|
Forum: Rants Topic: Do people just make news up??? started by: Wiley Posted by Wiley on Apr. 03 2002,17:44
I first saw < this article >on Slashdot and was shocked. The entire company I work at is switching to Linux!?? Now, you think that since I'm one of the few technology guys at the company (one of only two on the west coast) and since I'm working on a project to replace all the desktops in the firm this year (exactly the project this article is making reference to) I would have caught wind of this Linux thing. So I made some calls to find out what's going on. It turns out that we have a few people looking into the feasibility of using Linux in our environment at some future time ....maybe. We also have a few guys looking at other operating systems because it's just good business to keep some options open. The only use Merrill currently has for RedHat Linux is a piece of voice recognition software. So is this article just simply made up? I think it is a case of the Linux community trying so hard to be taken seriously in the business world that any notion that a company is looking at their OS is taken as a sign that the tide is changing in their favor. They jump all over a bit of news like "we're looking at using Linux at our company" as "a top-down implementation of Linux software". Linux has a lot more maturing to do before I can ever see it realistically being accepted as the platform of choice in a fortune 500 company. I know a lot of you are Linux junkies, but do you think the OS is ready to be the only workstation in a mission critical environment? I hear all this talk about the stability of Linux and how it runs for ever without rebooting, but as with all other OS consideration I always come back to some of the same questions;1. Can it run every piece of software that I will need to do business effectively? 2. Are there well-documented best practices backed by the creators of the OS? 3. Can I get onsite support to resolve any issue, no matter how large? 4. Are there proven models for deployment and administration of a large-scale network? 5. Can the creators of the OS guarantee 100% uptime? 6. Can it be made idiot proof for my users? I know people hate the Evil Empire, but they can answer yes to all the questions above and more without flinching. Now I know everybody is too smart for a MS vs. Linux flame war so I don't want to get into that. I want to know what everybody thinks is the core issue that is holding Linux back and if you were in charge what do you think you would do to fix it. Posted by CatKnight on Apr. 03 2002,19:29
there isn't enough mainstream software that is easily portable. take lindows for instance. most rediculous idea ever. it's an operating system that looks like windows, supposed to run windows programs (although does so very poorly), and is supposed to be easy to set up and use. what is the god damned point? just use windows! i think unix/linux are great for servers and scientific applications but for mainstream users, trying to setup linux to run all your programs is just a huge waste of time. why make things more complicated then they have to be?
Posted by veistran on Apr. 03 2002,23:53
when AOL starts targeting linux users, then it'll be mainstream.
Posted by chmod on Apr. 04 2002,03:11
Hehehe... as a matter of fact, there really was an AOL for linux at one point.... pretty experimental though I think. Theres not much feasibility in marketing idiot software meant for a non-idiot OS. But yeah, that would be good for a laugh. Posted by Beldurin on Apr. 04 2002,06:39
I think what holds Linux back are the following:1.) Ease of setup/config 2.) Enterprise-level software 3.) Legacy system support (HW drivers and SW systems) 4.) Well-understood application model (development and integration) 5.) The marketing machine (obviously) I agree w/CK (dear God, what am I saying?). UNIX/Linux are great for servers...Apache, Samba, UofM Mail, etc., but it's just NOT a desktop system. Add in the fact that a lot of smaller companies don't have extremely tech-savvy staff. Sure they may have a couple of MCPs or an MCSE, but you can get your MCP by taking a test over Win98, and your MCSE by memorizing and parroting back facts. Maybe number 6.) Should be some sort of industry-recognized training/certification curriculum? That's my 00000010 cents. Am I full of it? Edit: Holy crap, I just realized that article wasn't just a comment on Slashdot, but on Forbes! |