General discussion

Locked

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,
SL

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

104 total posts (Page 5 of 11)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Money

by dingletec In reply to Good point

My company spends much more over the lifetime of a product for support than we do on the actual product. A few of these systems have moved from SGI/Irix to Dell/Redhat. They are saving us both in license fees and hardware upgrades. While we pay for the software on these systems, the bulk of the income to these companies comes from support services and data subscriptions.

As an IT person, that is what I would like to see more of. More money spent on the person doing the work, and less on overpriced software.

Pay me more for my skills, giving me the incentive to keep learning and improving, rather than paying me custodial fees to keep Windows running.

We have to buy new hardware, we have to buy certain software and services, but if money can be saved on the OS and general desktop software, GREAT! Spend the money on people who can actually solve problems, not just those who have to call someone else to fix problems for them.

I guess my point is that money will still change hands, but with Linux and open source, more money can be spent where it is most needed, skilled workers.

Collapse -

I agree with you

by dafe2 In reply to Money

I agree with most of what you said. The only issue would be the 'commerce" side of things.

Business is still business and funding is a necessary 'evil'. It matters not that we think it's overpriced.

Collapse -

Agreed

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to Misguided

WEB Server + database (mysql), hotstandby, raid and replication for the cost of two PCs. The firm I'm working for even zeroed the training costs. I just did it with the help of the linux community and this network connection and a mandrake download. Probably not the absolute ideal setup, but it works, it's nowhere near the edge of it's capacity, and the only maintenance I have to do is swap the dvd backup disk out once a week.
Most surprising of all, my employers are positively jurassic in their IT outlook. They still have a large number(100s) of 95 desktops on Pentuim IIs, running Lotus Smartsuite. They chose to go down the linux route because of cost and weren't scared of the fact that it's new. Whether they go down the microsoft or linux route for desktops eventually the cost is going to be hideous, and that's without re-jigging all the internal software, and coping with issues like 'I can't find Find' that I remember from 2K rollouts in other places way back when.

I'll get back to my Fortran 77 compilations running under VMS 6.2 on one of the DEC Aplha's now.

Not a joke unfortunately

Collapse -

In response to the Linux Desktop naysayers

by David Mohring In reply to Oz - aka Linux Guru

In response to the various naysayers in these forums who say Linux on the business desktop is either not possible or not worth it.
Read ...
http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=5&threadID=165827&start=0

Collapse -

Reads like a kludged Infrastucture

by dafe2 In reply to In response to the Linux ...

Yup, more selective writting and a perfect example of what to avoid to me.

I think we've pretty much beat this horse to death for about the 700th time.

Collapse -

Dave

by house In reply to In response to the Linux ...

As much as we all love Linux on the desktop, you can't deny the productivity cost that you will face when deploying workstations in a well rounded environment. Sure an MS install is more apt to failing, but the problems that we face usually stem from the "user". I will keep my comments brief, because I need to actually get some work done today, but I will subscribe to your discussion so that I might give more insight later on. Your opinion is not without it's pros, but user comfort plays a big part in productivity ratings within an organization.

In my experience, hardware standards and supported models, play a huge part in the recovery process. Having standard images and basic installs ready to go out on the floor, removes the fear of an MS system failing. Swapping the box, home folders on an h drive, 10-20 minute network install... there is more time lost in training somebody on the OS than there is in replacing a failed station. That is my "general" opinion. I've used Linux worstation distros at home myself, and I love it, but perhaps it is not the best option in corporate rollouts yet.

Collapse -

IN that same note, house.

by Oz_Media In reply to Dave

ON that same note,I felt the exact same way regarding Novell and Linux. I was perfectly happy running Novell servers and Windoze desktops for years and cringed at the though of Novell Linux on the desktop for those exact same reasons.

I was PROVEN wrong though by the users ability to instantly adapt to and accept Suse, with many offering VERY favorable comments about it. Thier main comments were general how they THOUGHT it would be a real pain in the *** to learn and nothing would be where they expected it, but Suse has done such a nice job of the desktop that users were pleasantly surprised. It wasn't the big bad ogre they had expected at all, they had no problems doing thier work, whether administrative, accounting etc. and actually rave about how they can get a full days work done now without all the reboots or bugs they had with Windoze. More than a few user have had me go and install it on ther home PC's since changing, and they are tickled pink with it.

Yes they thought it would be hard, I thought it would be hard, but it PROVED it wasn't and it was accepted without issues. In fact they have several users at one company that have become HUGE Linux advocates that initially screamed blue murder at the thought of learning a new OS. Once they see it, are forced to use it, they find out just how familiar and yet more stable it really is. It is a result of FUD, people as they get older form comfort zones, stepping outside that zone scares many, but once they do it is usually found to be far better.

Just like people who are scared to quit work and move on with thier lives, it is a comfort zone. Once PUSHED from that zone, they generally move on to bigger and better things.

This also stems down to the tech, an MCSE who has ALWAYS seemn it as the furture in IT, will put up such a fuss about changing technologies, as demonstrated here, but al in all they and the company are generally better off in the long run.

It's also no different than the old mechanics raising a stink when fuel injection was being introduced in new cars. People have security in MS jobs, they will ALWAYS be needed because it always has issues. Now it may mean that two or three techs may be let go, it is a fear of the unknown, just as users fear leaving MS until they try it.

These feelings aren't unique to IT at all, they are just basic reactions to change of any sort.

Just typlical psychological reactions, not really any proof either way as to the best product.

Hey, just like a US election, it's merely a pissing contest with lots of flaming the other guy.

Collapse -

Oz... Yeah but,

by house In reply to IN that same note, house.

Don't forget all of the applications that they have been running and any internal appz that might have been in development for a long time. The change cannot be weighed solely on common applications that are packaged with the distros, nor can it be compared without an individual "case by case" analysis. I would not consult a move to Linux, if they are married to Microsoft based applications. It all depends on the organization, the function of the various departments, what kind of information solutions they require, etc. There is no right or wrong answer here.

Wow... why am I defending MS?

Collapse -

ooops

by dafe2 In reply to Oz... Yeah but,
Collapse -

So you leave the MS apps in place

by Oz_Media In reply to Oz... Yeah but,

I don't se ewhy it has to be all or nothing anyway. MOST large corporations have a mix based in the needs of the system.

If you MUST have MS desktops due to user inability, then so be it. This still does not mean that Novell Linux is going nowhere. (which is why this topic was dragged from anothe thread)

Back to IT Employment Forum
104 total posts (Page 5 of 11)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums