux is good enough for your organisation? Go ahead and try it, even if on a test basis.
What kind of fud inspiring propoganda is this? And why 2005? is something happening that we dont know about? I disagree totally. In fact If more Users deploy Linux and alternate OS it will inspire the software community, both oss and commercial to port apps to the gnu platform. Im sure people said the same thing about software when dos was the rage..”no dont port to a gui application till 1985!”. Isnt it obvious that this is intended as yet another anti- linux article?? In fact it hearkens to the stuff we were reading 5 or more years ago, about the “infant OS”. It almost makes me wonder if the author has recnetly purchased a liscence for SCO ip….(bah)
I had two personal experience with Linux desktop migration of two nonprofit organisations in Romania.
The first one (5 PCs) did a true migration, from Windows 98SE + Corel WordPerfect Office 8 to Mandrake 9.1 + OpenOffice. Nobody really cared about the change in OS and officesuite, they’ve just went on with their work. They took advantage of having a database professional in their team who migrated their DBs from Paradox to the MySql-Php-Apache combination that proved to be beyond all expectations in terms of usability and flexibility.
The second one is smaller (3 PCs) and got their first PCs with Redhat 9 preinstalled. There was no migration, then, maybe only in terms of users experience. So far they seem to work very well. Actually more and more small businesses and nonprofits here prefer to buy PCs with Linux preinstalled because it makes economic sense.
The sheer absurdity of the “advice” is breadthtaking. No wonder nobody takes analysts seriously anymore. This guy says “don’t get platform religion” and then reveals his own “platform religion” – the dogma that Windows is the TRUE WAY. From what I have read, Verizon Wireless, a big company, migrated to Openoffice in 2001/2002 and they seem to be doing ok. I do not see why others also can’t use OpenOffice and Linux, unless they must use some Windows specific programs.
…and that’s why Linux isn’t 100% ready for desktop. 2005 seems quite late, but big businesses are quite conservative. Smaller businesses can afford a failed conversion, but big can’t. 2005 isn’t that far away, anyway…
I wouldn’t agree with the “costly” part of Giga’s assessment, but I would say it could be an annoying mistake. If user’s preferences aren’t taken into account, and if X doesn’t crash randomly (ie, in about ten years) the Linux desktop experience might be the perfect solution many businesses upgrading from Windows 3.1 are looking for.
The companies that don’t take steps to integrate Linux now, will be at a serious disadvantage in the future, because they will have to trained staff to run open source systems.
Interesting “analysis.” Giga can be a Microsoft mouthpiece at times, so take their advice with a grain of salt. Whether Linux is suitable for your desktop depends on what you do. Let’s examine some of the places where Linux is gaining momentum:
– Universities.
– Graphics workstations.
– Point of sale terminals.
– Government offices.
The above places have some features in common:
1) The utility of compatibility is limited. Universties and government offies, for example, are large enough to dictate approved document formats, while point of sale terminals and graphics workstations pretty much only need to deal with company-internal documents, if they deal with documents at all.
2) Extensive support network. All of these places have support teams that maintain the machines, and can compensate for the fact that users are not familier with the new environment.
3) They can afford to provide user training, and to acquire sysadmins with UNIX rather than Windows skills.
Now, if any of these isn’t true for your organization, then you’ll have more of a problem moving to Linux. For example, if your support desk consists of summer interns, then Linux issues will probably throw them for a loop. If you are tasked with recieving and working with a variety of documents from outside sources, the lack of Linux application support could pose a problem.
I wanted to know how much would a business pay for Windows based software and here is a sample of what I’ve found at Wal-Mart (or PriceWatch, a cheaper source) :
Windows XP Pro (198.98 $), Office XP Full Version (437.82 $), Intuit Quicken Deluxe 2003 (40$), Norton Antivirus 2003 (36.63$), MS SQL Server 2000 Single Client access License (130$), and the list goes on.
Add to this the mayhem caused by Windows viruses or worms every year (many estimate it to the tunes of billions) and we all get a pretty grim picture of the Microsoft-centric computing.
