Headline FeedsLinuxInsider Talkback
|
|
See Full StoryIn recent weeks, several sources have portrayed Linux users and the community of open-source software developers as fanatics. This caricature seems now to be the most prevalent alternative to the equally unflattering images of Linux users as computer geeks or pizza-consuming programmers. For many, the impulse to switch to Linux has indeed required a strong nerve and a willingness to delve into technical minefields. Even with robust distributions -- such as Red Hat and SuSE -- there are still challenging hardware compatibility problems to navigate.
Re: Enthusiasm, Linux and the Facts
Posted by: patrick_darcy 2003-09-27 13:29:40 In reply to: Paul Towlson
working together, sharing, enjoying life
and the computer experience is in a sense
becoming fananitcal. (perception that some
american business would love for u to believe)
the alternative is windoes.
to work together and to share is becoming
very rare in the united states. as this
becomes ever more and more uncommon, it will be considered fanatical.
perception is everything.
and the computer experience is in a sense
becoming fananitcal. (perception that some
american business would love for u to believe)
the alternative is windoes.
to work together and to share is becoming
very rare in the united states. as this
becomes ever more and more uncommon, it will be considered fanatical.
perception is everything.
These studies and articles picking apart Linux always seem to focus on the "Enterprise"... There are far more small and medium sized businesses for which Linux is perfect. Yet people are always swayed by these articles.
There is a very good reason for Linux fanaticism, and for growing resentment of Microsoft. For any IT person who struggled for years to meet the needs of companies with small IT budgets, Linux is an outright miracle.
We just could not afford either the cost or the lack of reliabilty in MS server products (Append long list of Viruses, blue screens, exploits here). We still have a few MS servers that cannot be replaced, but every time we need a (file|print|email|web|database|etc) server I just pull a retired buggy Windows workstation off the shelf and create a highly stable (Linux|FreeBSD) server out of it.
Plain and simple, with everything I have done for my company using Linux, I have spent $ZERO dollars, and very little time maintaining them. They just work. You just get more with open source, where it would have cost me thousands of dollars to do similar tasks using MS products. And I could not add more machines at no cost with MS.
Oh, and I can (play with|test|research) all kinds of technology at home as well, since it is all free. Open source creates better educated and higher skilled IT workers, based on their personal interest and motivation. I compare my skills and knowledge to MSCE's all the time, and I'm pretty certain I'm not the one lacking...
I'm not bashing this author, there are things I can agree with in the article... I just get tired of reading articles about TCO and ROI, when those things do not apply to anyone I know. My ROI is huge, I put next to nothing into some of these projects, and get continual and stable service in return. TCO? I take machines that were paid for a few years ago, combine them with the cost of 3 cd's burned with the latest version of my favorite freely downloadable Linux Distro, and I have systems that are used every day without reboot for longer than the total combined uptime of our MS servers. Ok, I'm finished now.
There is a very good reason for Linux fanaticism, and for growing resentment of Microsoft. For any IT person who struggled for years to meet the needs of companies with small IT budgets, Linux is an outright miracle.
We just could not afford either the cost or the lack of reliabilty in MS server products (Append long list of Viruses, blue screens, exploits here). We still have a few MS servers that cannot be replaced, but every time we need a (file|print|email|web|database|etc) server I just pull a retired buggy Windows workstation off the shelf and create a highly stable (Linux|FreeBSD) server out of it.
Plain and simple, with everything I have done for my company using Linux, I have spent $ZERO dollars, and very little time maintaining them. They just work. You just get more with open source, where it would have cost me thousands of dollars to do similar tasks using MS products. And I could not add more machines at no cost with MS.
Oh, and I can (play with|test|research) all kinds of technology at home as well, since it is all free. Open source creates better educated and higher skilled IT workers, based on their personal interest and motivation. I compare my skills and knowledge to MSCE's all the time, and I'm pretty certain I'm not the one lacking...
I'm not bashing this author, there are things I can agree with in the article... I just get tired of reading articles about TCO and ROI, when those things do not apply to anyone I know. My ROI is huge, I put next to nothing into some of these projects, and get continual and stable service in return. TCO? I take machines that were paid for a few years ago, combine them with the cost of 3 cd's burned with the latest version of my favorite freely downloadable Linux Distro, and I have systems that are used every day without reboot for longer than the total combined uptime of our MS servers. Ok, I'm finished now.
Re: Enthusiasm, Linux and the Facts
Posted by: stdsoft 2003-09-25 15:40:50 In reply to: Paul Towlson
<<
... The new caricature portrays Linux enthusiasts as fanatics that have neither interest in nor understanding of the hard realities of the business world.
>>
.
Some circles may believe this, but this is still way off the mark. I work with C-Level and EVP/VP executives every day that are strong advocates of Linux, purely for business reasons. For many ISP owners I know, Linux makes the difference between breaking even and suffering quarterly losses.
.
.
<<
... there are substantial costs to be borne by organizations that implement a Linux-based infrastructure
>>
.
Substantial is a relative term. Substantial versus other alternatives? Typically not.
... The new caricature portrays Linux enthusiasts as fanatics that have neither interest in nor understanding of the hard realities of the business world.
>>
.
Some circles may believe this, but this is still way off the mark. I work with C-Level and EVP/VP executives every day that are strong advocates of Linux, purely for business reasons. For many ISP owners I know, Linux makes the difference between breaking even and suffering quarterly losses.
.
.
<<
... there are substantial costs to be borne by organizations that implement a Linux-based infrastructure
>>
.
Substantial is a relative term. Substantial versus other alternatives? Typically not.
