Linux

The Linux consultant: The Maytag repairman of the IT world

The Linux IT consultant is the Maytag Repairman in the IT world. Jack Wallen reminds us why there is more money to be made as a Windows IT consultant.

I was enjoying football Sunday with a few fellow IT friends over the weekend. Naturally, between plays, the topics tended to veer towards that of IT. I was the lone Linux guy in the crowd, so my opinion was not the norm (I'm used to that, of course). During the course of the day I pieced a few bits of conversation together and was able to finally draw a conclusion to that age old question, "Why don't more consultants roll out Linux?" The answer should have been obvious to me all along as I long had all of the information I needed. But after hearing what I heard from the collective mouths of an IT group with years of experience and a metro city's worth of clients, it became all too clear why Windows is always rolled out.

$$$$$$$$$

Now understand the people I was with were all self-employed consultants who depend upon their client's needed support for income. Needed support. That's the key. My freelance clients...they rarely need me. Oh sure I secure shell in to some of the boxes now and then to check security logs and update. But other than that - those machines just run and run. Of all my IT consultant friends, I am the Maytag repair man. If you don't get the reference, I will explain.

Years ago, the Maytag company had a wonderful advertising campaign (that was mostly successful due to the casting of a rather charming Gordon Jump of TVs WKRP in Cincinnati) that illustrated how dependable the Maytag washers and dryers were. The old repairman grew bored and lonely because those machines never needed his assistance. His lack of work helped define the reliability of a line of machines.

And so it goes for the Linux consultant. You land a client, you work with them to meet their needs, and then you part ways only to once in a great while hear from them (and that is usually to add a service or resolve an issue that has come about due to a third-party source). To that end, there is little money to be made from Linux clients.

Windows clients? Bread and butter. Why? Because when Windows machines are rolled out, they need constant care and attention. Maybe not daily or even weekly, in most instances, but they need your help. And without Superman there to solve the problems that Windows (or end users) have caused, those machines would simply cease to work.

I realize there are so many out there that would scoff at what they have just read. But it's the industry's dirty little secret. One of the reasons consultants stay so busy is because the Windows operating system is so prone to need help. Linux? Not so much.

If I weren't concerned for security or updates I could set up a LAMP server or even a Linux desktop for a client and walk away knowing I may not hear from them again. What is that sound? It's a satisfied customer for sure. But it's not the sound of my bank account filling to the rim.

But then - shouldn't that really be what the job is all about? Satisfied customers? One of the benefits of rolling out Linux installations is you know your client is going to recommend you to other people (that assumes you succeed in your job in the first place). When you have a client that sees you once and might not ever need see you again (unless they want updates or more installations) you can be sure that clients' satisfaction is going to infect others. Word of mouth is a very powerful marketing tool, one which the Linux consultant needs to make up for the reliability of the operating system.

Now, I may very well catch a lot of flack for this entry. A lot of people bank on clients not knowing there is a more reliable solution that will, in the long run, cost them much less money. You see, as one of my dear friends will happily say, the real world is not Fortune 500 clients. There are, after all, only 500 of those. The real world is Mom and Pop shops and small businesses, sans IT departments, who depend upon consultants to keep their workflow flowing. Those Mom and Pop shops could greatly benefit from the uptime of a Linux desktop and/or server combination.

I have, over the years, considered starting a Linux-only IT consulting firm. The problem is, like open source software, how do you make money? You roll out a system and that's that until that client needs an upgrade or something disastrous happens.

A lot of IT pros want to argue that the reason Linux isn't rolled out is because it's not ready. It is. Anyone that has used a modern Linux distribution knows it is. If you don't think Linux is ready for the desktop or the business market, you've been hiding in a cave for about five years. No. The real truth is there is little money to be made as a Linux consultant because it's as close to "set it and forget it" as you can get.

And now, I don my flame-retardant mithral suit so to survive the onslaught.

About

Jack Wallen is an award-winning writer for TechRepublic and Linux.com. He’s an avid promoter of open source and the voice of The Android Expert. For more news about Jack Wallen, visit his website getjackd.net.

97 comments
steve
steve

Mmmmm One Linux Box (which replaced a Novell Box) running everything in the Computer room gets replaced by an Exchange Server AND a File Server AND a Web Server AND a Print Server AND a Database Server AND a .... (each running its own buggier & less secure OS) I can't imagine why M$ takes more care and feeding.

keithbottomley
keithbottomley

There is some truth in what he says in that Linux distros are much improved and ready for the business market. However, as windows owns over 90% of the market it is obvious that over 90% of viruses and hackers are going to attack that platform. Another problem faced by Linux is 'Familiarity', users and support staff are not familiar with the o/s let alone trained in it. How can you sell/support a product that firstly your customers cringe at, and then your customers IT Staff no nothing about! Chicken and egg situation.

jfreedle2
jfreedle2

Linux is one of the worse operating environments that I have ever had to work with. Do one update and the system will never boot again. Install Linux and the system never gets used. Linux is on the way out, thank God.

smatteson
smatteson

My company has about 50 Linux servers and 25 Windows servers. Probably 50 Linux desktops and 75 Windows machines. And yet four people are needed to manage the Linux side of things whereas only one guy is required to handle the Windows server administration. The Linux servers and apps they run frequently need maintenance. Reboots are constant. Crashes DO occur, contrary to the mythology. The Linux workstations have regular problems with screensaver lockups, "lost mouse pointer" problems, remote access issues, kernel panics, and a plethora of other troubles. There have been users who were migrated from Windows to Linux and then asked to be migrated back. And these were not scared-Grandma types but actual software developers and database administrators. One person in particular clearly stated "I need to do my job, and it has to be on a system that I can count on." He was talking about XP, not Red Hat. I'm not saying the Windows servers/workstations don't have issues - like all computers/operating systems, of course they do. But four times as many people at my company are needed to deal with the Linux environment, and that says something. It's often come up in discussions that, sure, some apps and flavors of Linux are free (the server OSs are purchased with support from Red Hat at my place of business) but the amount of labor needed to maintain these systems offsets any savings on software. Simply put, it is a myth to pretend you can set up ANY type of system and it will never need to be touched again. It's a myth to pretend one type of OS is absolutely perfect and completely trustworthy, and another is full of bugs, crashes endlessly and is used only by idiots. Lastly, I think it's somewhat childish and insecure how some Linux advocates get so shrill about Windows and what they claim it can't do. The OS is a tool; if you want to use it, fine. If you want or need another tool, that's fine as well. But it's ridiculous to run around proudly saying "A wrench is the BEST! Hammers can't do anything; wrenches do it ALL! Boy, hammers are so stupid..." I'll pick the tool I need depending on whether I need to turn a nut or drive a nail.

emmaylots
emmaylots

YOU ARE SO RIGHT! Linux runs and runs and runs. I am a Sysadmin on Windows, Linux, Solaris and Stratus VOS. I treat Windows as my baby, I make sure I get the latest security updates and stuff. I hardly bother about the other three OSs why? They just keep running!

count_zero_interuptus
count_zero_interuptus

Linux is Unix Unix is 1980s Linux lost Get past it. Move on to Apple OS-X. Wait, that's Unix, too.

pete.irvine
pete.irvine

I have converted 12 windows servers to fedora 10/11 and spend my days looking at the net. Automated backup, a few cleanup scripts, copy of Zabbix running. I am the maytag repairman you talked about.

gometrics
gometrics

What a meaningless article. The only comparable I really have are windows servers which don't need maintenance very often either. The only real money is when the client wants to do new stuff or replacing hardware (configuration and install). I don't care what kind of box your run, disk space has to be managed if you have a fast growing client (even the magical linux box runs out of space) who are adding new application services/locations. The desktops are different but users want windows so they can run all their apps. More maintenance comes in on those. The money for a linux desktop (I dare say) is they are calling the consultant to change settings and add apps instead of doing it themselves. Mitigated by lack of viruses and because a professional is doing the install, less room for error there. I support Macs too and with the exception of malware, haven't found that I'm needed any less with those. The malware infection rate on windows machines that I support (over 200), is about 1 out of 10 (fox XP) and that is usually attributable to user behavior combined with local admin rights. There are some situations where I refuse to relax permissions and those have never been infected. A whole billing department on Vista runs well on limited rights, never infected, and after the initial configs worked out on the browser, rarely requires maintenance (to date). So I dare say your friends are doing things they either don't have to do, or because their clients are demanding a certain amount of freedom on their desktop. Updates to the Server OS once a Qtr don't add up too much $ and you should be doing the same on your linux boxes.

fonzireyes
fonzireyes

I could not agree with you more. I started using Linux on a daily basis about a year ago. I keep my machine on dual boot just because I need to keep up with the latest and greatest Windows achievements and failures (I repair computers on the side and 50 bucks an hour for doing what I love, well, it is too good to pass). However, every time I encounter I real head-scratcher with Windows, I always ask the client "Have you ever heard of Linux?" Some think I am asking perhaps about the latest band or American idol. Some know it relates to IT but that is. Very few know it is a [free] operating system. Only two or three have actually agreed to allow me to turn their machine into a dual boot Windows/Linux (I always carry an Ubuntu ISO disc with me). All of them have started to use Linux more and more than Windows. One of them a senior citizen who thought the Compiz effects where so cool; of course eye candy that Windows does not have.

dcolbert
dcolbert

Jack - this is so silly, that you knew the response before you even finished the article. In order for Linux IT consultants to be the Maytag Repairmen of the IT world - (I'm sure I've written this somewhere here in one of my posts and you've lifted this phrase from me, too, btw - but maybe it is just synchronicity...) it would require Linux to be distributed in significant numbers to support an ecosystem of Linux techs and consultants who then had nothing to do because the platform was so stable. While there are a few guys who can eek out a business as "Linux consultants" here and there - being a Linux consultant is more like being a refergerator salesman in Antartica than being a Maytag Repairman. Things are QUIET, for sure, but it isn't for the reason you're claiming. The penguins have it covered... LOL! Quite simply, things are quiet on the Linux Highway because the Windows Business Bypass is far more popular with commuters trying to get from point A to point B. Too many stoplights and intersections on Linux to slow you down.

jgaskell
jgaskell

I am not anti-Linux at all and I use and deploy it regularly. I would happily deploy Linux solutions to all my clients, but I rarely do. The real reason for this is applications. Before anyone says it, I know there are Linux equivalents for most applications. The problem is that there is invariably a specific application that is essential to my client that only runs on Windows. Why would I deploy a system that will run 95% of my client's applications when I could deploy a system that runs 100%?

abusir
abusir

Linux Lesson learned and would like to share. I have been down this road late 1998 is became one of the first group of RedHat certified Engineers coming from 12 years of Unix background. I opened a small company promoting Linux implementation/support and integration into existing environments. My company became Redhat reseller, Suse reseller and IBM Linux leader. After two years into this business around 2001, I had many satisfied Linux customers with limited increase in the revenue. I signed up as a Microsoft reseller and started going after MS business, it's another world. I was able to double the revenue until I sold the company 2007. My name is still listed as Linux consultant on many web sites, Asem Abusir / Texum Technology/ Beyond 2000 Solutions

whocares88
whocares88

The one big problem with your theory is that Maytag had a large market share of the overall appliance business. Probably second behind whirlpool at that time and probably 30% to 40% of the market. The same can't be said about Linux. Sure it has a large share of servers and applications like Apache are outstanding. However, my windows file servers are also great. As long as I don't have product like McAfee mess things up everything is fine. It is the desktops were windows has its problems largely because of poor 3rd party apps and the fact it is the only OS crooks are worried about writing spyware for currently. On Windows server core boxes two smb fixes are the only problems I have had. We setup a lot of file servers we never touch again. Linux can have its problems too. Wireless configurations, kernel upgrades, and kde crashes are just a few of what I have seen. If Linux had the desktop market share Windows did I am sure there would just as many issues.

brokenspokes
brokenspokes

You may be right. When I was moonlighting as a tech way back in the day, I was asked to help a customer move some of their computers to a new office. Included in the group of computers was a Debian box that had been pulling mail server duties for over 4 years without a hitch. The original consultant had long since disappeared and nobody in the office knew the root password. The box was setup to automatically update itself and never needed anything else. I ended up recommending that the customer outsource their mail server needs. I currently work for a large organization and the techies around here are constantly inventing new ways to waste money (um...upgrade). I always remember that old box when they do that.

aaronchall
aaronchall

Thanks, do you have any journal articles you might point me to that give a similar position?

lastchip
lastchip

But you have hit the nail firmly on the head; it's not good for the bank balance!

kurtesmaximus
kurtesmaximus

We have several Linux servers and several Windows servers, I have to always look up the Linux box passwords but the Windows machines I know by heart as I am in them all the time.

jgirizarry
jgirizarry

I have found that clients are not willing to reinvent the wheel, much less change and learn a new O/S. Windows brings them not only compatibility but entertainment and a huge software product line. If it is Free stuff we are looking for, Windows platform has it too. It is true, it keeps me busy, but my clients are making money out of their systems as well and they are happy. I started using Ubuntu and I had to remove it because the programs were not as complex in functionality and satisfying as programs running for a Windows platform. Linux is very powerful but it needs to get out of being an open source in order for clients to adopt it. Just an opinion.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

I was saying that about being a Novell Admin more than 5 years ago, NOvell admin is just like being the Maytag man. (phrase theif!!) Linux admin does take a lot of hands on in the sense of user/desktop issues, if running on desktops too. As for Novell, it quietly sits at the backend with no user/account maintenance needed. TO top it off, run GroupWise email and you gave a job where you need to make stuff up to do just too look busy and justify your pay. You aren't spending all day patching, studying exploits and fixing account permissions, it's just fire and forget (not to mention it pays more too!!).

aharper
aharper

I checked our records and have some real world stats for you. One disclaimer: We are in an economically depressed area (50+ years of it) and low market penetration of modern computers. These numbers will likely be rather atypical for the rest of the nation. We support around 180 regular clients, mostly SMB. About a third run Linux somewhere in their organization. Discounting service contracts, 93.8% of our business volume (by labor) comes from Windows machines. 5.1% comes from Linux machines, 0.7% comes from Mac, and the rest come from minis PLC or embedded stuff. I can't give you exact figures on the number of Linux boxes in the mix. I know four clients use Linux on the desktop, as do we, while quite a healthy number use Linux in a server role. The stats seem to indicate that you are right. After initial setup, we review logs and correct user errors, and that's about it. Occasionally we get an exciting call to upgrade or switch to a different distro. Maytag repairman indeed.

cdasso45
cdasso45

You are absolutely correct.

dwdino
dwdino

The same user that can be satisfied by a netbook can convert to Linux. I have tried repeatedly over the years to really establish Linux as a primary OS, but there are too many roadblocks. I have a Dell Precision M90 laptop and half the hardware doesn't work. Throw my docking station, dual external monitors, usb devices and wireless projectors into the mix... Don't think so. So, if your user base is finite and limited, so can their OS be.

bill.herde
bill.herde

An earlier post about the cost and availability of Linux repair techs is the heart of the reason Linux remains the step child of the industry. I can't roll out a system to a client that I am the only one in the world able to service it. For a while it looked like Redhat was going to crack the nut with big name support and certification/training programs, but alas, THEY couldn't make money on it either. A business cannot hinge it's existence or viability on a single point of failure any more than a well designed infrastructure can. You also cannot limit the growth of your client by selling them a system that cannot run any application they want to use. Right or wrong, it is thier choice, you are here to advise, then implement what THEY choose to run. That way you become part of the team standing next to them, not face to face, as they go forward. For this you are rewarded with repeat business and lasting relationships. It has worked for me this way my entire career, which started in 1976.

zeke123
zeke123

Im not going to go all Peter Gabriel/Phil Collins on you but Jesse White was the Maytag repairman for over 2 decades: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0924964/ I loved Jump in WKRP (tried watching it recently,.. show didnt age well) and he was great in his stint, so much so that some young whippersnappers will forget about White. You do know there were two husbands on Bewitched right? --- Gotta agree with the article, Windows pays my bills and Linux doesnt. But all my friends servers run on it as do all of my extended family's desktops (KDE4.3.2) and my 'free support' time for family has been cut down to zero since going all Linux. Those are my conditions for free tech support but when I go to clients my first job isnt to convert them and mixed environments are now the norm, not the exception.

HAL 9000
HAL 9000

Besides being completely wrong with the comment [i] Do one update and the system will never boot again[/i] Sure if you do it wrong this happens but then again apply the wrong update to a Windows System and see what happens. :^0 [i]Linux is on the way out[/i] Afraid you are so wrong on that count the Cloud runs on Nix not to mention all of the Big Business who do bulk processing. Don't confuse the Desktop Environment with real computers. ;) Col

Sensor Guy
Sensor Guy

and wait until it does an update while you are speaking on it! The reality is that outside the current mainstream IT desktop and server, Linux and UNIX runs almost all other production systems in this world. For example, on most modern airliners (built post 1990) there are an average of 85+ embedded Linux/Unix systems working hard to get you to your destination. In a car, last I heard, it's about 12 different Linux/Unix systems. Like IBM and MVS/VM in servers, Microsoft Windows won the first and most initially lucrative battle in the desktop, and made a valiant and substantial move into the server, but in the embedded systems space it's not even a ranked player. They've clearly lost that war. The industry is not wondering if Microsoft CE will die or not, but when. It may be true that Linux on the desktop and laptop/netbook is on the way out, but that's because the desktop and laptop/netbook themselves are an endangered species. On the server side it will stay. Too much investment in it to be cast aside anymore at least in our lifetime. The best doesn't always win in this business. Hell, I still think the RPG language and COBOL are much better for business reports than BASIC and C and it many variants, and that Windows 3.1 was technically a hell of a lot worse than OS/2 and the Mac but sure beat the mainframe for app development, but we must all eventually abandon our past technological loves and successes and move on with what the industry and markets have picked up and run with. That's how you survive and thrive in this business.

gometrics
gometrics

As a Microsoft small business specialist, I'm supporting nearly 150 desktops/laptops and approximately 10 servers running file server, mail server, IIS, FTP, print, terminal server, citrix, vpn, and many business applications. I think that supports what you are saying very nicely.

mdhemphill
mdhemphill

You obviously failed to realize how far back Unix has actually been in existence, try the 1960's and not the 1980's. You also fail to understand that the majority of servers which make the backbone of the internet are Unix servers. Unix nor Linux has lost anything up to this point. To loose the OS has to be irrelevant and that is simply not the case. There maybe less market share for Unix/ Linux at the desktop, but this is not the case for servers.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

COBOL is older than that, and it isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

If all I had were 12 servers to worry about then I would have lots of spare time no matter what OS they were running. Anything less than 15-20 windows servers doesn't require very much upkeep time at all. It all relates back to knowledge level IMHO. I have a handful of Linux servers and I spend more time fiddling around with them because I'm simply not as familiar and confident with them as compared to Windows servers.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

Four physical, three virtual, automated backup, set 'em and forget 'em. They're not my primary concern, so I get to hold users' hands and image hard drives after changing the tapes. Windows admins can be Maytag repairmen too. How you configure the systems initially is more important than the OS used.

rduncan
rduncan

Linux V Windows discuss and abandon

Mah
Mah

I think the author was talking about servers, not desktops. You simply can't let a desktop Windows or Linux run without regular updates and maintenance. Linux is on par or better than Windows when it comes to server apps, although it lags behind in desktop apps.

Mah
Mah

Linux beats Windows servers in terms of numbers in the Windows file server category as well if you include NAS server boxes which almost exclusively use Linux and Samba. Linux doesn't have the same virus vulnerabilities as Windows, and that is nothing to do with popularity. The bottom line is there has never ever been a successful virus infection of a Linux PC in the wild - never ever. Compare that with billions of Windows infections and counting. That simply can't be dismissed as due to the difference in popularity. The real answer is that in order for backward compatibility with older Windows/MSDOS PCs which were never designed to be secure in a multi-user networked environment, Windows cannot fix existing flaws in its basic security model which allows viruses to thrive on Windows. Linux is a clone of Unix, which was designed from the onset as a multi-user high end secure network server system exposed to a hostile networked environment. The real reason why Windows servers are targeted more often is that, although Windows and Linux machines have about equal risk of a vulnerability due a coding or configuration error, the same issues that make Windows vulnerable to viruses also make network attacks on Windows (worms) easy to automate once this vulnerability is exploited. Viruses are after all automated self installing trojans. Linux on the other hand has to be hacked manually when the vulnerability is known. What makes worm attacks on Windows so successful is the fact that Windows' only defence - anti-virus software - can't protect against automated network attack because they can proliferate long before the anti-virus vendors can identify the worms, update the databases, and distribute the updates. In addition, the distribution of the updates is usually disrupted by the mass outbreak that the updates are trying to counter.

