Linux

General discussion

Locked

Windows vs Linux

By rkuhn ·
Ok, these discussions are out of hand.

Anytime there is a discussion of Linux vs Windows, without laying down some background, it is almost impossible to have a meaningful discussion.

For example, there are substantial differences between rolling out Linux in a business environment vs rolling it out to a home user with minimal PC skills vs rolling it out to an experienced IT home user.

I'll start 3 threads to reflect this and let me hear the arguments.

For example, for a inexperienced home user, I don't want to hear about "cheap" printers when it comes to drivers. Let's face it, home users buy cheap printers...that's a fact of life.

Conversely, in a business environment, you do have time, money, etc for a roll out whereas in a home environment, you don't.

Let's agree to some variables. Corporate environments typically have time to train, get support, tweak, whatever.

Home users typically just want things to work, buy cheaper and more generic components, etc.

Let's hear your opinions now...

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Apologies for the late reply.

by johanv In reply to ERP / MRP System

.We're using Sage Line 500 based on SQL 2000 DB / Windowmaker Enterprise on SQL 2000. We have just integrated the Sales Order Entry-process between the two applications.
While Sage does come with the option to run on a Linux platform, the GUI-client is still Windows-based (although great inroads are being made to provide a web-client [even though this only runs on IIS]).
The Windowmaker application only runs on a Windows-platform.
Thus in our environment it is not possible to derive maximum financial benefit in moving to a pure opensource infrastructure.
On that note I would also like to add that we are in the middle of implementing SugarCRM using the Windows-stack and integrating it with our Sage system.
I think the bottom line is that your business type dicates what systems you put in place.

Collapse -

erm . . .

by apotheon In reply to Apologies for the late re ...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but . . .

Sage doesn't provide open source software, so if you ran it on Linux you wouldn't be running a "pure opensource infrastructure" (your words). Since there are open source alternatives to the software Sage sells, I don't see how your objection makes any sense.

Collapse -

Context

by johanv In reply to erm . . .

Please read the post in it's entire context. It serves as an explination that in our environment it is NOT possible to run a pure open source environment. I am trying to make the point that as a business we would not derive the benefits that say an ISP would derive from running everything on some form of *nix. In my opinion you are also missing the point that businesses have varying requirements and a decision was made that Sage was the correct solution for our business based on what we required. In my position I have to take everything that is out there (software/hardware wise) and ensure that it fits with the business needs. If you look at this whole thread, you will notice hardliners from both camps - and then there are the ones who look at what would suit a business.

Collapse -

no . . .

by apotheon In reply to Context

I'm not missing any point you made. You didn't make a point about Sage being the correct solution for your business needs. You just said you couldn't run a pure open source system because you were using Sage. It's fine if you chose, and continue to use, Sage because that's what fits your needs. If that's something you meant to convey, you should have said so.

Collapse -

?

by johanv In reply to no . . .

My apologies for YOUR inability to understand. My apologies for YOUR need & desire to prove that YOU know it all.
Thankfully there are a lot of professionals on these forums who can see the wood from the trees unlike you.

Collapse -

don't be asinine

by apotheon In reply to no . . .

If you don't say what you mean, blaming others for not magically divining your meaning isn't particularly justifiable.

Collapse -

by johanv In reply to no . . .

It's indeed a sad time if you want to resort to discussions outside of the topic. So please carry on as I have neither the time nor the inclination to enter into a debate with you on commucation abilities & understanding what is being communicated instead of (as in your case) looking at what it typed.

Collapse -

mixing made it complex

by kudincendol In reply to Research

Actually if you mix Open Source Software (OSS) with proprietary software product where no such OSS equivalent to the proprietary software exist, it would be very complex in many areas; support, coding, integrations, preventive measures, standard procedures, etc.

Don't mix. Or you will get older sooner than you think.

Collapse -

What's wrong with you?

by apotheon In reply to mixing made it complex

A lot of organizations are doing just fine mixing the two, with Firefox, Thunderbird, and OpenOffice.org running on Windows. There are even webservers out there running Apache and MySQL on Windows.

Collapse -

You don't understand

by kudincendol In reply to What's wrong with you?

Probably I did not clear out my statement.

I'm not talking about mixing open source Software (OSS) with Windows. I'm talking about mixing Linux with some other proprietary software.

A real-life example, running a proprietary Link-Balancer/DNS Server (LBDS) under Linux. The link-balancer DNS service does not support wildcard virtual hostname (*.domain.com). Another application required that the wildcard virtual hostname must be supported. I asked the LBDS vendor to support wildcard. They said it is a major patch.

Another real-life example, proprietary PHP webpage running under Linux. A few problem happened but still it happened again and again. No preventive measure taken by the vendor who developed the webpage.

Probably Richard Stallman already saw that this kind of problem will occured when he wrote GPL.

That is why don't mix Linux with proprietary software. If you want to use proprietary software, run it under Windows!

Related Discussions

Related Forums