----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Abernathy" <Cnc002@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


> Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the
people
> that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.

Very true

> In the real world, companies and people want something that they don't
need
> to think to use.  Mac and Windows seems to be going closer to that than
> Linux.

Also true.  In addition, in industry, companies want something they feel
they can count on.  Support is a big issue.  Although there is some support
for Linux, none of it is structured to deliver the sort of confidence that
M$ does.

> reason,  it took specialized people to maintain them.  Linux is just a
"free"  or
> "shareware" version of UNIX from what I have learned.  Are we just
longing for
> days gone by here?

Yes and no.  There is a lot of value in the old stuff.  In many ways,
Windows is just a new DOS with a fancy paint job.  Linux is only just
getting the paint job act together.

But there is one big difference ... Windows Applications, Windows, and PC's
conspire in an upgrade cycle that is getting very expensive.  Companies are
noticing this.  The Linux upgrade cycle is not nearly as expensive, either
in terms of actual dollar outlay, nor in terms of retraining and conversion.
With M$, every two or three years it's a new ball game.  This is very
expensive.  Next month we are going to get a "security upgrade" with few new
features that may be more expensive than the new operating system versions,
in terms of conversions, application upgrades, and retraining.

> It is fun to "re-invent" the wheel sometimes but I have yet to find any of
> my major clients that will even consider using Linux or going back to a
UNIX
> type operating system.  They like how Windows seems to work for them.

And the Linux enthusiasts still don't really get this.

> Just asking a question here that has been proposed to me by a number  of
my
> clients that have seen Linux and wanted to know why someone would, more or
> less, go backwards.

In some areas, it isn't a step backwards.  I think it is hard to argue that
it is an improvement for the desktop, other than dollar outlay.  But for
database servers, firewalls, file servers, web servers, etc. etc. etc.
Microsloth is scrambling to catch up.

For people who develop it is interesting how it is evolving.  Linux has
always had quite a complete development environment, which in many ways has
traditionally been more developer-friendly than M$.  But M$ has been upping
the ante there in a way that is hard for the open source community to match.
VS 2005 has developer features that are truly astonishing.  But it comes at
a breathtaking cost.  It will be interesting to see whether people will be
willing to make the investment to get the features.  I suspect that they
will, because the security features in particular are hard to ignore.  But
it looks as if Whidbey is poised to deliver developer productivity features
that are going to make it hard to compete.

--McD

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu