Sitewide
RSS Feed:
Linux on the business desktop
 |
By: Michael Warrilow, Director, Hydrasight Published: 19th April 2007 Copyright Hydrasight © 2007 |
 |
Delicious
Digg
reddit
Facebook
StumbleUponI received a mountain of comments regarding my blog entry about desktop Linux, which explored my early experiences using SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop (as a potential Windows replacement for the business user).
I must confess I was pleasantly surprised with the (low) level of animosity in the responses received… other than the odd dig from the occasional zealot on either side. It was much less than I expected: anecdotal evidence that the argument is evolving, perhaps?
I also got suggestions on various Windows mitigation strategies (e.g., Citrix, VMWare, wine). Availability of these technologies will clearly have a positive impact on an organisation's current potential to migrate—particularly among enterprise-class organisations.
Meanwhile, my Linux (business) desktop adventure continues—some good, some annoying and (surprisingly, to me at least) only a few bad. I've sussed-out SUSE and ushered in Ubuntu—both of which demonstrate that the real issue is no longer technical (it hardly ever is, is it?). Both of these distros are increasingly suitable for the average business desktop… and increasingly the business laptop too, imho. For example, Ubuntu 7.04, named Feisty Fawn, due for release Thursday 19 April, looks to make wireless support an out-of-the-box experience for laptop Linux.
So, with the technical arguments receding into the background, the decision to 'switch' will come down to minimising intertia (just as with the Mac). This will be a function of familiarity (so as to reduce hard and soft switching costs) plus feeling sufficiently comfortable that your organisation is not the first to fly in the face of conventional IT practice. What's more, it may also be somewhat dependent upon where you are in the world—say Tamil Nadu, for example. There's other considerations too, and many of these were mentioned in my prior blog entry so I'm not going to repeat them here.
Finally, before anyone says it, obviously this won't be for everyone. In fact, the scant research I've seen says Linux desktop adoption is a single digit trend right now (i.e., 1% or thereabouts). So what I want to do is put a little more science into our discussion. Clearly some of you are using Linux on the desktop at work now; or at least that's what your comments suggest. So why not share your experiences with the rest of us?
Below are some suggested characteristics to include in your response—be it anonymous or otherwise.
- Name of organisation (optional)
- Industry
- Country
- Total number of employees (full time equivalent)
- Total number of Linux desktops & laptops
- Total number of Windows desktops & laptops
- Why did your organisation begin the 'switch'? How far have you got? What was/is coexistence like?
- Any other observations? (be they good, bad, ugly)
I look forward to hearing from you.
Reader Comments
We are no longer accepting comments against this item. We suggest contacting the author directly.
20th April 2007: 'James' said:
I firmly believe that Linux is suited only for the server and consumer desktop. It is a long way from Business desktops unless you run a VM with Windows on! But what's the point in that? You still need an MS license, so you might as well go with Windows and forget Linux. Plus your answers: * Personal
* Personal
* UK
* 0
* 0
* 2
* N/A
* Linux desktop is poor overall
20th April 2007: 'Jenny Latimer' said:
Linux on the desktop is poor? Have you actually seen KDE / GNOME / Enlightenment? Have you tried OpenOffice, Evolution, Firefox, Thunderbird etc? For a free OS it is quite something. Couple this with the reduced threat of viruses and malware and you have something worthy of consideration.
20th April 2007: 'Simon Phoenix' said:
The learning curve for implementing a non-MS desktop must be HUGE. Most businesses exist to make money, not through it down the drain on the latest fads!
20th April 2007: 'Ian Fletcher' said:
Too steep a learning curve, everyone knows Windows.
20th April 2007: 'Neil McFarlane' said:
I believe Linux can be used successfully on the desktop in most environments. The two primary reasons, so far as I can tell, why Linux is frowned upon in the corporate environment are user acceptance/understanding and lack of adequate, specialized software. For the former, I think it's a safe assumption that the average corporate (and home) user spends 90% of their time in a browser, office application or email application. On Linux, free and viable solutions exist that shouldn't take much time (an hour or two for all but the most stubborn of users) to train employees in their use. For the latter, which primarily applies to corporations that have non-web based, specialized applications (medical / financial software etc.) Wine has been able to run most things I've thrown at it without a hitch. Now, that said, Linux is not going to be the ideal solution anytime soon. Large enterprises, especially those in slow-shifting fields such as the financial or medical sector, are likely to have sufficient resistance just to the idea of introducing a new operating system to prevent it from being forwarded. That, coupled with the inherent safety that choosing Microsoft bestows to the individual who ultimately decides which software to procure (recall the saying "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM.") leaves Linux as something that fear alone would prevent, regardless of its capability. The current FUD campaign being spread by Microsoft certainly augments this. For small businesses (< 10 people), the primary problem is likely to be a lack of knowledge as to the capabilities of Linux, with the common misperceptions that it's something only for servers and that its difficult to use. A valid concern for them beyond that though, is the cost of a Linux systems administrator; being that they are not as common as Windows system administrators, they are likely to be more expensive, and even then, mostly server-oriented. Where it might see some in-roads, if anywhere, will be the medium sized businesses. This entities do not qualify for large discounts off of enterprise liscencing agreements and usually have the resources to be able to prototype alternative solutions. Ultimately though, Linux growth in the corporate environment is going to have to start at home; poeple use what they are familiar with. Judging by the continued acceptance of Linux distrobutions like Ubuntu, and the sub-par reception of Vista, growth among users at home is only going to continue to increase. Will Linux be on the average corporate desktop within a year? No. Three years? Maybe. Five years? Certainly.
23rd April 2007: 'BajanGerry' said:
Why would a company change to from Windows to Linux on the desktop? Is there a financial benefit? I don't think there is. Try buying a Dell computer without Windows pre-installed and it actually cost you MORE! Everyone with computer skills will have been trained on Windows as well, not Linux. So where is the savings for businesses coming from?
27th April 2007: 'Brian' said:
The way Linux will get adopted on the desktop will be when ISV's recommend Linux as the desktop platform. For example, if your company runs an accounting product like Sage, then you'd probably be inclined to adopt Linux on the desktop if Sage said they recommended you use Linux. The best thing Linux distro's could do would be to find and partner with ISV's so they could get their platform in the door.
The messages above were all contributed by IT-Director.com readers. Whilst we take care to remove any posts deemed inappropriate, we can take no responsibility for these comments. If you would like a comment removed please contact our editorial team.