Compare this to Linux : Debian 3.0 (0$) or Suse Linux 8.2 Professional (79.95$) or RedHat 9.0 Pro (149.95 $), …, each of these coming with ample software to run most businesses.
My questions to Rob Enderle are the following :
How much money has Giga Information Group paid to Microsoft in terms of licences over the last ten years ?
Since the time they started experimenting with Windows, how costly did it prove to be for them ?
When is he going to learn from mistakes made by all the Redmond-centric businesses ?
Since software vendors deny any responsibility in case their products wreak havoc in computers, how does his group forces proprietary vendors to “share the risk as possible” ?
I always thought the title “Research fellow” was synonymous of “job thoroughly done, attention to details, references”, but Rob Enderle is the living proof that I was wrong.
“Nobody really cared about the change in OS and officesuite, they’ve just went on with their work.”
Well I have been a Linux user for years. At work I use a linux workstation along side my Win2k box and my personal experince is that if they took away my windows box I would throw a tantrum.
I think people should stick to OS X and Windows for desktop for probably pretty long until an OS which might be human to administer pops up on the market (from review of Zeta, that is probably not it neither).
I’d say any company who brings in Linux to desktop will looose a lot of working speed since it’s not a fast working system for Joe User. That means, it’s far to complex and it seems to hate its users. Not to mention update costs every day, your IT department has to be huge to handle it.
OS X and Windows is pretty much the only thing which is competitive at the moment and I can hardly see anything changing that in the coming years… and especially not with Linux.
The article says to avoid Linux, but doesn’t give any examples as to why. They give broad generalizations like “it’s not good to be a pioneer, and let other people make mistakes first”, but they don’t give any examples of how people using linux have been hurt because of their decision. Basically, to summarize this article: FUD.
I guess you never tried KDE3 or GNOME2.
It’s point and click, just like in Windows.
Normal users wont install Linux and software.
These things are done by system adminstrators…
At home you have to do these things by yourself, but not when working for a company.
// wanted to know how much would a business pay for Windows based software and here is a sample of what I’ve found at Wal-Mart (or PriceWatch, a cheaper source) : //
You’re a complete noob, if you think most businesses pay *CONSUMER RETAIL PRICE* for their MS software. No way.
Maybe when you get out of high school, you’ll understand how business works.
Analysts are armchair quarterbacks whose perspective is
gained through the rearview mirror.
The analyst and consultant track record on giving intelligent
advice on Linux is very, very, pathetic.
Of course, that won’t stop them years from now trumpeting
we have been advising on Linux for decade.
Yeay, a decade of covertly and not so covertly saying
“Kill it, _before_ it grows.
Once again, Microsoft’s dirty gold at work. GIGA offers no facts, no in depth analysis, nothing except for fear mongering.
Hey, just like those fake WMD’s, eh?
Linux certainly has different strengths and weaknesses compared to Windows. However, even today it is being adopted by millions of people around the world who do not want Big Brother on their computers.
The government of Munich didn’t pick Linux because they were afraid of Linux. They picked Linux because they were afraid of Microsoft!
Thailand is selling more Linux laptops than they can make because the government does not want Windows in their country.
Those who believe in the personal part of ‘personal computing’ are moving to Linux and Mac. And Microsoft knows this. Microsoft knows that the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand and other subservient states will pass the laws that will make Windows the only OS that you can use for mainstream use. The rest of the world will move to something else as they know life is short and one breath of freedom is worth more than a life of living as a slave to Microsoft and the Neo-Cons.
“Normal users wont install Linux and software.
These things are done by system adminstrators…
At home you have to do these things by yourself, but not when working for a company.”
I don’t think a company with 3 or 5 computers will employ a “systems administrator”.
“if they took away my windows box I would throw a tantrum.”
When they took mine away I threw a Party 😉
It isdefinitely not as much as on Pricewatch, but still significantly more than for Linux. They also have volume licensing deals you know. In fact, I owuld say its much cheaper because you can buy one and install it on many computers. Or not buy at all. You can’t beat that.
Then wait and watch until 2005.
Most platform development in both the Linux and Windows worlds has been dedicated to abstracting away from a legacy infrastructure, the action based kernel. Linux needs to balance security and user friendly interfaces. The trend is to maintain security and offer more powerful GUI control. This is happening, and at this stage Linux has some strong desktops such as Gnome 2.2 and KDE 3.1. These desktops are still evolving, so they will acquire more functionality as time goes on. I would rather put my money toward these projects rather than fund closed implementations of platforms that I have no control over because they are not my property. In other words, I would rather buy than rent.
//Microsoft knows that the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand and other subservient states will pass the laws that will make Windows the only OS that you can use for mainstream use. The rest of the world will move to something else as they know life is short and one breath of freedom is worth more than a life of living as a slave to Microsoft and the Neo-Cons.//
How’s that tin-foil hat fitting these days? From the above comment, I think it may be a bit too tight.
Nothing like a good dose of “Paranoia, self-destroyer.”
The only real fud-free argument given is: Early movers mostly suffer the most pain. This is a fact of life. This isn’t a anti-linux statement, it is a general business advice. waiting till 2005 is waiting till others have ironed out the flaws in migration paths to desktop Linux.
If you want to talk DRM, I’ll bet Saddam Hussein would have loved to have palladium, which was basically what his government was based on. Do you think he let anybody donwload linux? Don’t blam conservatives for Linux not getting anywhere. First of all, IBM is making money off of linux. The US Military uses linux. Rush Limbaugh uses OSX (close enough, at least it’s BSD based). Anyways, This Giga Report is full of crap. The fact that they have to tell people NOT to deploy linux shows that linux is gaining respect. Don’t forget the the Military helped develop the Internet. and one last thing, why don’t you visit the families of people who died in the OCT 2001 Anthrax attacks and tell them that WMD’s are just fud.
Aye, exactly. Waiting 1~2 years isn’t that bad, anyway. Linux will be even more ready for desktop at that time. The kernel 2.6.x or 3.0.x will probably kick some major butt.
I got out of college twelve years ago. The prices I quoted where OEMs, for the most. When you say businesses don’t pay retail prices, I wonder which one you’re talking about.
Let’s take an example : how much did your company pay for Photoshop, Autocad or the software you use for tax reports ? Unless you use pirated versions, you had to order online or go to a retail shop, either way you only got the usual 10 $ rebates. By the way, the article deals with Windows based software in general.
Maybe you work for one of these big corporations or universities that get special discounts from software manufacturers. But the places I worked for didn’t have that luxury and they always paid the retail price.
It’s pretty clear this guy has never used a GNU/Linux based desktop OS.
I take Giga’s cautions as a good sign… even the most skittish are coming to recognise the inevitability of desktop Linux.
I think it’s useful to consider the settlement of the western United States as an analogy for Linux adoption. First, there were explorers, trappers, and hunters heading out into the wilderness west of the Mississippi. Next, gold is discovered in California in 1849, so all the *get rich quick* types come out of the woodwork and head west(think dot com bubble).
Right now, with projects like Ximian Desktop and OO.org, we have moving out of the pioneering period into the period of settlement. [Load up your Conestoga Wagon with a good distribution. Make sure you know what you are doing if you go it alone, or else hitch up with a wagon train. (Linux user group / *nix guru)]
Basically, what Giga is saying is that the transcontinental railroad hasn’t been built yet. But be patient, eventually it will be built, ( 2005? ) Then anyone who buys a ticket will be able to have lunch while crossing the Rockies and later get some sleep while passing through the Sierra Nevadas.
[remove caps to email me]
You can rent MS Windows until 2005, and than finally own an Open Source Linux platform. At that time Linux will be even better than it is right now, but waiting certainly means that Americans are going to loose their grip on information technology because they will not be providing input to the requirements process of software development. I think that Eastern and European contiries who get a head start will be looking at satisfying their own needs ahead of others. Open source technology has a great deal of unrealized potential. The opportunity for specialized systems and much higher quality architecture design will open up new areas of open source competition. On the other hand, you guys have been renting the Microsoft platform for a long time, so you probably think that things are going to stay the same until 2005, and by that time Linux will be a little more user friendly and have more software, however, that’s not what I think. It’s very difficult to say what will happen when groups of people, organizations, begin to investigate software architecture and quality based on open standards. Open source software will introduce many new dynamics that will drastically change information technology, really Linux is just the introduction into that path. I’d be surprised if people could identify with Linux by 2012, except in history books.
The pain that you feel when using Linux for the first time is similar to the burning that your eyes would feel upon entering the light, after standing in the dark for a very long time.
Windows XP Pro (198.98 $), Office XP Full Version (437.82 $) …
When people talk about how much it would cost to use Windows, why do the automatically throw in the price of Office XP and other high-dollar apps in there too? I mean, would you include Crossover Office into the price of every Linux install by default? If you really need these high dollar apps in Windows, you’re going to be paying for them in Linux plus the cost of Crossover (if the apps don’t run in regular Wine) as well.
But if you don’t need those apps, considering that tons of open source apps run in Windows (including Mozilla, Gimp, and OpenOffice), it’s not like all of this other crap is a manditory purchase.
In terms of system administration, virtually anyone can administer a Linux box in this day and age. Distros like Mandrake are pretty simple. My grade 11 students install both windows and linux as part of their curriculum – and actually prefer the Linux install as it requires fewer reboots and allows them to install all of their software simultaneously.
Custom applications is definitely a possible sticky point for migrating from one platform to another. This is why most custom applications should be web based thin client style apps – making them cross platform almost by default.
Any organisation considering migrating platforms should carefully consider well in advance what the computing needs of their employees is. Only after careful consideration can you decide whether or not a migration will work in your organisation. Blanket statements either way (pro or anti linux) are ludicrous.
um, does anyone else think it’s convenient that giga is recommending 2005, the year that “longhorn” is slated to be released?
Why, be afraid i know hard habits die hard but it is going to happen linux will become user friendly to the point that it will make a run for the desktop market.
This article just reminds me of people that dont want to think outside of the box and are in there old habits. I know you dont have to but still come on.
Darius>
Acting as a consultant in IT, I can ensure you that most companies I’ve seen using Windows used Ms Office as their standard base package. Why so ? because Ms consider Office as part of its development platform and integrate all of its products around it. If you are a Windows shop and want to take advantage of this platform, you’d better be a fully MSCompany (advantage being mostly easy configuration setup and interoperation, even if time often transform the initial “no problem, no expert setup” to “I just have to reboot every time I use this app”, I even saw an hospital having to wait 15mn for each lookup of a patient record, because they had been sold a “no DBA needed” database setup and that nobody did any cleanup in 7 years of operations).
The few I encountered that were using StarOffice or OpenOffice where mixed shop Unix/Windows.
Then the base price for an enterprise package to consider, is how much does it cost for a workstation with spreadsheet, word-processing, and presentation software that can work with MSOffice (an absolute requirement if you want to communicate with 90% people out there).
But the price given previously in the thread are mostly wrong because they are street prices. If you reach 20 or more desktops you can enter in rebates programs that make prices drop.
This is still not as cheap as a StarOffice suite. But GigaGroup clients are mostly companies with thousands of workstations …. not the small one person company and they really are negotiating their prices with MS (ok they will each time finally buy MS, but they could choose between Windows and Linux for other services, like web, proxy, mail or pick Oracle as database instead of MsSQL…).
By the way working freelance, I have to buy Ms products street price and that really make realize how Linux platform can be attractive for very small business that can not negotiate MS prices.
So big companies probably won’t move to Linux desktop now, but small ones may be quicker to switch having less people to retrain, lower IT budget and very few proprietary Apps.
this is the same cr*p that the analysts always say. They are like a flock of sheep.
You hear about more and more gov. agencies, bodies making that switch and you don’t hear of that many that go back to windows.
“I even saw an hospital having to wait 15mn for each lookup of a patient record, because they had been sold a ?no DBA needed? database setup and that nobody did any cleanup in 7 years of operations).”
That sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen…
I could be rich if I had a dollar for each time I have read this sentence. We all know Linux is not ready for the prime time in the desktop field, but we can tell from the headlines that more and more people are making this question. In other words, the demmand for a desktop solution based on Linux is increasing, and we may be reaching the “tipping point” where Linux will be used on more desktops.
In my opinion, the biggest problem is that there is no Linux, but dozens of Linux distributions, each of them without binary compatibility among themselves and among diferent versions (a binary compiled for RH 8 may not run on RH 9). It is not a problem when you are talking about servers, but surely is when the subject is the desktop.
I beg to differ with what has been said in this article. I have been using Linux as my desktop for a year now, and I find KDE to be just as easy to use as any other desktop. Gnome perhaps isn’t as good for a newbe, this is simply because curtain things lack from the desktop environment. Gnome apps are by far supperior, but the desktop itself sucks (IMO).
My whole family agrees, we have a mac box which recently was installed with Linux instead of OSX because my sister said she prefered the machine. My step-dad has replaced his Windows machine for the same reason. They have both played with my Linux machine, and although both find the command line dounting (sp), they both love KDE with Gnome apps… I actually tried to convince my sister against it due to liking OSX, but whatever I guess…
I haven’t seen anyone find KDE to be hard yet, so how anyone can say linux distros aren’t ready for the desktop, I challenge them to show me something difficult that can’t be done with a GUI just as easily, if not easier then on OSX or Windows.
Only reason Windows or OSX is easier, is because thats what that person is most used to. It can be difficult to find curtain things if you don’t know where to look. All in all however, there is no way KDE is more difficult to use, I personally find Windows to be brain dead however, and OSX lacks substantial features when considering customization! (have you ever seen or heard of someone even changing the theme for any MacOS? I know I haven’t.. well other then simply changing colors, but that is hardly something to celebrate)
> That sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen…
No that sounded like, big money for an afternoon of work cleaning up the settings (network and base fragmentation), and lets not say it to anybody.
But I’m totaly OT there …
That could have happened under Linux, but Windows is often sold as a “no need of tech people” OS when Linux is rejected because supposed to need more IT skills. This is obviously false for both, but in bad Windows setup (particulary when LAN+Multiple version of Win+uncorrectly setup NT Domain happen(very often)), people learn “Magic trics” to live with and think it is normal …..
One could even postulate that the biggest assle of changing platform is that people will have to learn new bugs workaround.
It seems like this giga pundit is living under a rock. I have been using Linux at work and office close to year with no issues.
i think all these world domination dreams of linux enthusiasts will never be fulfilled. The only chance that linux has to become a real mainstream product for desktops is that a vendor like IBM finally decides to invest some good money and fully support desktops with linux preinstalled. until then, forget that the windows monopoly is going to dissapear anytime soon.
For me, the importance of linux is not primarily the price. Or the technology. Windows has enough money to lower prices if that’s the problem, and they certainly have been doing much better technologically. What I would like see is simply more competition in the desktop and everywhere else, be it the desktop, the db market, hardware, or whatever. Imagine how much we would be paying for dbs if oracle was the only game in town. Or how much we would be paying for servers if SUN was the only server hardware vendor in town. Competion is good. For a whole lot of reasons, least of which is not to avoid abuse. Of all things that’s why I would that linux, and perhaps a few more open OSes, will succeed.
I haven’t seen anyone find KDE to be hard yet, so how anyone can say linux distros aren’t ready for the desktop, I challenge them to show me something difficult that can’t be done with a GUI just as easily, if not easier then on OSX or Windows
Well, KDE is good for what it does, but AFAIK, KDE does not handle networking to another Windows PC, installing hardware, enabling DMA for your disk drives, running windows apps (if you need to), installing TrueType fonts (esp. for non-KDE apps), adjusting screen resolution, etc. The ease of use when doing these things seems to depend on which distro you’re using – some distros do some things better than others, but I have yet to run into a ‘jack of all trades’ distro that makes everything come together in one coherent user interface. Libranet may fall into this category, but I haen’t tried it yet so can’t say for sure.
User friendly means
– never EVER dependencyhell (If this happens even once, it’s not ready for desktop)
– Updated regularly but not often (If you patch your system every 6 months or so, with some simpler installs it’s good, more is NOT user friendly)
– Only 1 of each software (Meaning, 1 webbrowser, 1 spreadsheet app, 1 graphics app) If there are more than 2 of any by default, system is messed up
– File management (It should be very obvious how and where to store files so that Joe Sixpack manages this without security issues)
– Less options (For some reasons Linux seems to get clogged up by options Joe doesn’t want, even Mandrake)
Conclusion… it’s not in the public interest of Linux zeals to solve these matters. However, the evolution of Linux goes pretty much the same way as Windows, except for the fact that it’s allways 2 years behind on desktop issues due to lack of innovation.
Linux wasn’t meant for desktop, will surely not be standard before 2010 and IF it would for some reason, all zeals would just move on and say, mainstream crap.
XBe pretty much nails it.
What the Linux geeks (present company included) champion about Linux are the very same things that turn off companies wishing to deploy systems.
Choice is good for the geek. Uniformity is good for the company. Unfortunately, you can’t have more choice AND less choice at the same time.
Geeks love the power that comes from less automation. Companies cringe at the potential damage (or, at very least, confusion and difficulty of use) that comes from less automation.
When I install an app, either in KDE or in GNOME, half of the time there isn’t even a shortcut/launcher/chooseyourfavoritenameforit created in the “Start menu”. When I stick a CD in, it doesn’t pop up an Autorun window. There’s no simple “My Documents” folder for each login (Thelma in accounting doesn’t understand that /home/thebigho is “her” folder).
I’m a computer science student. I use KDE. I like it. It is exactly what I want, though I would like an Apple laptop with OS X. I have worked in an office (a university department) with “regular” people. To these people, even Windows is mystifying and archaic. Anything even slightly more complex would make their heads explode. I wouldn’t dream of trying to roll out any sort of Linux desktop in that office.
The needs of the geek are very different from that of the mundane office worker. One size does not fit all.
… until those people writing the custom apps (ie ERP, MRP-II systems, stuff that runs companies, enterprise not SMB market) start actively supporting Linux/*BSD. I understand that Redhat and a few others are now offering enterprise level support, which IMHO is a good thing, but what is stopping the mass migration to other platforms is the lack of integrated company-running applications for the other platforms.
I’ve been looking at several ERP systems (in my price range), which have proven track records (in operation for 3+ years), and guess what, they run on Windows w/MSSQL, that means simply Windows on the Desktop/Server. Next I want seamless Office integration, answer Win2K Domain/Forest infrastructure, using MS Office w/Exchange (or Groupwise or Notes). How many OSS apps provide the level of functionality and reliablity that Outloook/Exchange, et al offer? very few… (Exchange, Groupwise, and esp Notes are more than just mail servers, they are all information resource sharing servers).
Always look at the primary application (the thing that will run the company), then integrate the OS/admin stuff later. It is a total waste of time, to select any OS, without considering what needs to be done on it first… That’s the message that Giga was trying to give, (but admittly did it poorly)…
Chewy509…
I think the biggest problem for having Linux on a corporate desktop is the availability of specific software.
For example, we have installed a Linux file server and PDC for a customer, who would be happy to move to Linux on the desktop, but their CAD program is not available on Linux.
This means they have to struggle with different versions of windows ranging from NT to XP or spend a lot of money upgrading to newer hardware and XP.
Anyway, deadliest problem is availability of specific applications. Installation and system maintenance can all be solved realatively easy by a trusted external company. Even remote administration is a snap using ssh.
For small businesses I would consider running NT 4.0 WS. You can buy a used license for about 20 Euro’s, so it’s dirt cheap.
On top of that, you can run most open source software, including apache, Open Office and mySQL as well as those special apps that aren’t available on Linux yet. Only problem is usb support, but for most hardware there are alternatives.
i think you can deploy linux-desktops even now, if you know exactly what you need and that it is avaible now, and if you have a consultant/admin who knows how to properly configure your network/desktops-there are already some nice nwm-tools like red carpet or rhen.
but, of course, porting of commercial software (where no mature and compatible oss-program exists) will be one of the main factors for an eventually success of linux on desktop.
on the other hand, the companies won’t do that if they see no market, means already demand and growthrate-talking about chicken and eggs.
but in this respect, the best ally of linux is microsoft (and the economy)…!
I think what we are going to see is Americans loosing their grip on the computer industry due to their lack of motivation and desire to rent, rather than invest and own.
First of all, I am really unimpressed with analysts, from Gartner on down. I always have been, especially when they announce something *mindblowingly obvious to everyone* and present it as if it came on stone tablets from up above.
However, in the United States, I really don’t see Linux taking a significant share of corporate desktops anytime soon. Frankly, I think there are several reasons why this is the case. If Linux was perfect – if it never ever crashed (which it does rarely), if it never acted quirky (another matter), if it could summon supernatural forces to do superhuman work, I doubt it would be adopted. Linux is free, and this wigs out a lot of corporate types, as does the idea that except for some of the commercial distros, there’s no one to call if it breaks *even if they never require that support*.
It’s psychological. You can complain about this of course, criticize it, but it is reality. The concept of a free operating system is just *weird* and raises immediate suspicion from a lot of people in charge of making these decisions from up above. When you get a situation where you are paying for Linux, and/or paying for support, it becomes less attractive when compared with Windows, even if it’s still cheaper. Windows may have security holes, other problems, but chances are the guy making the financial decisions runs it on his laptop, and from a personal standpoint is scared of having to learn something new (There is still a generation of higher level managers who refuse to use computers altogether, but most of them ought to be retired or turned to stone or something soon).
It may well be too late. The so-called monopoly that Windows has has been tolerated for too long. I have noticed that customers and end-users almost always *hate* change – they can be made to learn to live with it and it’s never as bad as they may indicate by their grumbling, but it’s true. I don’t know how many people I’ve heard whine even over an upgrade from Windows 98 to 2000 because a few minor things were shuffled around.
The other problem here is that Windows simply isn’t as bad as Linux advocates make it out, for the vast majority of people. It just isn’t, especially since XP came out. The flaws you notice seem to be roughly proportional to how hard you push your system or how much of a computer enthusiast you are, and most people use computers out of necessity, not because they like them. *I* notice a lot of Windows flaws and grumble constantly about their limitations. Most people I know don’t. Not because they’re not there, but because they’ve acclimated to them just like I’ve acclimated to the sad reality that CUPS just *stops working for no reason I can ascertain* every few months on my Linux desktop.
Just as these flaws and irritations inherent in Linux don’t stop me from using it, the same is true for most people of Windows. There are exceptions but as a general trend, Windows does basic tasks pretty well; well enough not to justify any kind of migration.
But as Hunter Thompson would say, **** those people. What we should be doing is making Linux as good as we can *for Linux users*. We should be building paradigms that make sense *to us* and driving Linux not toward mimicking Windows or winning over Windows users, but making *our* experience better. Some of my favorite Linux apps and projects are ones that think differently.
Mark among other things wrote : Office XP Full Version (437.82 $)
So thats exatcly $100 less than my monthly income. I saved money, installed Gentoo Linux and Openoffice and bought v5 engine (Volvo) instead
Life is beautiful with linux … not slower but surely more interesting