General discussion


Oz - aka Linux Guru

By secure_lockdown ·
Oz - in all honesty, do you really see Linux taking off to the same extent as what the actual Linux vendors (Novell, IBM, and Co.) are predicting/hoping?

If you are, can you post reasons and proof as to why you see that will happen?

I origianlly got sold on Linux thing when Novell were agressively pushing it a year ago - I was planning on getting all the LPI certs and the CLP and focus on their new product lines. But have since changed my mind because I am not seeing in the "real world" what the vendors are hypeing.


Let the discussions begin,

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

104 total posts (Page 2 of 11)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

dafe2 is propagating the same old untruths

by David Mohring In reply to Not So

The studies that dafe2 refers to have been selectively targeted and quoted as to ensure only a Microsoft favorable outcome.

Read: Let's play the Magic Quadrant game

Things Microsoft Failed to Mention
Microsoft's ?Get the Facts? website summarizes and emphasizes the strengths of Windows as they appear in the reports and studies they provide (see However, they fail to mention the strengths of Linux that are cited in those same reports. Here are some quotes from these publicly available reports which highlight some of the benefits of Linux.

It does require some research on the part of the customer to evaluate where Linux on the desktop makes sense. But in most cases, medium to large organizations can greatly benefit from making the shift. See

Collapse -


by dafe2 In reply to Not So

Gartner is the most reputable & independant IT research group out there.

Left wing Linux trade rags dont compare. Sorry.

Collapse -

daf2 : Ad hominem

by David Mohring In reply to Dave

I have read Gartner's recent studies regarding Linux on the desktop, and IMO both are flawed in regards to TCO and ROI. Both Gartner reports are correct in terms of the expertise required for *deploying* pre-2004 Linux distributions, but recent developments in both Novell/Suse and Xandros ( see ) make deploying and managing as easy or easier than WindowXP.

When you actually sit down and total the figures for Total Cost of Ownership comparison between Windows and Linux, disregarding the cost of virus on the Microsoft platform, then you get closer to the following ...

Collapse -

both camps are propagating half truths..

by secure_lockdown In reply to Not So

I will whole heartedly agree with dafe2 on the "double click" comment. of my user base - and it's pretty large!! - i would estimate 25% are tech savvy users that are fairly to very comfortable with the PC, OS and APPS. the other 75% are very un-comfortable with the PC, OS and APPS. the ones that have trouble with the "double click" so to speak. and no - on one if going to fire them for not being tech savvy. they have been employed way before my time and before the PC took over every aspect of their work and they will be employed way past my time and until retirement. we have staff professional upgrading programs that they can take - it's optinal and up to them if they want to take them. in the meantime - they will continue to do their jobs and i and my staff will contiue to do ours.

as far as the "TCO will cost 10x more to deploy linux"?? i don't know about that one. but i am very confident that my work load will go up by 10x. and i personally like to leave on time and get home to spend time with my family instaed of hangin' around servers 'til the wee wee hours.

The driving force in my environemt towards moving to MS Win 2003 and AD is better and more efficient depolyement of APPS, patches, upgrades as well as AV and antispyware and the signature updates. all the apps and MSI's now.

Novell and their Red Carpet product is fine and dandy - but whats the use when no one in my environemt uses Linux apps. we need better deployement of MS Office, Adobe, PeopleSoft, Cognos, Oracle apps. not open source!!

This has nothing to do with Linux vs Windows. Linux is stable. I use Linux. but none of my users use linux. they don't want to use linux. design dept's don't come knocking on my door asking for open source - they want the latest quarks, photoshops, premieres!!!


Collapse -

Secure re BI

by dafe2 In reply to Not So

You make other good points with regards to Enterprise software. Besides the subtle but important user trainning costs, side issues such as BI Software could include:

1 - Cognos Impromptu / PowerPlay (BI)
2 - PeopleSoft (HR)
3 - SAP (AP, AR & Materials Management)
4 - Primavera and Graneda (Projects)

But, apparently, some of the Linux crowd and the companies that did surveys on implementing Linux forgot Businesses and Industry needed to access a data warehouse, pay their employees and their AP, look after the AR, ship or receive materials or finished product and/or manage their projects.

I'm obviously not a fan of the Penguin, BUT I do respect those that have taken time to learn it and use it. Most of them know when & where to implement Linux to a business advantage.

As I said, it does have a place. Just not on a production server or a user desktop.

Collapse -

dafe2 - yup

by secure_lockdown In reply to Not So

the linux advocates assume that users just use their machines for email and web browsing. even their argument to just replace MS Office with OpenOffice - it does the same thing!! --> It's true to an extent - but have they ever looked at support logs of a full production network environment? look at % of level 1 support calls related to file attachements and file compatability issues. you add OpenOffice into the mix - you are just going to add to those calls. i guess they don't care as long as it's not them fielding those calls.

personally i love linux. especially for network admins - the sheer volume of network tools available is worth the switch. i am a big fan of the SuSE distro. been using it long before Novell got their slimy paws on it. and here comes my doomsday prediction. Novell are going to screw SuSE big time. They will screw up the best thing about it --> YAST! But lets wait and see.

Collapse -

Dave - Did you even read that Cybersource Doc?

by dafe2 In reply to Not So

I will address a couple of points for the **** of it:

"In the survey, Linux admin salaries were slightly higher than Windows admins, with Linux at $71,400 per admin, and Windows at $68,500 per
admin. But Linux admins took care of an average of 44 servers and Windows admins an average of 10. So the salary per processing unit
was Linux, $12,010, and Windows, $52,060.4"

Allthough the salaries seem right, no Windows shop I know of has a 1->10 ratio. It's closer to 1 -> 50

If you read the intro (Disclaimer) to that document it states that it gathered it's 'research' from "sources believed to be reliable". Cybersolution has a stake in the results so it's hardly 'impartial'. So does 'Open Source Victoria.'

Most important, nowhere in that document does it talk about Enterprise business tools (SAP & BI & Others) except on the MS solution. Don't you find that curious? Most Business & Industry can't run on an office suite & e-commerce alone.

Collapse -

ap, ar..etc

by Jaqui In reply to Not So

full professional level accounting software.

oracle for entrprise systems runs on linux also.

vendor specific software ( peoplesoft et-al )

well, if they get enough requests for it on linux they'll port it won't they.
oh, hold it a second, it's not a 3d modelling application..vmware or wine will run it under linux.

tco is far less with open source, specially when you include costs of virus software and damage to systems from it, security breaches from adware getting in from users.

more work for admins? not really, after install and configuration, less overall. configuration including cron job to get security updates regularly. 250 viruses a year for unix systems, 250 month for windows systems.

no outlook, or ie, oh well they are nothing but security risks anyway.

project management software.
Mr. Project ( gnome )
Contact Manager,
all exist already, all designed for large projects.
the open source systems are in and of themselves huge ongoing projects with deadlines, schedules and extensive requirements for completion, do you REALLY think PROFESSIONALS would ignore these vital tool sets?

Collapse -

Dafe2 The question is did YOU read that Cybersource doc?

by Oz_Media In reply to Not So

YOu went on about how Cybersource has an interest and therefore must be considered a biased opinion. They outlined this issue, knowing very well people such as yourself would deem it biased.

They actually gave MS a leading edge on purpose for this reason. (read HOW WE TIPPED THS SCALES IN MICROSOFT'S FAVOUR)

There exists survey research by the RObert Frances Group which indicates that it takes 82% fewer resources to support Linux systems than Windows systems. They have not included the costs of malware, viruses, spyware, worms, keloggers, adware, etc. Every research point we found suggests that this cost is essentially and predominatntly a WIndows platform cost, resulting in billions lost by business every year.

So in essence, they have completely ignored what most people see as the biggest advantage to utilizing Linux over MS systems. I know you seem to think that MS is a lower maintenance system, contrary to the remainder of the worlds population. This is simply untrue, I have taken over Windows shops that converted to Novell Suse (desktops and all) as their LONE tech working remotely from my home. They then removed the 4 MCSE's that they used to have and replaced them with ONE offsite tech. IF users had problems I would remote to thier desktops for repairs or walkthroughs, ending up onsite at various stores for only hardware related issues. For the most part these former Windows users were shocked at how similar SUSE was to the old Widows look and feel,though some menus were moved around they had no problem adjusrting at all and all recognized the instant reduction in desktop problems they suffered under the MS system. I NEVER had people phoning me every five minutes and wondering about stupid user issues over how things were different than MS.

Just one of four organization-wide installs I did last year.

Now this was a fairly small organization less than 150 users (again with 1 tech offsite), another was the largest chain of food stores on Vancouver island. Connected ALL locations with NEC PBX based VoIP, then swapped ALL location servers to Novell Suse (again one solitary remote tech needed). No users complained of the change at all, many being big MS advocates themselves and never having seen nor used Suse. Learning curve? Maybe at one time (and I would have agreed it was a difficult curve to throw into most organizations), but nobody complains of it in my experience.

The main thing that has been forotten in ALL these posts though, MOST companies will deploy MS AND Novell in their organizations to get the best of both worlds. For security, printing, and directory services, Novell outperforms MS everytime hands down, I haven't heard anyone that has both systems installed say otherwise.

But mainly, if you are going to discredit something due to a disclaimer, read the rest of the information first, not just the disclaimer.

Collapse -

OZ - I did read it, unlike yourself:

by dafe2 In reply to Not So

I did read it completely.

Unlike yourself, I had glasses on and an open mind.

Seem like Linux die hards have a problem with logic & COMMON SENSE though.

Back to IT Employment Forum
104 total posts (Page 2 of 11)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums