“I am not hearing of many wholesale swaps from Windows to Linux,” says Laura DiDio of the Yankee Group. “A company has to have a self-sufficient, experienced I.T. staff that can write custom applications, and be willing to risk not having an indemnification policy.“
Linux: Not for Everyone
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Ms. DiDio and Mr. Enderle at the same time? I’m thinking they are the same person. They say almost the same stuff.
I know a retired lady in her fifty’s that couldn’t get windows to load the drivers for her Winmodem. When an External zoom modem was sent to her, she couldn’t get windows to work with it either. What’s really funny is that Knoppix, and Mandrake work well with the extrenal modem. Windows was also complaining about her partition’s that she had setup for a previous install of Linux.
What’s the moral of the story. Windows is only around because people don’t actually have to install it. otherwise Windows and Linux are nearly equals.( One has features the other doesn’t, and vice-versa.)
Windows isn’t for me, neither is OSX, or FreeBSD or BeOS, Linux is my one. I am a joe user as well. This is a worthless news posting.
Is my car for everyone?
Is my tv for everyone?
I will not be posting anymore on this story which is empty of real content and neither should anyone else. Besides, most oif these points have already been solved. You can run legacy Win32 programs with Wine for example.
Well.. all the good win32 programs is not working in wine and programs like that….
Uh… hmm… what would be the point of having OS news on OSnews? Come on guy?!?!
Translation
“We won’t make as much cash under the table if more companies go to Linux… uh, so, uh, like Linux doesn’t work for everyone… so, uh, don’t use Linux”.
Sorry Laura. You may have to cut back on your shoe budget.
Then get vmware or cross over office. You have to pay for them but the compatibility is better.
“I am not hearing of many wholesale swaps from Windows to Linux,” DiDio said.
Which means that it’s either happening or people are really asking about it.
“A company has to have a self-sufficient, experienced I.T. staff that can write custom applications, and be willing to risk not having an indemnification policy.”
A company needs to have staff, or more likely, a support organization that can implement Windows alternative. Since a company will be paying for support anyway, this really isn’t a barrier.
Co-existence of Windows and/or Unix with Linux is popular among enterprises, she said, offering the example of a branch office that does not have the funds to buy software licenses and can get by with OpenOffice instead of the more-sophisticated, Windows-based Microsoft Office software.
Interesting. She’s talking about co-existence.
Linux is for everyone. Just not for you.
If you’re unwilling to learn about the advantages of running a free operating system with a lifetime of free updates then you don’t need it. Let me clarify, it costs $0 if you want it to. But why should I spend my time making it so simple a retard can use it when most lazy Americans don’t want to meet us half-way and learn a thing or two about these $3000 paper weights they have sitting in their offices?
Don’t want to learn? Go buy a fucking MAC!
Or Get Linspire, Xandros, or the hundreds of other joe-user freindly distros. People who say Linux is hard in 2004 is either listening to FUD, or have used a crappy distro.
I am using Fedora Core 2 and it is NOT hard. This story is 100% flamebait.
Linux is for everyone who has a brain… Computers, specially complex machines like a PC are not for everyone too.
Please stop with these anti-linux FUD !
Shocking. I would think that she would crawl under a rock after reading Groklaw.
I think this site should be renamed as BeOSNews.com because all BeOS articles are positive while there are so much anti-linux articles only for generate page views…
[i]Uh… hmm… what would be the point of having OS news on OSnews? Come on guy?!?![i]
Do you honestly call this news? If this site was called OSastroturf.com then I would understand. Even OSopinion.com will be better.
So we are lacking ‘crowd-pulling’ stories on OSnews these days, are we?
check her statements in connection with the SCO case.
You really have to wonder: “How low can you go?”
I think DiDio was passed some hooka…
I am not hearing of many wholesale swaps from Windows to Linux…
That’s because you’re not in the IT sector. You are in the red light district of “think tanks” and “expert opinions”. BTW, are you and Ken Brown dating?
A company has to have a self-sufficient, experienced I.T. staff that can write custom applications, and be willing to risk not having an indemnification policy…
Raw FUD. Sorry to say, this is exactly the same situation for the windows (not a trademarked word, thank you Michael Robertson) world: all the customizations, work arounds and (last but not least) no indemnification.
I guess I should bring something up, and I’m sure I’ll get flamed for this. How many people here are sysadmins for large organizations with many users, and a wide variance of hardware to support as opposed to people playing around with Linux at home or work on a few machines?
Now I’m not an overly experienced Linux user, but I have used it enough that the time it would take to sort out the little issues like supporting a dozen different types of network and standalone printers on most distros would be far higher than that of using Windows XP. Keep in mind, I’m not a microsoft fanboy either. But in my opinion, being too lazy to learn something and not having the time to support something are not the same. Doing a windows update is not hard, and it’s something you kick off if you’re doing it manually, and go do something else in the mean time. Hardware driver issues are generally quick to fix. When there are only so many hours in a day, I’ll the easiest solution to make the people I work for content. Companies aren’t willing to hire more people because they’re using free software. With people comes long term liability through all sorts of benefit programs and insurance issues.
I do support free software. Hell, I use FreeBSD at home on my laptop nine times out of ten compared to my XP install. But until the ease of upkeep is there, I find it hard to believe that you can upkeep a linux distro in a non standard hardware environment as proficiently as a with something like windows XP. That’s at the workstation level. Personally, I feel a mix of Netware/Linux/*BSD is a much better NOS environment compared to windows. How a server OS can have so many of the same security holes as a workstation OS when that workstation OS is as comparable to swiss cheese is beyond me.
If anyone wants to disagree, feel free. I’ll gladly listen…er, read.
Go home Didio. And let’s post articles which do make sense, instead of these… Enderle’s articles don’t make sense, Didio’s articles don’t make sense. They never did. The recent thread on “Linux” (rather KDE/GNOME) and bloat is an interesting discussion and also home-brew.
For example i haven’t seen anything on the Ken Thompson / Tanenbaum debacle. But now there’s some post on SCO revenue. The former has been totally ignored which is an interesting choice.
I’ve been in boardrooms when such issues were under discussion. When someone suggests using Linux on the desktop, they’re inevitably questioned by someone who says, justifiably, that the employees will challenge any move away from Windows. And, then, the Linux advocate says something about OpenOffice, VMWare, or any other such goodies that are supposed to make working on Linux feel just like you’re working on Windows. The discussion ends there, because the next question is this: If we’ve already paid for Windows, why should we pay to move to a new OS with some gimmicks to make it feel like Windows?
Accept for Ian’s, all the posts here sound as if they were written by teen-age adherents of the Church of Torvalds and Stallman. Those folks may think the people who run this site have an obligation to filter and edit its content until there’s nothing left but simple-minded true believer Linux propaganda, but I don’t.
As Ian implied, I really doubt that any of you have ever had anything to do with making buying decisions for a large corportation. Please consider, therefore, that you really lack any perspective on this issue.
And, of course, we have the simple lie that moving to Linux has a cost of $0. That’s demonstrably wrong on its face. Unlike Linux fanboys squatting in their dorm rooms, businesses have to pay their employees to remove Windows and install Linux. Poof, there goes your $0. Then, they need to make sure they’ve got IT people on staff who know enough about Linux to support it. Those skills don’t come about by trolling the web and reading a few man pages. Someone’s going to be spending some time in training, and their company is going to pay for it. And, if you put Linux on the desktop, you’re guaranteed to spend even more money training employees how to use it and answering the spike in support calls triggered by their unfamiliarity with it.
The issues and concerns surrounding the purchase of dozens or hundreds of OS licenses, or the migration of dozens or hundreds of machines from one OS to another, are completely different from the concerns of a single Linux user.
Its a common misconception is that Linux will do everything that windows does and for free. I love Linux, and Mac OS X, but it is impossible for me to play cutting edge games on any platform other than Windows. As far as I am concerned, this IS the consumer market for home desktops (well along with digital video, imaging, and we cant forget home finances!)
As with any switch from hardware and software platforms, there has to be a reason to switch, a major differentiator. What is the major reason to switch to Linux? Its free. Cool, can I play SWG and Farcry on it? No.
At work I use Linux and Solaris; they have the same work productivity features that exist with Windows (plus they are better systems to let me do my job) . At home, I use Windows and Linux, but right now its impossible to make a total conversion. It seems unlikely that it will ever happen.
Flame on Fanboys!
“A company has to have a self-sufficient, experienced I.T. staff that can write custom applications…”
Given that the website has ‘Enterprise’ written all over it, I’m going to assume that the the article is referring to large orginizations with a large number of people and computers.
Now – this may just be my biased view, but if that sort of orginization _doesn’t_ have that sort of IT staff, I think they should hire them, and get some who do fit that description – regardless of the platform/operating system they run.
“Accept for Ian’s, all the posts here sound as if they were written by teen-age adherents of the Church of Torvalds and Stallman.”
Coming from anyone else, this post might have some value, but since you seem to bash Linux users every chance you get despite claiming to be a Slackware user, Enloop, you don’t deserve to be taken seriously…isn’t it about time you picked another OS’s users to bash for awhile?
This indemnification argument is TOTAL nonsense. How many times (dozens, at least) have tens of thousands of different companies around the world been down because Microsoft software crashed, was hit by a worm, etc. Have any of these companies been sued because their Microsoft software was down? And if they did, did Microsoft protect them? Seriously. I have never, ever heard of this happening.
There are two mistakes that Linux advocates and critics generally make. One is expecting immediate, all or nothing switchover. The other is focusing on the desktop to the exclusion of all else.
When Linux started creeping its way into enterprises in the mid-90’s, it was for small-time web-, print- and file-serving. Now, companies like Google use it for massive, mission-critical web-serving.
Three years ago the idea of running an industrial-strength relational database system on Linux was a joke. These days it’s the fastest-growing RDBMS platform. Linux still loses out as an application server; that’s changing.
So the point is Linux didn’t become the server OS that it is overnight. That won’t happen for the desktop either. If desktop Linux happens it’ll be at a slow but relentless crawl: first the cruddy stuff like call centers and point-of-sale systems, then the glory-boy terrain of knowledge workers only afterwards.
Oh please! What the hell does she know? This is the same individual that pushed the SCO case from the beginning saying that she had seen a lot of stolen code, without knowing what the heck she actually was looking at. Again, she is just a Microsoft supporter, and that’s that!
“A company has to have a self-sufficient, experienced I.T. staff that can write custom applications, and be willing to risk not having an indemnification policy.”
Did I miss something? Who offers indemnification for Windows or MacOS users? Is this a big business I don’t know about, or does nobody care because there’s nobody like SCO attacking MS and Apple?
I’m pretty sure your average Microsoft EULA explicitly says they DO NOT indemnify users against third-party IP claims.
I guess I should bring something up, and I’m sure I’ll get flamed for this.
Not at all. They are relevant issues.
Doing a windows update is not hard, and it’s something you kick off if you’re doing it manually, and go do something else in the mean time.
Well, I sincerely hope that you don’t take Windows Update so lightly if you work in a large organization. Some actually lock off their internal networks completely from the internet and don’t update Windows at all. If you have bespoke applications and VB apps and components, like within a bank for example, the combination of these apps, DLLs and Windows updates is a definite no in support terms. Even if you do update Windows, can you imagine doing this for hundreds or thousands of desktops and testing each configuration? No. Please, don’t mention Software Update Services either, because the above still has to be done and dealt with.
Windows update is something you kick-off on the computer in your bedroom, not in an organization of any (and I mean any) size.
Updating software is like installing new software. It has to be tested and verified to work with what you have. Windows Update, under no circumstances, is something that you kick-off and do something else in the mean time if you have any knowledge whatsoever of IT and computing within any sizeable organization.
Sorry, but one or two of these comments are a rather irresponsible especially if you supposedly have large-scale sysadmin experience. What you’re describing is a nightmare.
Hardware driver issues are generally quick to fix. When there are only so many hours in a day, I’ll the easiest solution to make the people I work for content.
Not having to actually deal with those issues might be a good start
.
Companies aren’t willing to hire more people because they’re using free software.
Who says they’re going to need to hire more people? It is well known fact that you need less UNIX/Linux admins for the same number of machines. I hardly notice Linux and Netware around where I work. I certainly notice Windows, and that’s without the viruses.
I’ve been in boardrooms when such issues were under discussion. When someone suggests using Linux on the desktop, they’re inevitably questioned by someone who says, justifiably, that the employees will challenge any move away from Windows.
That’s because they generally do not communicate it well enough. Sad, but true.
Employees ‘at the coal-face’ will actually not directly confront a move away from Windows if you communicate it, and the reasons for doing it, effectively. That remark is always brought up by many people because they are afraid of any change, usually for the sake of their own jobs and to keep them looking like some sort of IT professional. You don’t say that of course, but you can gently hint at it over time.
I’ve been to interviews where they have seen ‘Linux’ mentioned a couple of times on my CV, and they have gone on the offensive with exactly that. I’ve been really startled at the fear shown, because since these interviews have always generally been for MS development/VB jobs I’ve never brought up the subject once. It is always them who take the discussion off-topic.
If we’ve already paid for Windows, why should we pay to move to a new OS with some gimmicks to make it feel like Windows?
You quietly and methodically do some hard research, and you work out what staying with Windows will cost you in terms of licensing fees, upgrade fees (you might have bought it, but what about three or four years time?), and security costs. This has to be completely specific to your organization, it has to include examples that people in the meeting know have happened and it has to include the costs that those TCO studies refuse to include. Do a side-by-side comparison of the ongoing costs of Windows against the initial costs of moving and the ongoing savings. Come up with a rough ROI. Make it professional.
It is easy to promote Linux, but this hard background research is difficult and most screw it up big time. If you do it though you can have the pleasure of watching some people get pretty uncomfortable, especially those advocating Windows servers everywhere. Start with the servers, because many have already realized that Windows servers are actually pointless unless you really need and use the distributed programming of Windows.
The desktop, I agree, is a bit of a different proposition. You’re going to have to look at every piece of software that you use on the desktop, and work out what alternatives you could use. Make sure you anticipate the questions and get some answers.
Test, do research, get your users to try things out and do research, and did I say research? Get out there and find some answers!
And, of course, we have the simple lie that moving to Linux has a cost of $0.
No one has said that it is free and no one believes that. Microsoft and ‘Windows-fanboys’ have latched on to that word in a rather hysterical way without understanding what it means.
Unlike Linux fanboys squatting in their dorm rooms, businesses have to pay their employees to remove Windows and install Linux. Poof, there goes your $0.
That’s why you do research, look at those costs and come up with some hard ROI. Unfortunately for many people that can be done, and it makes pretty damning reading. That is certainly the case on the server-side, where there really is no business case for Windows servers whatsoever.
Then, they need to make sure they’ve got IT people on staff who know enough about Linux to support it.
That’s why many support companies offer exactly that. The situation is only going to get better. You’re talking about initial costs here, not how much more it is going to cost over time. That’s what many don’t understand regarding situations like Munich. Of course it’s going to cost to move away. ROI against the alternative? Time will tell.
Someone’s going to be spending some time in training, and their company is going to pay for it.
Well, either that or a handful of people are out of a job
.
And, if you put Linux on the desktop, you’re guaranteed to spend even more money training employees how to use it and answering the spike in support calls triggered by their unfamiliarity with it.
I hear this many, many times. Do you take another driving test to drive another make of car? No. With careful planning and consideration of the issues this can be kept to a surprising minimum. No organization with any brains spends several hundred thousand sending people on training courses, and the vast majority don’t. You get given what you need and you get on with it.
David,
I guess my point was, flipping over to Linux isn’t as easy as some here are making it out to be, just by bringing up wine or open office. I agree that Linux is making progres on both desktop and server fronts, and frankly, I think that’s a good thing. I’m not going to tell you microsoft is the be all end all of operating systems, because frankly aside from its ease of use(when it works), it seems like a cardboard box held together with bubble gum and post it notes. Both operating systems, along with the BSDs, all have their advantages and disadvantages. I happen to think a plus for FreeBSD in particular is that its documentation blows everything else out of the water that I’ve encountered.
If you have bespoke applications and VB apps and components, like within a bank for example, the combination of these apps, DLLs and Windows updates is a definite no in support terms. Even if you do update Windows, can you imagine doing this for hundreds or thousands of desktops and testing each configuration?
No, I couldn’t imagine having to do that. I’m sort of in a different situation though, since we don’t often have users needing to connect to network services outside of our schools(I work for a school district with about 800 workstations). I did over simplify the windows update, but from what I’ve seen, it normally installs and causes no issues. Most of our critical applications are rarely effected by windows updates, partically because they are delivered from our Novell servers, or Unix. Our servers on the “dirty” side of the network with public IPs are Netware boxes, and two windows boxes offering web services. We rarely have issues with viruses. The msblast problem is the only wide spread issue we’ve had in four years.
Who says they’re going to need to hire more people? It is well known fact that you need less UNIX/Linux admins for the same number of machines. I hardly notice Linux and Netware around where I work. I certainly notice Windows, and that’s without the viruses.
Would you happen to have a documented source for this? It’s not that I don’t believe you or are trying to prove you wrong, I’d be very interested to read the details.
In any event, I guess TOC really comes down to specific situations. Throwing a blanket statement such as windows is less expensive or linux is less expensive is just plain wrong, not matter which way you lean. I think that article is just as wrong as people who think linux is the answer to all. Personally, my previous post is based on my work experience(I’m still only 24, and have 5 years of experience getting paid for IT support, so my experience is limited), so it is biased. But I think you have to be biased on your situation. For us, Linux at its current state is sort of a square peg into a round hole type of deal.
The future for it however is looking bright. I can’t wait to see what Novell does with SuSE and combining it into Netware. I still think Novell is an great print and file server, not to mention its user services are now just getting caught up to by competition since it released NDS in the 90s.
Uh, make that TCO. I need to proof read these posts a bit more.
Most large companies require costum software. You can’t run a fortune 500 company on Microsoft products, unless you want major headaches. Imagine if they could get their tools for free instead of paying the Microsoft tax. Now if only we can communicate this to the CxO’s by pointing to the cost savings and the fact that their favorite DB is now developed on Linux and that there are no viruses for Linux. A million bucks saved is a million bucks. CxO’s like it when you speak to them in their favorite language, $$$.
Don’t want to learn? Go buy a fucking MAC!
Funny, you know, that’s exactly what I did. But unfortunatly for you, it has nothing to do with wanting to learn. It turns out that I probably know more about computers and operating systems than most people here (with a few notable exceptions of course). I know how to use Linux. But I dont’ WANT to use Linux.
Why? Because computers are tools, and they should do what I want without me having to jump through hoops. It has nothing to do with meeting poeple half way, but rather with produceing a good system that is efficient to use. 99% of people DON’T want to learn how to configure their computer, they just want it to work. And that’s the way it should be.
Finally, between Linux and the other free operating systems such as the BSDs, I’d use the BSDs instead of Linux. Why? Because of people like you. I want in no way to be associated with such arrogance. When someone is called a ‘Linux guy’ my first thought is that they are an arrogant *beep* *beep* *beep*. Forntuantly, that thought it often wrong. It may be a few bad apples in the Linux camp who give the community a bad name, but it doesn’t help that the reasonable Linux users don’t step in and speak up.
David, you present cogent arguments. Frankly, as someone who has used Linux since 1995, I agree with you. But, remember, for every person who presents a case for Linux, someone else can present a case for Microoft.
In my experience, the advantages of Linux — especially Linux on the desktop — are not nearly compelling enough to convince management and staff to jump into what they see as the vast unknown. Staff doesn’t care what goes on in the server room so long as everything works; management’s attitude is much the same, which is why, I think, the “Linux is cheaper” argument works there much more readily than it does on the desktop.
The organizations I am most familar with contracted out the entirety of their IT support, using a very few in-house managers to oversee the “program”. This may or may not be smart (it is usually advocated as a cost-savings measure), but it does mean that the people who do the MS vs Linux studies will be employees of that contractor. This will influence their determinations.
In addition, managers usually see IT as a necessary evil. They resent spending money on it, and tend to see every new IT purchase program as they very last they’ll ever need. That’s nonsense, of course, but the “do it yourself” glow surrounding Linux can scare managers who translate it to “I’m gonna hafta pay to keep a bunch of developers on staff to write bespoke code anytime we need to tweak this thing; meanwhile, this other guy is telling me that they’ve
got stuff on the shelf that they can just plug in…”
And, any appearance of an ideological commitment to Linux is usually the kiss of death.
Linux is the underdog in a game where the frontrunner has written all the rules and established the expectations of users and customers. If Linux is to make serious inroads on the desktops of corporations and similar organizations, it needs to offer something people want that Microsoft doesn’t, and it must be compelling better at everything. Today, it isn’t compelling better, and everything it offers for the desktop is available from Microsoft.
I’d use the BSDs instead of Linux. Why? Because of people like you. I want in no way to be associated with such arrogance.
Read these forums. Windows advocates are as arrogant, if not more, than Linux advocaates.
When someone is called a ‘Linux guy’ my first thought is that they are an arrogant *beep* *beep* *beep*. Forntuantly, that thought it often wrong. It may be a few bad apples in the Linux camp who give the community a bad name, but it doesn’t help that the reasonable Linux users don’t step in and speak up.
Do Windows users step in and speak up when Windows advocates are arrogant pricks? No, they don’t.
Seriously, look at the comments over the past two days. Arrogant Windows advocates outnumber their Linux counterparts by at least 2 to 1.
It always amazes me when people put so much effort into defending a multi-billion monopoly. Unless they’re astroturfers (and I believe a good portion of them are).
The truth is, every time I speak to regular Windows users (not people who attack Linux in Internet forums), they always have something to complain about their systems. Always. I never get that from Linux users. Go figure.
That is the dumbest argument for anything I’ve heard/read all week:
“Finally, between Linux and the other free operating systems such as the BSDs, I’d use the BSDs instead of Linux. Why? Because of people like you. I want in no way to be associated with such arrogance. When someone is called a ‘Linux guy’ my first thought is that they are an arrogant *beep* *beep* *beep*.”
And to “hmmmm” don’t be a troll, plz. You succesed in making linux-users look like jerks, thanks, I really needed that. Just for the record I’m a linux-user, and I don’t think I’m a jerk.
” Linux running SQL or Oracle might be sufficient.”
She lost credibility when she said Oracle might be sufficient. MySQL *might* be sufficient, Oracle better be.
Itook that to mean Oracle on Linux might be sufficient to sell Linux, not whether or not Oracle itself is “sufficient”.
for all the Microsoft-based malware going around the Internet? As a volunteer working with a community-based Neighbourhood Net with Windows, I think I would like some reimbursement for all the hassle Microsoft causes.
It’s hardly likely. So how come it’s Linux that has to foot the bill?
Somebody belt Didio with a cluebat A.S.A.P.
I appreciate and agree with your point, but you really shouldn’t suggest physical violence against Didio. That’s enough for Rob Enderle to write an article about the violent nature of Linux fanatics.
Booga!
“but you really shouldn’t suggest physical violence against Didio.”
doh! A cluebat – something that opens the mind. Perhaps that would cause serious physical harm to Laura Didio – I don’t know.
But the fact is that us Microsoft Windows users don’t get indemnity, no matter what Her Cluelessness Ms Laura Didio might think.
doh! A cluebat
Sorry, english isn’t my native tongue and I didn’t get it the first time.
But you’re right, I think it might actually hurt her. Her neurons might not be used to that much work.
But the fact is that us Microsoft Windows users don’t get indemnity, no matter what Her Cluelessness Ms Laura Didio might think.
I totally agree with your point. Disinformation at its best.
“Linux is the underdog in a game where the frontrunner has written all the rules and established the expectations of users and customers. If Linux is to make serious inroads on the desktops of corporations and similar organizations, it needs to offer something people want that Microsoft doesn’t, and it must be compelling better at everything.”
Well it already is, but like you said. Microsoft wrote the rules, so I guess Linux should crash, cary hords of viruses and spyware and be difficult to use. Then its the ‘perfect’ desktop OS, since it would just like windows 😀
I thank both Linux and Windows have their uses. I use both all the time and have no problems. By the way, according to Osviews Eugenia Loli-Queru was the second highest opinionated behind Enderle. I never looked at Eugenia as being bias, just giving us the facts.
One reason that desktop Linux doesn’t do better, IMHO, is that it’s sold the wrong way: as a drop-in replacement for standalone single-user Windows machines.
But Linux is a multiuser system at its core. Its power only becomes apparent, and its shortcomings become far less cumbersome, when it is used as such. This is why, in my personal experience, nearly all successful desktop Linux deployments that I’ve seen have been thin client installations.
In one firm I consulted at the “clients” were Win98 machines running XFree. When users needed Office they just switched out of the X server where they did their “real work” and used Excel or whatever.
ROFL!!! If you don’t think Eugenia is opinionated, you obviously have never disagreed with one of her pronouncements.
By the way, according to Osviews Eugenia Loli-Queru was the second highest opinionated behind Enderle.
It was “biased”:
http://www.osviews.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=NS-Polls&file=in…
(Ahead of Ms. diDio, as it happens)
[If you delete this, you also have to delete Brian’s post.]
I agree. I’ve done some tests with thin-client software and it’s pretty impressive. On a fast LAN (100Mbit) you can use an older computer as a thin clien connected to a faster one and you get amazing performance.
Of course not!!! If you enjoy working around virus’ and trojans then Windows is the ultimate OS. As an IT professional I attest that all these Windows worms are keeping my skills in high demand. Job security!!! Keep it up Microsoft…you rock!!! …meanwhile I quietly run Linux on my home network…safe and secure.
the rabid linux devotees get their panties in a bundle when people even mention that they’re dual-booters or use the right tool for the job. To them, they can’t fathom why anyone would even use windows no matter how many advantages that windows has over linux.
Maybe there should be a support group for those people when they decide to grow up and realize that Bill Gates isn’t a baby killer. Until then, have fun frothing at the mouth fanboys.
We KNOW what Laura Idiot – excuse me, DiDio – thinks. We’ve heard it all before.
It was bullshit then. It’s bullshit now.
Don’t waste our time with this kind of partisan crap.
I’ll say it AGAIN. S-L-O-W-L-Y….
Windows is CRAP. Linux is ALSO CRAP. But Linux is FREE (as in “beer” and as in “freedom”) crap.
What part of “free” don’t these morons like DiDio, Enderle and the former-IBM-mainframe-CIOs who listen to them get?
Oh, they get it all right – they just don’t believe “free” is good. They should all be working for Enron – and they’d probably be making the tapes being reported about lately about how the Enron traders were trying to DESTROY CALIFORNIA in order to make a buck. These – and the morons at SCO – are the idiots running corporations in this country (and presumably everywhere else in the world).
Mod this troll. Mod this flamebait. Oh, wait, this isn’t /. …
Is that all you got, huh? Are you nuts? Come at me!
I have to completely disagree with everything you said.
For a start, I have had years of experience both as a consultant and a direct IT h.o.d. for very large corporations. I dount however that you have…
In board meetings, the company directors ALWAYS trust the judgement of the IT head of dept or the consultant. They NEVER argue against anf of their IT purchasing decisions.
Companies do not PAY employees to remove windows and install linux. Windows is removed in the INSTALL process for linux, and one copy of linux can be used on every single pc in the building. So that can in all reality be ONE single purchase of linux, be it an enterprise version, or one from a magazine disk.
Companies need IT staff who know how to admin a linux system ?? fair enough, they do.. however, if you do have the job you say you do.. go and ask your IT staff how many of them run linux at home ???
In almost all major corporations, IT staff will be made up of people who ENJOY fiddling with pcs, os, apps etc, they are a mixed lot, and as such will have a mixed lot of os’s on their personal pcs (hmm “personal personal computers”)…
The only exception to this, will be companies whose hr dept recruit staff if they have an mcse to run a unix based mainframe serving 1800 workstaions.. The IT personel will not be amongst the best, but that it not their fault..
Another misconception is that end users will complain…. In my experience, end users hardly ever notice any difference. Stick on a couple of destop icons, call them word, excel, etc change the desktop them to one with a crappy background and a small menu, and the desktop will look the same
SO I conclude this… either you are a schoolboy who typed this before his bus came, OR you work in an IT dept but have not got buying power, and also not got the balls to tell the directors what they need.
Please correct me with PROOF if this is not the case
sorry, I judged you wrong from the first post…. I read your second post and now believe you do know what your are talking about.
however, I will stick by what I said in my earlier post.. you need to TELL your directors to support your judgements,, thats why they employ you in the first place.
Once again, I apologise for giving you hassle
Large scale rollouts? would the SUSE deal with McDonalds count?
naw, mcdonalds is just a run of the mill mawpaw bussiness in the great midwest, hardly a bussiness to talk about at all
Any other obvious msft shills to quote?
Appreciate the apology. My experience obviously differs from you. My directors did not automatically trust everything said by their IT chief, and certainly did not let IT purchasing decisions go unchallenged. (An IT chief’s demand to be “trusted” would have been seen as irrelevant, if not insubordinate.) It was their money, and they each had pet projects they wanted to spend it on. Every director got the same treatment when they wanted to spend large chunks of money. It was a competitve environment and no one was given a blank check. (In this case, our organizational structure meant that the IT chief was not selected by our board, but by the director of our larger parent firm. Our board did not pay the IT chief and he lived an uncomfortable existence serving two masters. Each staff IT employee was in the same situation.)
My point about paying people to remove Windows was simply meant to illustrate the error of claiming that transitioning to Linux is free. In fact, you do save in licensing fees, but those are often a small component of the total cost of a large IT project. No one on your IT staff is going to forego his salary or benefits because the boss switched everyone to Linux.
The users I worked with must be more assertive, or grumpier, than yours. They complained, vociferously, at any change to their desktop. (We locked down their applications set, but enabled a lot of user desktop customization. We pulled a replacement IM client from several hundred desktops after user complaints. We also killed a rather expensive suite of Oracle-backed document manager and desktop publishing tools because users hated them, did not use them and got their work done via “unofficial” workarounds. We actually had cases where unhappy users from all departments met and sent delegations to meet with the IT chief. These folks would, without question, protest loudly if they came in one morning to find Linux on their desktop.
the rabid linux devotees get their panties in a bundle when people even mention that they’re dual-booters or use the right tool for the job.
Really. I must have missed that.
You know what’s funnier? Rabid anti-Linux advocates so desperate for a new angle to attack Linux and defend a multi-billion dollar monopoly that they examine every facet of Linux users’ behaviors, looking for something to exploit in their next FUD post.
Seriously, there must be a new Windows vulnerability out there, because the anti-Linux trolls have been particularly arrogant over the past few days. You talk about frothing at the mouth? If you weren’t so blinded by your bias, you’d see that most of the frothing is on your side – you know, the one that freely spends time defending that, really, doesn’t need your help.
You know, I really hope you’re getting paid for this, otherwise I can’t figure out what you gain from spreading this much FUD…
Read the Red Hat mailing lists, they certainly don’t care about the dual booting bug with Fedora Core 2..scroll down a bit & you get all sorts of useless comments. THat is an attitude I don’t want any part of.
How can anyone really take this woman serious? Even if I was hardcore windows and hated Linux, I couldnt buy her garbage. The only true thing in there is that you do have to have an experienced Linux admin. Perhaps its just me, but doesnt that hold true for any OS? Linux doesn’t need indemnification, nor do you have to custom write any program you want to run on it. What a joke. Listen genious, are you saying Windows programs just ARE and that nobody has to write them either? Somebody slap this moron and remind her that the entire internet is largely Linux.
Accept for Ian’s, all the posts here sound as if they were written by teen-age adherents of the Church of Torvalds and Stallman.
Your bad grammar indicates to me that you are more likely a “teen-age adherent” of the Church or Gates than someone who has ever been in a boardroom.
P.S. The word is “except”.
1. I believe the dualboot bug is a 2.6 kernel problem, not just as Fedora problem. Fedora gets beat up about it, especially here by posters who most likely never installed it.
2. Teknishn: Loosen your panties, OK? If a corporation uses commercial Windows software, of course they’ll ask if the same software is available for Linux. Almost certainly, it isn’t. So, they can pay to have it written for Linux, or hey can try and find some open source software that does the same thing. The first alternative is out of the question: too expensive and too long to wait. The second entails wasting time, production and money teaching people how to use the Linux software. (Even if you don’t send employees to formal training, every minute they stare at their Linux programs trying to figure out what to do is a minute you are paying them to do nothing productive.)
I’m not bashing Linux I’ve used it for years. It ought to be considered when new organizations make their first IT rollout. But, for an organization that has already invested in Windows and Windows-based workflow, the notion of migrating to Linux is much more questionable. The financial benefits of migrating to Linux are often marginal and do not balance the losses entailed in making the switch.
This situation will not change until Linux offers desktop software that meets needs Microsoft doesn’t meet. That’s not the case today. The best Linux can do is offer desktop software that mimics Windows. When Linux offers compelling desktop applications that are more innovative and more productive than Linux, things will change.
Read these forums. Windows advocates are as arrogant, if not more, than Linux advocaates
This is true. But with Windows advocates I don’t usually see arrogance as much as misinformation. On these forums as least. These forums seem to be very very very heavily slanted towards Linux users.
Do Windows users step in and speak up when Windows advocates are arrogant pricks? No, they don’t.
Well, I dont’ see all that many Windows ‘advocates’ really. I do see a lot of people who defend windows though. If these people ever say something incorrect or stupid, I will usually correct them. I’ve seen seriously stupid windows advocates on other forums, but generally not here.
The truth is, every time I speak to regular Windows users (not people who attack Linux in Internet forums), they always have something to complain about their systems. Always. I never get that from Linux users. Go figure.
This is true, but I wonder if it doesn’t have more to do with the fact that Linux users tend to be far more devoted to their OS and overlook annoyances easily. Windows users often just want their computer to work. Most Linux users I know have a far deeper devotion to their OS than just as a tool.
@M_abs
Thank you for stepping in and demonstrating that the Linux community has many level headed folks as well.
…computers are tools, and they should do what I want without me having to jump through hoops. It has nothing to do with meeting poeple half way, but rather with produceing a good system that is efficient to use. 99% of people DON’T want to learn how to configure their computer, they just want it to work. And that’s the way it should be.
The problem with this line of thinking is that you are always going to have to configure something if you want a system that is efficient to use. Sure, you can use Windows or OSX right out of the box without configuring anything (you can even do this with some linux distros), but it’s not going to be efficient. There is no way that standard, default settings are going to be the most efficient settings for 99% of people. They may be usable but they won’t be efficient. An OS shouldn’t assume everything, despite people’s ignorance.
Finally, between Linux and the other free operating systems such as the BSDs, I’d use the BSDs instead of Linux. Why? Because of people like you. I want in no way to be associated with such arrogance. When someone is called a ‘Linux guy’ my first thought is that they are an arrogant *beep* *beep* *beep*.
That’s your own fault for stereotyping people. It seems like you are basing your opinion’s on comments posted to OSNews, which is not a cross-section of the linux community. Any commented news site is going to have trolls and bitter argument over the subject matter.
Read the Red Hat mailing lists, they certainly don’t care about the dual booting bug with Fedora Core 2..scroll down a bit & you get all sorts of useless comments. THat is an attitude I don’t want any part of.
Read the Gentoo forums. It’s such a helpful place that users of other distro’s find a lot of their answers there.
In my experience, the advantages of Linux — especially Linux on the desktop — are not nearly compelling enough to convince management and staff to jump into what they see as the vast unknown.
I agree there. The desktop is very difficult because people aren’t happy with Windows, but they don’t want the upheaval of something else. Quite frankly, they don’t like Windows and don’t like computers in general, and they can’t be bothered with people ripping them off for more. The good arguments are there for Linux, but they need to be presented carefully. That is going to take a few years.
In addition, managers usually see IT as a necessary evil. They resent spending money on it, and tend to see every new IT purchase program as they very last they’ll ever need.
That’s very true. People generally just can’t be bothered.
If Linux is to make serious inroads on the desktops of corporations and similar organizations, it needs to offer something people want that Microsoft doesn’t, and it must be compelling better at everything.
I’m not even sure that that is going to be enough. I think Microsoft is going to have to start cheesing a lot of people of over the next few years, which might actually happen.
“Does OSnews have to list this story?! What could be the motivation for having this Story on OSnews?”
Whats wrong? Is it because it is something that doesnt think Linux is the greatest? I bet an anti MS article would be ok to have on here, right? Face it, not everyone wants to use Linux. Is that so hard for many people to understand?
I dont’ see all that many Windows ‘advocates’ really. I do see a lot of people who defend windows though.
Defending Windows == Windows Advocacy
I think the reason we may not have the same opinion on the number of Linux/Windows advocates may have to do with our respective biases.
However, I will conced that Linux users are usually more devoted towards their OS than Windows users. There’s a pretty good reason for that: Microsoft is a monopoly, while Linux is a community. People are usually less enthusiastic when cheering for the Evil Empire rather than the Underdog (unless they’re on the Empire’s payroll, that is…)
Whats wrong? Is it because it is something that doesnt think Linux is the greatest? I bet an anti MS article would be ok to have on here, right? Face it, not everyone wants to use Linux. Is that so hard for many people to understand?
No, I think it’s because it’s a poorly-researched article by a well-known anti-Linux shill. Remember, this is the “journalist” who has kept saying that SCO had a case.
She is basically a mouthpiece for powerful private interests. This is why people don’t give her much credibility anymore.
What the hell is this “Yankee Group” anyway?
>>[/i]”…they don’t like Windows and don’t like computers in general…”[/i]
That is a fundamental truism of great importance. Unlike those of us who read this website, using computers at work is sheer drudgery. There’s no doubt that computers have changed how we do work, but most people I know don’t necessarily like the changes. They feel changed to their desks; they feel equally chained to their email, considering most of it a complete waste of time; and they hold the IT shop in contempt because their only contact with it is the tech support staff, invariably derided as people who never fix anything.
Their issues have nothing to do with software or the technical merits of two different operating systems. The passion, commitment and ideological fervor of most of the other posters in this topic would be lost on them. What, they would ask, does any of that have to do with making my job better? A computer is a tool, just like, say, a van, and all this emotional fervor about an OS makes no more sense to them than people going off on a similar binge aboud Ford versus Toyota.
I’ve used Linux for years. I think it is a technicall superior OS. I think open source has made vital contributions to our lives. But none of that has anything to do with whether or not a corporation is going to start pushing out Linux to the desktops of their employees. Sadly, most posters around here don’t have a clue about that.
I use Linux everyday. Still playing along on RH9 at home right now.
Is linux for everyone? Of course not, Linux commercial distributors are missing the damn point. You hit the niche and then expand slowly and hard. You got a lot of the hard core geek types. Its time to hit the corporate desktop.
How? Am I suggesting that Mary the the Administrative Assistant needs linux? Hell no.
What I am saying is that if you are a Network Administrator, System Administrator, Systems Engineer, Build/Configuration Manager or a Unix programmer who spends over 60% of their day stuck in a Exceed session, Secure CRT session, or ends up having a Sun workstation in their cube then linux is for you. How the heck do I know? I used linux for three years as my workstation and right now I use Solaris workstation for my main workstation. (Yeah, I got a laptop and its really good at running Outlook at that is about it.)
Does that mean that Mr. Project Manager should run linux? Nope there is no overwhelming need to switch platforms especially since no project management software can deal with his MS Project files or Visio stuff yet. No need. But as a Systems Administrator I am more comfortable with and use to a Unix environment and I am more productive in that environment.
It does not mean that it will be a better fit for you or your grandmother.
But that is part of my point. I started using linux to learn the unix way of doing things and because I did not like Windows. Notice that bit. I do not hate Microsoft. I just never liked Windows that much or the Windows way of doing things. Is linux always better? No, everyone has to tow the line on the Microsoft market or crap on 90% of their profits so… of course there are advantages but I still prefer linux and your mileage may vary.
Listen the funny thing is that I found the Redhat and SuSE lists full of really nice people that have helped me out.
I have found my share of arrogance on the chat groups and usenet but hearing people bust on the lists and their response to the dual boot Fedora problem is a bit troubling. Listen I read the posts where someone busted on the 100+ newbie that came on the list and asked about it but then that rude person was immediately berated for his bad attitude.
There is no perfect operating system and getting into a pissing match on some osnews board is just silly.
Listen this is a poorly researched article and there are poorly researched MS articles or Windows articles as well.
Sometimes the articles spew FUD about linux and sometimes they perpetuate nonsense falsehoods about Windows and sometimes they talk about Mac OS X and ….
Linux is not for everyone? No joke.
Linux is not for everyone especiall those who don’t want to adapt.
“Microsoft is a monopoly, while Linux is a community”
A community that wants to become the next monopoly.
“People are usually less enthusiastic when cheering for the Evil Empire rather than the Underdog (unless they’re on the Empire’s payroll, that is…)”
Strange- I see many people cheering for IBM and Oracle in their jihad to bring Linux to the server room, destroy commercial UNIX in the process and punish Underdog Windows Server.
Strange, you must be on IBM payroll, that’s it. With so many billions IBM and Oracle poured into server Linux it is nice to have multibillion FUD machine behind your back, right? Enjoy it while it lasts.
Be a part of a movement sponsored by a monopolist who only got off the government hook because it had enough money and lawyers.
In Europe, they draw cartoons with IBM and Microsoft painted as buddies. Why? Because they are not that different.
So, you took IBM’s side- good for you. Just don’t fool yourself with all that “freedom” stuff. IBM, Oracle, Sun, AOL are there for money. For profits. Not for some free-for-all crappola.
Make sure you help them make money, or they’ll abandon you in the dust.
Generalisations from RG
“A community that wants to become the next monopoly”
Blah.
“Strange- I see many people cheering for IBM and Oracle in their jihad to bring Linux to the server room, destroy commercial UNIX in the process and punish Underdog Windows Server.”
Blah-ahaha.
“Strange, you must be on IBM payroll, that’s it. With so many billions IBM and Oracle poured into server Linux it is nice to have multibillion FUD machine behind your back, right? Enjoy it while it lasts.”
IBM was a monopoly. It appears to me they’ve changed their manners (widely accepted premise) and it appears Microsoft took over their manners (again a widely accepted premise).
Microsoft and IBM are the same – bloody greedy capitalist sharks
Well, do you think that IBM is some kind of altruistic company, trying to bring freedom to the masses? Nope, they’re trying to give you free linux and then sell teir consulting, their “Websfear”-websphere, their DB2 and so on.
Think about it.
The good thing about windows is you can write a quick app using VB.
The bad thing about windows is it lacks the features of Linux. If you want to make that app you wrote in VB backup to cd automatically everyday and the user just has to change the cd then your screwed. In linux that would be simple but it would not be easy to write the app because there is no VB.
This is a problem for both.
And, if you put Linux on the desktop, you’re guaranteed to spend even more money training employees how to use it and answering the spike in support calls triggered by their unfamiliarity with it.
Not likely. Most computer users use the icons on their desktops or start menu to get to the applications they use at work. if the IT department does a little pre-planning, they can setup the distro to put the required icons on the desktop for each employees machine. Say 20 employees in a group all use pretty much the same icons and apps, then setup one distro and clone with Ghost to each machine (assuming machines are all the same or similiar as Corp structures buy in bulk).
My bank (Bank of America in Tampa FL.) uses Linux for their desktop and servers. The guy I talked to RAVES about how much faster it is compared to windows (same machine, different OS). He said it is so nice to be able to take care of customers RIGHT AWAY rather than having to wait 5 min for the stuff to process.
On another note, I talked to the IT guy at my work about some stuff related to network security. He mentioned he would have to buy a packet sniffer for thousands of dollars. When I told him you could download and burn Trinix (sp?) or install linux on your desktop, you could have Ethereal for free. Why pay thousands of dollars for some simplified version of a packet sniffer when you can learn to use Ethereal? If you are even more inclined, you can tool around and modify the code to your own liking.
~me
says/thinks everybody in the world living out of USA.