steve.rentageek
steve.rentageek

My understanding of the results of hacking tests is that Mac, Linux, and Windows are all vulnerable. 95% of the desktops are Windows, so that's where application developers and cybercriminals focus their efforts. It's a much more complex world, and in that chaos, way more work, and some of that from crashes. Will the future bring an increase in users/machines using ~(Windows)? (meaning anything but windows). I hope so, because competition spurs innovation and keeps prices down. My clients are mostly medical and similar professional offices. Almost none of the practice management run on anything non-Windows. If one of these offices had a Linux machine, it would run forever with little or no maintenance because there would be nothing of note running on it. When I worked for a defense contractor years ago, one group ran Unix (Sun) machines for one application (code management). We used those machines heavily, and as a result, the group that had the burden of keeping them running averaged 1 full time sysop for every 4 servers. The inference is that the more interesting (complex and active) the applications running on a system, the more maintenance it requires. just my $.02 worth.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

Are you logging into the Windows servers frequently because of problems with the Windows OS or because of the applications it's running? What are you running on the Linux servers, and what do the Windows servers host?

j-mart
j-mart

Available applications is always the crunch point. At the OS level Linux is a better OS than windows for sure but if the required applications need are only available on Windows you end up with no choice

brokenspokes
brokenspokes

Linux techs are hard to find but they can usually save your bacon when it comes time to fix low-level problems. Most of them that I know are also well-versed in multiple scripting languages and operating systems. I remember having a problem with one of our Dell servers that baffled every Windows-only admin. The box was going through a KVM switch and would show a cryptic error message when running the Dell setup disc. It turns out the setup program was really a stripped down Linux distribution and couldn't handle the resolution set by the switch. Our Linux guy was able to drop down into a console to fix the problem there in a couple of minutes. He was later able to build us a custom install disc that bypassed the Dell problem. It's the same thing with software development. You have plenty of developers that know how Visual Studio works but they have no idea how code works at the ground level. I have a few in my organization and their code is usually structured terribly.

JimboNobody
JimboNobody

Our department has staff of 300. We maintain 150 mainframes (z/OS) and handful of z/TPFs and a handful of z/VM servers supporting several thousand z/Linux guests. We have 200,000 internal users and millions of customers via ATMs, POS networks and other interfaces. If we never had changes, the systems would run for years without maintenance (except for storage additions). Thankfully, we have about 1000 changes per week, so I am still employed.

jgaskell
jgaskell

Especially as he specifically mentioned Linux desktops. Linux is certainly much more of an option at the server level, but even there I have many clients who run server applications for which there is no Linux alternative. This may be because of legislative requirements, requirements of industry groups or franchisors or just because there is no Linux equivalent with the same functionality. As I said, I would be happy to roll out Linux everywhere if it was the best option. I just take issue with the suggestion that the only reason consultants roll out Windows machines is so they can kep coming back for paid support.

j-mart
j-mart

The advantage of the UNIX/LINUX designed for the task as compared to Windows stretched and adapted well beyond the purpose originally designed for

rduncan
rduncan

yep that's a virus alright

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

In general, Linux is a more secure, configurable operating system than Windows. In general, applications for the Windows platform have more features, are easier to use, and are available for more business needs than those for Linux. Users work with apps, not OS's.

kingttx
kingttx

"...virus IN THE WILD..." [caps mine] There are dozens of Linux viruses in various A/V labs around the world. Read that article you linked, though, where it intimates it's only a matter of time that a Linux virus would take to the wild and spread. Hasn't happened yet, has it?

Mah
Mah

Most SMBs will certainly be better off with Linux servers than the Windows SMB boxes most end up using. I think the reason why a lot of SMBs use Windows for everything is that they use part-time or low end sysadmins who double as something else eg. handiman, electrician, general fix-it man, desktop PC setter upper etc. They have limited experience of servers, but they have used the Windows desktop, so they go for a Windows server, because it is all they know and all they are comfortable with. Hopefully Ubuntu servers and prepackaged server admin interfaces like EBox on Ubuntu and Turnkey Linux http://www.turnkeylinux.org/ will make Linux more popular with SMBs.

j-mart
j-mart

I can't see why Linux is not used more for servers than it is. Even if you go out and buy Red Hat Enterprise it has to be a much more cost effective solution than the Microsoft option. In a small business situation, it is not an overly complex task to set up a lan with Microsoft desktops and Linux servers, well worth the effort, and once set up properly, very reliable

Mah
Mah

Windows may well have more desktop apps than Linux, but when it comes to servers, Linux has more and generally better server apps than Windows.

Editor's Picks