Tech Broiler

Jason Perlow and Scott Raymond

Surviving the recession with Free Linux distributions (Part 1)

By | October 12, 2008, 8:51am PDT

Summary: Times are tough. You’re a computer geek and you need to feed your PC with the latest and greatest applications. What’s a frugal nerd to do? A group of industry peers was recently asked by a colleague the following question: “If an SMB wants to upgrade from XP, what Linux variants would you recommend?” The first to [...]

linux-dustbowl.jpg

Times are tough. You’re a computer geek and you need to feed your PC with the latest and greatest applications. What’s a frugal nerd to do? A group of industry peers was recently asked by a colleague the following question:

“If an SMB wants to upgrade from XP, what Linux variants would you recommend?”

The first to answer that call among our group was Kenneth Hess, over at DaniWeb, who put together his own “Top 10″ list.

While it’s admirable that Ken did the work, I think his list is flawed because he’s mixing both End-User and Enterprise, and his personal biases are evident. In this first of two parts, I’m going to discuss the major flavors of Linux that best suit the needs of end-users, have no acquisition cost, and also have the best chance of surviving through an extended recession that could last several years. In the second installment, I’m going to address the Enterprise/Server distributions that have the same characteristics.

Click on the “Read the rest of this entry” link below for more.

Ubuntu Desktop Edition

Web Site: http://www.ubuntu.com

More Information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu

Let’s face it, Ubuntu has had a meteoric rise to popularity since the project had its first milestone release four years ago in October of 2004. It quickly displaced Redhat’s own Fedora project as the top downloaded community Linux distribution, and there’s no signs of its energy abating anytime soon.

Distributed in a number of different official flavors depending on your GUI and feature sets of choice, and also “re-mixed” by many less prominent Linux distributions such as Mint and gNewSense, it is by far one of the easiest Linux distributions to install due to its relatively small payload (a single CD-ROM, with the balance of its applications installable over the Internet using package feeds) and comprehensive device driver support. The system can also be installed on top of your existing Windows installation using Wubi without re-partitioning your drive, which is great for fence-sitters who want to check out the OS before completely reformatting the system with Linux or want to easily able to dual-boot. Additionally, with the backing of billionaire Mark Shuttleworth, Ubuntu’s financial stability is ensured for years to come. Ubuntu is a very safe choice for anyone looking to weather the financial storm and to use a free OS, and its constant six-month refresh with the latest and greatest software makes it a great system for those of you who always need to be on the bleeding edge.

The Support Skinny: for Ubuntu “Long Term Support” (LTS) versions: 3 years of security and stability updates. LTS versions are being released once every two years. The current LTS is 8.04. For “Normal” versions: 18 months of security and stability updates. Normal versions are being released once every 6 months. On the end of this month, a new normal version will be released.

OpenSUSE

Web Site: http://www.opensuse.org

More Information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opensuse

Like Ubuntu, OpenSUSE is a relatively new player on the community/free Linux distribution game — it recently celebrated its first three years a community-driven Open Source project. However, its relatively new Community status is misleading, because the project is supported by 16 years of experience from its parent company, SUSE, the most popular Linux distribution in Europe, which was formally acquired by Novell in January of 2004.

At summer LinuxWorld Expo in 2005, its commercial and successful SUSE Linux Professional product was spun off as an Open Source project, what we now know as OpenSUSE. The code base behind OpenSUSE is the basis for both SUSE Linux Enterprise Server and SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, which are two of the most polished corporate/enterprise Linux products available on the market today.

Unlike Ubuntu, OpenSUSE is the “Kitchen Sink” of Linux distributions. Most commonly distributed as a  DVD (although a CD-ROM Live CD is also available)  it includes thousands of packages. I’ve always considered OpenSUSE to be the Cadillac or Mercedes Benz of Linux distros, and it should provide more than enough meat, features and a support base to get end-users through tough times.

Like its rival, the Fedora Project at Red Hat, OpenSUSE is the “proving ground” for many technologies that eventually make its way into SLES and SLED, so its a critical project for the company. Among a host of other reasons, Novell is more than likely to stay financially stable due to its interoperability alliance with and partial financial support from Microsoft, which also makes it something of a pariah in fundamentalist Free Software/Open Source circles.  Still, what some people regard as a weakness is also regarded as a strength by the Enterprise crowd — its privileged status with Microsoft will always make it the most interoperable Linux distro with Microsoft systems for the foreseeable future.

The Support Skinny: 2 years of security and stability updates for each major version. Versions are being released once every 6 months. The Current release version is 11.0. OpenSUSE can also be purchased in boxed format with installation media, a printed Start-Up manual and 90 days of paid technical support for $59.95.

Fedora

Web Site: http://fedoraproject.org

More Information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedora_Project

Red Hat has continuously stated that it has no interest in pursuing the Desktop market, but that’s of little concern to anyone because it has satisfied the needs of the end-user with Fedora, which recently celebrated its 5th anniversary as an Open Source project. Backed by the #1 Enterprise Linux vendor, any questions of its chances of survival during these tough times are moot — it will continue to be the essential developer and testing environment for the Red Hat ecosystem for years to come. In terms of “Safeness” in terms of support it’s probably one of the safest choices for a Linux distribution if you want to weather the storm, as it’s backed by the healthiest Open Source company in the industry.

Fedora isn’t just the Volvo sedan of community OSes, though — it’s an extremely active Open Source project, and is consistently one of the first to inject bleeding edge features into its OS before anyone else, such as its early adoption of  KDE 4 and the KVM virtualization stack. However, some would say that Fedora is a bit too bleeding edge, in that unlike Ubuntu, Debian, or OpenSUSE which has much longer support cycles, it phases out support for its versions very quickly — it is a project that by definition is a constantly moving target. Still, if you can commit to keeping up with new releases, Fedora is a great end-user Linux distribution.

The Support Skinny: 1 year of security and stability updates. Versions are being released once every 6 months.

Debian GNU/Linux

Web Site: http://www.debian.org

More information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian

Debian has to be on this list because it is the very definition of “stable”, “community” and “free”. While definitely not the sexiest of any of the distributions on this list, its importance to the Open Source community is immense. As the “mother” Linux distribution, it breast-feeds many other “child” Linux distributions with its nourishing milk of source packages, the most notable of which is Ubuntu, which could hardly afford to let the project fail due to its huge dependence on Debian for its base systems architecture.

Debian GNU/Linux, which is sponsored by Software in the Public Interest, is related to GNU Project which is a not-for-profit entity supported by the Free Software Foundation, and has thousands of developers around the world, and the largest community of any of the Linux distributions, due to the fact that it cross-pollinates so many other projects. In fact, many of the Ubuntu developers are also Debian developers. Founded in 1993 and the the oldest of the community-supported Linux distributions, it could probably be considered something of a futuristic Monastic Order if you had to classify it in terms of its safeness factor and likelihood of longevity. Like the Albertian Order of St. Leibowitz or the Mathics, The world economy could collapse into a new Dark Ages and it would be likely Debian would probably still be around.

Debian used to be picked on for being difficult to install, but a lot has changed over the years. Since the 4.0 release of “Etch” in April of 2007 the system has had a graphical installation program, and for the most part is no more difficult to install than its more famous child, Ubuntu.  Debian also supports its “stable” releases for several years before phasing them out, so you can be assured that you’ve got a platform that won’t break on you. The flip side of this is that Debian releases tend to take years, so most hard-core Debian fans using the OS for a desktop use the “unstable” feed of the OS or lean towards Ubuntu.

With thousands of developers, thousands of software packages on its feeds, and a massive end-user community, Debian is the safest of the safe if you’re looking to weather a very long economic storm with a Linux distribution.

The Support Skinny: Debian has a very strict and comprehensive release and support cycle. The Debian support cycle includes milestone”Stable” releases, with “Unstable” package feeds being constantly revised and maintained. “Stable” releases are typically released and updated with security and bugfixes over a period of 3 to 4 years, with older versions having overlapping support cycles into the current released versions.

Part 2: Surviving the Recession with Free Enterprise Operating Systems

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Jason Perlow, Sr. Technology Editor at ZDNet, is a technologist with over two decades of experience integrating large heterogeneous multi-vendor computing environments in Fortune 500 companies.

Disclosure

Jason Perlow

My Full-Time Employer is IBM. I write as a freelancer for ZDNet.

Disclaimer: The postings and opinions on this blog are my own and don't necessarily represent IBM's positions, strategies or opinions.

I own no investments or direct financial instruments in the companies I write about.

Biography

Jason Perlow

Jason Perlow, Sr. Technology Editor at ZDNet is a technologist with over two decades of experience with integrating large heterogeneous multi-vendor computing environments in Fortune 500 companies. A long-time computer enthusiast starting the age of 13 with his first Apple ][ personal computer, he began his freelance writing career starting at ZD Sm@rt Reseller in 1996 and has since authored numerous guest columns for ZDNet Enterprise and Ziff-Davis Internet. Jason was previously Senior Technology Editor for Linux Magazine, where he wrote about Open Source issues from 1999 to 2008.

In his spare time, Jason is an avid amateur chef and food writer, where his work reviewing New Jersey restaurants has appeared in The New York Times. He is also the founder of the popular food web site eGullet and blogs about restaurants and cooking at OffTheBroiler.com.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
197
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

I agree with Loverock
Dan the Digital Dog 14th Oct 2009
As unemployed readers with too much time and photographic memories will know, I use a Mac. And Lovey's right! There's no point changing the OS in this economy. I have newer MS Office but it's set to save in Word 97 format by default, and will be for the foreseeable future. I was curious about switching to Linux, but what's the point?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Re: Surviving...
khess 12th Oct 2008
wink

Great article as always, even if you have to diss me to do it.
0 Votes
+ -
If faced with upgrading from XP to Vista (and requiring new hardware to run Vista) then moving to Linux makes perfect sense.

The next step to realize, is that by installing Ubuntu there is a very well integrated package of LTSP (linux terminal server project). This allows using beefy servers and either thin clients or stripping out current fat clients running Windows and and turning them into Thin Clients. Then a half dozen commands later and these machines can network boot off the servers.

Easier maintenance for the IT group later (where the real savings is at).

I've used 10 year old computers as thin clients for manufacturing businesses (from receptionist through engineering quality manufacturing and shipping). This can save a huge amount of cash for a company - maybe they are expanding with new business and need workstations for many new people? Lots of options.


Linux can definitely save a company money - no matter what their condition.
0 Votes
+ -
ThinStation and/or Wyse Linux terminals
pointzerotwo@... 21st Oct 2008
We have been gradually replacing Windows desktops with thin clients running Linux. In some cases we simply run ThinStation on old PCs (late 90's models are fine), booting from CD or even the network. Linux-based Wyse terminals are also inexpensive (~$300?), small (can be bolted to back of a LCD monitor), and reliable.

Granted, they're all connecting to a Windows terminal server, but it has saved us a good bit on desktop replacement costs.
0 Votes
+ -
Support periods
pjotr123 Updated - 12th Oct 2008
Good article! I think it would be helpful if you would mention the exact support periods for each distribution.

Ubuntu:
1. LTS version (Long Term Supported): 3 years of security and stability updates.
LTS versions are being released once every two years. The current LTS is 8.04.

2. Normal version: 18 months of security and stability updates. Normal versions are being released once every 6 months. On the end of this month, a new normal version will be released: 8.10.

Obviously, the LTS version is the version of choice here, for a business.

openSUSE:
2 years of security and stability updates for each version. Versions are being released once every 6 months.

Fedora:
1 year of security and stability updates. Versions are being released once every 6 months.

By the way, I think Fedora is unfit for corporate use, because of it's short support period.

CentOS and Scientific Linux:
A much more logical choice for a business seeking something in the Red Hat family, would be CentOS, which is a revamped Red Hat. Very long support. And extremely stable and reliable.

Or even Scientific Linux, which is also a revamped Red Hat. Also benefited by long-term support and extreme reliability.

Greeting, Pjotr.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Thanks, and added
jperlow 12th Oct 2008
I added the "Support Skinny" for each OS.

CentOS is going to be in Part 2 of this article.
0 Votes
+ -
You missed Redhat for business...
mrlinux 12th Oct 2009
NT
0 Votes
+ -
Pound for pound ...
n0neXn0ne Updated - 12th Oct 2008
I think you're the best Zdnet might have.
Dre` is OK, but he is still too Windows centric.

Keep'em comming.

^o^ devil
0 Votes
+ -
I'm particular to Ubuntu ...
MisterMiester Updated - 12th Oct 2008
...since it does offer LTS versions and there is no free versus professional version. They're one in the same so none of the feelings that by using the free version your treated like a second class citizen.

Ubuntu also have brand recognition and is readily identifiable. SuSe had this prior to its acquisition by Novell, but somehow Novell has not been able to capitalize on their investment other than the bribe ... uh, "collaborative funds" that Microsoft so generously invested into the company.

You also have to look at the direction that Ubuntu is going from its leadership. Mark Shuttleworth is charismatic, charming, and overall a very good spokesman for both Ubuntu and Linux in general. And yes I do have a man crush on Shuttleworth if you haven't noticed.

So Ubuntu appears to be doing for Linux what others in the past have not been able to do effectively, which is raise awareness of Linux as a viable option on the desktop with a friendly to use comprehensive distro. wink
0 Votes
+ -
I too like ubuntu...
Sleeper Service 13th Oct 2008
...but I think we're kidding ourselves if we think moving to Linux desktops for major corporations is an answer at the moment. Too much infrastructure and embedded cost I'm afraid.

The real issue here is that sooner or later the Linux community is going to have to get behind one distribution and then we're going to have to start talking licensing and support costs. And then what happens? Yup, Microsoft Part Deux.
0 Votes
+ -
Kidding
daengbo 13th Oct 2008
The first rule of that recession is that nothing changes that doesn't have to. No new purchases. No new roll-outs.

As much as I'd like to say "the recession is going to be Linux's breakthrough" (I'm an 11-year Linuxer), it isn't going to happen. No one is going to take that kind of risk and investment in a downturn.

In places where it's already rolling out, they might have incentive to continue, but nothing new is going to happen for a while.
0 Votes
+ -
No, that should not happen ...
MisterMiester Updated - 13th Oct 2008
The real issue here is that sooner or later the Linux community is going to have to get behind one distribution and then we're going to have to start talking licensing and support costs. And then what happens? Yup, Microsoft Part Deux.

That should not happen since the kernel and the distribution are different parts of the equation. Neither one can't survive without the other, they have a symbiotic relationship.

Now since the kernel is the constant in the equation, only the distro can be competitive. So you shouldn't have the monopoly effect taking place like when one company has control over both components.

As far as Microsoft I don't want them driven out of existence, but only to a level that allows for true competition on the desktop and not the current conditions that encompasses stagnation of technology and excessive pricing. happy
0 Votes
+ -
Hammer, nail
Yagotta B. Kidding 13th Oct 2008
The real issue here is that sooner or later the Linux community is going to have to get behind one distribution and then we're going to have to start talking licensing and support costs.

Well, you may have a point. Certainly automobiles never really became popular until the emergence of a single manufacturer and the disappearance of all of the others. Same for air travel.

That, or maybe your only experience is with monopoly-dominated markets and so that's the model you force everything into.
0 Votes
+ -
So...
Sleeper Service 13th Oct 2008
...do the vast majority of cars use an internal combustion engine and the vast majority of planes jet engines?

Oh they do?

Yay for bad analogies!
0 Votes
+ -
Engine is a kernel
hamobu-22333136139518773481685514128812 13th Oct 2008
All the distributions use same (or similar) kernels and most software, but they do differ in othe points. Therefore your analogy is wrong, and not the fellow you were replying to.
0 Votes
+ -
Ding! Ding! Ding! ...
MisterMiester 13th Oct 2008
..give that man a cigar! wink
0 Votes
+ -
Point conceded.
Sleeper Service Updated - 13th Oct 2008
Although it is still a bad analogy because there's always been more than one choice of automobile available.
0 Votes
+ -
.....
Linux User 147560 Updated - 13th Oct 2008
Not always, initially all there was, was Fords [Microsoft] (in the US at least). Also it's an excellent analogy. The engine (kernel) has many options, and several configurations. Horizontally opposed pistons? Porche... 4, 6 or 8 cylinders? Turbo, Super Charged, dual ignition, hemi-heads... each item defines the overall experience. Just like in computing...

Same goes with jet engines too. You have split spool, constant speed, variable speed, 10, 13, 16, 22 stage engines... want or need a turbofan?

But you at least conceded the point was valid, but to say a bad analogy is off base. devil
The fact that just about everybody writes software for it first if they want to get paid and port to other OSs if they even bother just as the hackers mainly go after it.

If the browser becomes the OS for cloud computing that might change because only the browser would matter but then you have to write for the most popular browser which will tend to make the same browser the most popular browser.

I as a end user can get by with ubuntu and the software that comes with it. It pinches a little at times but then every OS does.
0 Votes
+ -
As a software developer...
Spikey_Mike 12th Oct 2009
I write windows software for a living. I'm very frustrated with my user base, as they feel *MY* system slows down to a crawl after a few months worth of use.

I advise them to run anti-virus, firewall, NAT router, etc... When they're down, do they blame themselves for not following the advice? No - they blame 'the system'.

That's one aspect where writing for Win32 is getting tiresome. And now win32 is going away! Microsoft has changed things (again!).

The plan is to run our Win32 apps via Wine on Linux. In the meantime, we're writing the next version and will NOT be targeting Win32 or Windows. QT seems like a decent framework and our application source code won't be obsoleted by the next revision of the development tool! For our windows users that won't switch to Linux - QT apps are cross platform.
0 Votes
+ -
Another good choice...
Tim Patterson 13th Oct 2008

..also a ubuntu derivative, Linux Mint.

I is very easy to install and is surprisingly capable.



Read about it here...
Sorry but linux will not help in any recession. In fact it can only make the recession worse. Here you have their current set up which currently works and works well. Then you try to install linux on their machine interrupting their flow of business. All the downtime trying to install and convert will only make things worse.

Do you really think these people want linux to begin with? Of course not. Then when you force it upon them they will need to figure out how to run linux, figure out what software is installed, the versions of the software, then go to the application's website to see if its the current version and if its not they will have to find the download link, download the source code, look for where it was downloaded to, bring up a terminal window and use complex commands to extract it, then use a series of more commands to compile it, then let the system try to install it into wherever it feels like without telling you the exact location, so thats more time spent hunting down the application, and when the person finally does find it they get a seg fault and kernel panic. This is not going to do anything but hurt users due to the extra downtime that is involved with running linux.

The real solution is to say with the current set up until the recession passes. Or go with an upgrade of what they are currently using. Switching platforms would be a grave mistake at this point in time, especially if they are trying to switch to linux. It doesn't do a fraction of the functions these users would need.

Poorly thought out article from someone who has no idea about the IT industry.
0 Votes
+ -
Well ...
MisterMiester Updated - 12th Oct 2008
.. let's replace the word "Linux" with "Vista" on your little diatribe and see how that pans out:

Sorry but Vista will not help in any recession. In fact it can only make the recession worse. Here you have their current set up which currently works and works well. Then you try to install Vista on their machine interrupting their flow of business. All the downtime trying to install and convert will only make things worse.

See how that works? As far as downloading and compiling for most of the mainstream distros that's a thing of the past. For the one in a thousand times when a "bleeding edge" driver or small program is needed it's rather easy since all of the tools are readily available at you fingertips.

Your ignorance of IT in general is beyond belief. How much does Microsoft pay you to make such outlandish claims at every turn? wink
0 Votes
+ -
Let's not
Loverock Davidson 12th Oct 2008
.. let's replace the word "Linux" with "Vista" on your little diatribe and see how that pans out:


Lets not because then it wouldn't be true. By keeping linux in there we know its true and factual.

How much does Microsoft pay you to make such outlandish claims at every turn?

I don't get paid by Microsoft.
0 Votes
+ -
It figures ..
MisterMiester Updated - 12th Oct 2008
By keeping linux in there we know its true and factual.

We? When speaking French it's spelled "oui" because there is no "we" here. Now maybe in your corner of the basement there is, but here in reality world there is no "we".

I keep saying it over and over, you have to be more creative when serving red herring.

I don't get paid by Microsoft.

Then you're a bigger fool than I thought! wink
0 Votes
+ -
In a roundabout way, he has a point.
AllKnowingAllSeeing 12th Oct 2008
Why would anyone pick NOW as a time to undertake such a project?

If there was more info, like why the above mentioned person was wanting to switch, instaed of just the one sentence, then maybe the discussion would be clearer.

Right now their XP licenses are paid for, the people are familure with it, the staff can work with it, why change when 6 months down the road who knows what our budgets will be, or as different author here asked "what open source companies will be sucked into the black hole?"?,

I agree, I wouldn't pick today to do a company wide upgrade to Vista either, for the same reasons.

So he does have a valid point on that question, all else is open to debate.
0 Votes
+ -
Yeah, but ...
MisterMiester 13th Oct 2008
... you admit that you wouldn't upgrade to Vista for the same reasons, while "Loverock" cocaine doesn't. I never suggested that he was "wrong" about changing during a recession, just narrow minded about those reasons being for Linux only. wink
0 Votes
+ -
You're A Moron
itanalyst2@... 13th Oct 2008
0 Votes
+ -
put the on the subject line please...nt
TheBottomLineIsAllThatMatters 13th Oct 2008
nt
0 Votes
+ -
He's.....
todbran@... 13th Oct 2008
just Billy's butt buddy
0 Votes
+ -
you are wasting your time
deaf_e_kate 13th Oct 2008
responding to this troll with any facts. only problem with not trying to shoot him/her down in flames (its an easy target) is that there will always be a couple of naive newbies that will believe what he says. After all the years this troll has been operating, you would have thought maturity would have eventually crept up on this troll but i guess it passed this troll by. But then i guess if (s)he cant see a fact when it strikes him/her, there is no chance of it recognising maturity.
0 Votes
+ -
I agree
planruse 12th Oct 2008
I completely agree. Why on earth would you change your current IT to Linux during a recession - it is hard enough to justify the time and costs moving when not in one!! You could argue the case that you might add new servers to your company that are Linux based if it requires minimal effort to incorporate. We use Linux on a few servers but they are not key to the running of our the company - the Windows based systems have just worked and downtime over the years has been confined to patches and hardware/version upgrades - as they say - if it ain't broke.....!! Just touching wood and crossing fingers now! wink
0 Votes
+ -
Finally someone with some smarts
Loverock Davidson 12th Oct 2008
I don't even see companies wanting to incorporate linux into their server line. The same issues would arise if they did.
0 Votes
+ -
You're A Mindless Fool
itanalyst2@... 13th Oct 2008
0 Votes
+ -
Huge reason to change infrastructure to Linux
User07734 Updated - 25th Oct 2008
If the company is stagnant and not growing, then the payoff is less. However, if the company is adding new machines, a Linux infrastructure is cheaper, as the CAL goes away. That and the whole BSA, we want you to audit your licenses goes away.

The 'Software assurance' purchasers won't benefit from this, but then again, I don't count them as qualified to be making these kinds of decisions. Who but the most daft bought into this? I'll tell you who - every government contract I've worked, good ol' SA. Need I say more?

I will say thought that it takes more than a paper-tiger MCSE to implement a Linux infrastructure to support Windows clients. So, I guess in LD's case, Linux isn't an option for the company (s)he works for. Until that company replaces the defective component in their personell pool, they will remain locked-in to Microsoft tech. Sad thing, actually.
0 Votes
+ -
Throwing Hail Marys While Up by 20 Points
DannyO_0x98 Updated - 12th Oct 2008
It seems to me that any overhead you can cut will push forward
the time someone has to cut production staff. On the down
slope and at the bottom of the cycle, it's time to figure out how
to make that less painful and to prepare for the up cycle. More
productivity and efficiency and lower overhead will make the
ramp up on the upcycle less costly.

True, change is risk and I think people argue that taking the
risk when the market is providing the uplift doesn't make sense
as the downside may cause the company to miss out on the
prosperity.

Now, if your real argument is that, as I think Mr. L. Davidson
argues, one never uses Linux no way no how for any thing
important, then it doesn't matter. You've made your choice and
as long as the beancounters buy into a Window uber alles
argument, the chance that you keep your job is better.

If you're saying that Linux is working for you in certain parts of
the company and Windows is doing okay in the critical parts,
but you are not looking at the possibility that decreasing
Windows licenses may cut costs, well, I think that's a tad shaky.
Especially since, during the down cycle, beancounters are
always quicker to cut staff than servers and beancounters think
IT is a cost (whereas you and I may consider it an opportunity).

You certainly don't want to be in a situation where a change is
made up-org-chart and where that new person, in order to
mark their arrival, start greater deployment of Linux and you've
got nothing in your arsenal besides "If it ain't broke.." After all,
that person will walk in thinking it is broken, or else he or she
wouldn't have just been hired.

In any case, on the slide down, companies are looking for
heroes and villains.

But wasn't Mr. Perlow talking about personal desktop operating
systems? And I hope in Part II, he'll mention the BSDs.
0 Votes
+ -
No Hail Marys for me!
planruse 13th Oct 2008
Thanks for your response but how will moving to Linux increase productivity and efficiency?

I agree there may be lower overheads related to licence costs depending on the distribution you use but not as much as the time, effort and money involved in moving over to Linux on servers or desktops. All of our key applications and web services are VB and .NET based and not something I would want to change without seeing any tangible benefits in doing so. As I said before everything works and works well together, the costs for upgrading the licences are such a small part in our companys overall IT infrastructure and services.

The person coming in to counter my "it ain't broke" stance better have some better reasons than the licence and support costs might be a little bit cheaper. He would also better be careful as he would be reporting to me anyway wink


We are not adverse to using Linux and we do have the odd server providing functionality like caching or backup mail relays but we could switch them off today and everything would carry on running. In the future we may migrate some or all of our systems over to Linux and other Open Source Software but in the current climate, and with our current systems in place, there isn't any sound business reason to do so.
0 Votes
+ -
You've found the very reason...
User07734 25th Oct 2008
... To NOT use microsoft dev. tools. VB and .NET are poison to any enterprise. You exchange (perceived) short-term gains for long term lock-in. Microsoft never has the best dev tech, only the 'easiest' to implement - so easy, a novice user can develop. Trouble is, that's what you end up with - a system designed and developed by novices. Typically (not always), developers who use MS tech are MS-ONLY types. Certainly not best-of-breed aware.

Here's a saying: If you think experts are expensive, wait until you see how much an amateur is going to cost.

As a developer who started out in '88, even working alongside Microsoft consultants, we always developed using Borland C/C++, then had to compile for deployment using MS VC+ (I leave out the other plus, as they were not ANSI C++ compliant) because of the BS Microsoft does to position their product.

Never, ever have I seen a product from Microsoft that earned its preferential use. It has always been the platform that propped up the use of their dev tools. The lesson learned from this has been to use the platform, but not the dev tools. I trust 3rd party dev tools to work around Microsoft's BS shenanigans more than I trust MS. (Think Java).
0 Votes
+ -
You are sadly mistaken
MarksAngel Updated - 12th Oct 2008
Loverock Davidson, I can't compile anything yet Ubuntu is the only operating system installed on my computer. You don't need a ton of knowledge to operate such a system Maybe 10 years ago you did but that is no longer the case.
0 Votes
+ -
No you are mistaken!
Loverock Davidson 12th Oct 2008
Why would you want only ubuntu installed? Do you like being tortured or just don't want to take full advantage of your system? These linux distros still require 10 times more effort and maintenance than its competitors. By limiting yourself to just linux you are at a great disadvantage.
0 Votes
+ -
Actually Ubuntu is easier to Install than Windows
hamobu-22333136139518773481685514128812 13th Oct 2008
I installed Ubuntu with all the software in 30 minutes. Than it took another 15 to run updates, and another 5 minutes to install proprietary codecs.

It would take me much longer just to download all the service packs in windows XP. If I do not use OEM custom instalation for XP, than each driver would require a restart. If I do use OEM custom instalation than it would take me even longer to un-install all the crapware that came with the computer (Vongo - nuff said).

Often times after a fresh install I would get a dialog box after every boot saying that some program is missing some DLL.

After you do all that, than you fire up your browser and shell out $70 for a year liscence of Norton anti-virus. Only then you can download Open Office and Firefox and have a usable system.
0 Votes
+ -
Actually its not
Loverock Davidson 13th Oct 2008
With linux you need to spend countless hours downloading and burning the cd, come up to a text based installer, and try to figure out how to partition the disk with the multiple options displayed. Compare that with Microsoft Windows installation - you have the disc already, just pop it in the cdrom and boot it up, it comes up to a visually pleasing graphical display, then steps you through installation process with minimal user intervention. Updates are available after boot up with an easy online updating system. If you were running linux you'd have to update each package by source manually.

The DLL errors you experience are not from the Windows system but the additional software you chose to install.

That is the great thing about Microsoft Windows, you can pay someone else to maintain your system and keep it secure and at $70 it could be a bargain. You won't see that kind of care and maintenance in the linux world.
0 Votes
+ -
What are you talking about? Everything you said is wrong.
hamobu-22333136139518773481685514128812 13th Oct 2008
Everything you said is 100% wrong. You never deal with source on Ubuntu. There isn't even a compiler included with Ubuntu.

There is no Text installer in Ubuntu.

Updates in Ubuntu are handled outomatically for all the apps. This is actually not true in Windows where each program has it's own way of updating.

You can buy Ubuntu in store (like windows) or you can download it, and it only takes an hour to download. It actually takes longer to download all of the microsoft service packs you will need after the windows install.

Dll errors that I experienced is from crapware that came with default windows instalation from OEM, not from software that I installed.

I could go on and on about all the nonsense. You are obviously ignorant about Ubuntu and about windows.
0 Votes
+ -
Actually...
cheesyone 13th Oct 2008
...he's just plain ignorant!!
0 Votes
+ -
It's Lovertroll, what do u expect?
todbran@... 4th Dec 2008
NA
0 Votes
+ -
Not that many others haven't already. Still, its nice to see it so well tanned.
"FIGJAM" is a general "know-it-all" in the workplace who
annoys all that he/she works with, constantly thinking they
are right when they are almost always wrong.


For the record, most Linux installers are graphic/screen
based. The closest equivalent to what you are describing
is the old Gentoo installer (or perhaps Debian). Most of
the distributions realized many years ago that they needed
a somewhat easier installer interface, so they create
screens (with pictures, even). Sort of like the Solaris
installer (also graphical). Did you know that you can even
do network installs of these systems and not have to even
deal with (or touch) the localhost when installing.

The even have GUIs that inexperienced users (such as
yourself) to use (such as GNOME or KDE or the E desktop
or...). Amazingly enough, these same GUIs are available on
systems like BSD and Solaris.

Amazing, isn't it! So even someone with the limited skills
that Loverock Davidson claims to have could use one of
these systems. (Disclaimer: my impression of Loverock
Davidson is based upon posts and responses, all of which
tend to be wrong. See term above.) You already failed on
the package management/application installation area
(from another talkback), thus you appear to know even less
than you claim.
0 Votes
+ -
Windows is the most complicated OS to
TedKraan 14th Oct 2008
install of all time.. i've seen highly educated people fool around with it. I lost lots of time on it a few times back in the past.

The whole driver this/that.. story..

Just awkward. Linux uses the same hardware and the drivers just work.

At least Linux is real plug'n'play..

It's nice that you have too much money for maintenance and antivirus in the times of a recession.
0 Votes
+ -
Ubuntu and Debian are crack-a-latic my friend
SysAdminII Updated - 27th Oct 2008
Updating Ubuntu or Debian.

Open Shell and type aptitude dist-upgrade....WOW...I now have the latest and greatest code installed on my system and with a simple restart X I am good to go PLUS I saved $289 and didnt have to go to BestBuy and get the latest code.

Windows Update...I have to click on Windblows update icon...agree to their EULA that I will give up my first born and waite while it does a system scan (which takes forever -- even on a dual core - 8 GB RAM - Asus P5N) to see which patches I need and IF I am lucky it will detect it right off and I don't get some alpha numeric error saying it cant find the site. Once I get the downloads I have to install and then reboot and possibly reboot in the middle of the process so I can continue to get the rest of the Updates (IE7) and then when I finally log back in I have to go back to Windblows to get a new security update for IE7 because it could not install initially....WOW..Look, it's already midnight and I am still being hacked because I lack 5 updates.
0 Votes
+ -
Had my Ubuntu running......
todbran@... 4th Dec 2008
in less than one hour. In comparison it took 8 hours to reinstall Windows after having to re-install all of the service packs and a couple hundred security patches. It was quite a pain.
0 Votes
+ -
Ubuntu vs. windows install, reality check
shardeth-15902278 15th Oct 2008
Just have to share this true story. A couple days ago I installed Ubuntu on one of my computers, specifically to look at Ubuntu's 3D graphics capabilities for myself. Stuck the CD in, clicked next a couple times, rebooted, confirmed a warning about restricted drivers, and there it was.
Just yesterday I was in need of a clean Windows machine for testing purposes. That same machine is the only one I have available at the moment. Today I am still procrastinating doing the reinstall of windows, as I will have to recall what the onboard Net, Video, and Audio are, so I can chase down appropriate drivers. And before that there is the whole Sata Driver issue...

I remember once upon a time when Linux was painfully difficult to install. It was only just this morning as I was considering my impending re-install that I actually took notice of this role reversal.
0 Votes
+ -
I agree with Loverock
Dan the Digital Dog 14th Oct 2009
As unemployed readers with too much time and photographic memories will know, I use a Mac. And Lovey's right! There's no point changing the OS in this economy. I have newer MS Office but it's set to save in Word 97 format by default, and will be for the foreseeable future. I was curious about switching to Linux, but what's the point?

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix