Linux not the cheaper option
-
"Everyone has a Linux strategy, even if it's just to throw rocks at Microsoft"[^]
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
-
"Everyone has a Linux strategy, even if it's just to throw rocks at Microsoft"[^]
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
The bottom line is, and always has been, availability of applications for the platform. Remember OS/2? Until there are mainline business applications of comparable capability for Linux, I don't see it replacing Windows anytime soon. onwards and upwards...
-
"Everyone has a Linux strategy, even if it's just to throw rocks at Microsoft"[^]
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
I think CP's 1 million members puts this into perspective. I mean there are atleast 1 million people out there who've done some kind of windows programming (or attempted to). How many developers are there for Linux ? Probably about 10% of this...maybe even less. "Fortunately I had given him a false name" said Ukridge "Why ?" I cried amazed "Just an ordinary business precaution" he replied
-
"Everyone has a Linux strategy, even if it's just to throw rocks at Microsoft"[^]
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
You know what I don't like on statements like this? Let me tell a small story: Around 2 or 3 years ago, trying to stop music CD piracy in Brazil, authorities came to TV and warned that by simply playing pirate or home-burned CDs on your home stereo you would surely damage your equipment, and this would be much more expensive than buying CDs. Guess what happened? People believed on this lie for a while, but soon everyone realized it wasn't true, and people who used pirate CDs still probably use their home stereos until today. Now, let's get back to Linux x Windows: it's not by saying "Linux is more expensive!" that you'll beat it. I'll take you an example: I have an old AMD 650Mhz machine, with 128MB RAM lying around; I built a Linux Server based on Suse , and it took me an afternoon to set it up. It's serving: 1. Bugzilla 2. CVS 3. SMTP Server 4. SSH (every connection to the CVS is served through SSH) 5. rsync for offsite backup 6. Samba client (so it joined our W2K AD) and a Samba server (so we can do on-site backup using Windows tools) Bear in mind I'm no wizard at Linux. So, a challenge: can anyone point me to a cheaper solution based on non-Linux products? I see dumb people
-
I think CP's 1 million members puts this into perspective. I mean there are atleast 1 million people out there who've done some kind of windows programming (or attempted to). How many developers are there for Linux ? Probably about 10% of this...maybe even less. "Fortunately I had given him a false name" said Ukridge "Why ?" I cried amazed "Just an ordinary business precaution" he replied
Ramanan Sivan wrote: I mean there are atleast 1 million people out there who've done some kind of windows programming (or attempted to). Yup. And, at least three of them are me... :rolleyes: It's worth noting, i've dabbled in OS/2 and Linux programming also - they're not mutually exclusive, yet. Heh, if you're doing web or server apps, you've a reasonable chance of using [Perl|Python|PHP|Java] and running cross-platform. Ramanan Sivan wrote: How many developers are there for Linux ? Probably about 10% of this...maybe even less. Don't do that - making wild guesses is just asking for trouble, as anyone else can do the same to contradict you. For instance, Oracle's Robert Clevenger states:
"There are more than 18 million Linux developers worldwide, and the number is growing."
The bees will find their honey; The sweetest every time...
-
Ramanan Sivan wrote: I mean there are atleast 1 million people out there who've done some kind of windows programming (or attempted to). Yup. And, at least three of them are me... :rolleyes: It's worth noting, i've dabbled in OS/2 and Linux programming also - they're not mutually exclusive, yet. Heh, if you're doing web or server apps, you've a reasonable chance of using [Perl|Python|PHP|Java] and running cross-platform. Ramanan Sivan wrote: How many developers are there for Linux ? Probably about 10% of this...maybe even less. Don't do that - making wild guesses is just asking for trouble, as anyone else can do the same to contradict you. For instance, Oracle's Robert Clevenger states:
"There are more than 18 million Linux developers worldwide, and the number is growing."
The bees will find their honey; The sweetest every time...
"It's worth noting, i've dabbled in OS/2 and Linux programming also - they're not mutually exclusive, yet. Heh, if you're doing web or server apps, you've a reasonable chance of using [Perl|Python|PHP|Java] and running cross-platform " We may not even need to make that much of a change if Mono turns out to be the development platform of choice for Linux ! "Fortunately I had given him a false name" said Ukridge "Why ?" I cried amazed "Just an ordinary business precaution" he replied
-
You know what I don't like on statements like this? Let me tell a small story: Around 2 or 3 years ago, trying to stop music CD piracy in Brazil, authorities came to TV and warned that by simply playing pirate or home-burned CDs on your home stereo you would surely damage your equipment, and this would be much more expensive than buying CDs. Guess what happened? People believed on this lie for a while, but soon everyone realized it wasn't true, and people who used pirate CDs still probably use their home stereos until today. Now, let's get back to Linux x Windows: it's not by saying "Linux is more expensive!" that you'll beat it. I'll take you an example: I have an old AMD 650Mhz machine, with 128MB RAM lying around; I built a Linux Server based on Suse , and it took me an afternoon to set it up. It's serving: 1. Bugzilla 2. CVS 3. SMTP Server 4. SSH (every connection to the CVS is served through SSH) 5. rsync for offsite backup 6. Samba client (so it joined our W2K AD) and a Samba server (so we can do on-site backup using Windows tools) Bear in mind I'm no wizard at Linux. So, a challenge: can anyone point me to a cheaper solution based on non-Linux products? I see dumb people
How much would it cost to convert a medium sized company from Windows servers to Linux? Your current admin staff would have to be retrained or replaced. Applications would have to be converted or rewritten. Linux is fine for running a web server on but beyond that it gets a little tricky. BTW, I've got a red hat server running here for bugzilla and cvs too. :)
-
"Everyone has a Linux strategy, even if it's just to throw rocks at Microsoft"[^]
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
Ok... I'm reading three things here: 1) Executives like to make decisions which are seen as "trendy". 2) Large-scale software migration is expensive, trendy or not. 3) Being trendy won't save your ass if you make an expensive decision for little or no gain. So, certain executives are coming around to the idea that it's wise to (*gasp*) weigh the cost against the expected benefit prior to mandating a large, expensive software migration. The bees will find their honey; The sweetest every time...
-
How much would it cost to convert a medium sized company from Windows servers to Linux? Your current admin staff would have to be retrained or replaced. Applications would have to be converted or rewritten. Linux is fine for running a web server on but beyond that it gets a little tricky. BTW, I've got a red hat server running here for bugzilla and cvs too. :)
Avery Moore wrote: Your current admin staff would have to be retrained or replaced. Seeing from the POV of a company: staff qualification is your responsibility, not mine :) Avery Moore wrote: How much would it cost to convert a medium sized company from Windows servers to Linux? Nothing: deploy every new software on Linux (or use something that can be easily deployed, like Java/PHP/Perl/standard C++), and leave Windows software as is. After a few months (or years), you won't have a single software running on Windows anymore. AFAIK, it seems to be the strategy of most big companies on Brazil right now. Avery Moore wrote: Applications would have to be converted or rewritten It's wise to develop your new applications with an eye on Linux: avoiding technologies that can't be deployed on Linux is one way. I see dumb people
-
Avery Moore wrote: Your current admin staff would have to be retrained or replaced. Seeing from the POV of a company: staff qualification is your responsibility, not mine :) Avery Moore wrote: How much would it cost to convert a medium sized company from Windows servers to Linux? Nothing: deploy every new software on Linux (or use something that can be easily deployed, like Java/PHP/Perl/standard C++), and leave Windows software as is. After a few months (or years), you won't have a single software running on Windows anymore. AFAIK, it seems to be the strategy of most big companies on Brazil right now. Avery Moore wrote: Applications would have to be converted or rewritten It's wise to develop your new applications with an eye on Linux: avoiding technologies that can't be deployed on Linux is one way. I see dumb people
Daniel Turini wrote: It's wise to develop your new applications with an eye on Linux: avoiding technologies that can't be deployed on Linux is one way. Depends on your software. Linux is not taking over the desktop before you have rewritten your software several times anyway. (I dont see linux take over the desktop market for several years, actually I dont think it will ever happen) On the server... Well, the server stuff I make, uses some Windows only features like IO Completion ports, and I dows threading the Windoes way, not the *nix way, and I have no problem with that. There might be Linux servers running out there, but not as manu as Windows servers, and I dont think that will change sometime soon. Sure, more and more Linux servers are running everywhere, but It's the same with Windows Servers... - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!" ShotKeeper, my Photo Album / Organizer Application[^]
-
"It's worth noting, i've dabbled in OS/2 and Linux programming also - they're not mutually exclusive, yet. Heh, if you're doing web or server apps, you've a reasonable chance of using [Perl|Python|PHP|Java] and running cross-platform " We may not even need to make that much of a change if Mono turns out to be the development platform of choice for Linux ! "Fortunately I had given him a false name" said Ukridge "Why ?" I cried amazed "Just an ordinary business precaution" he replied
Ramanan Sivan wrote: We may not even need to make that much of a change if Mono turns out to be the development platform of choice for Linux ! Right now, with Microsoft's insistence on using IIS for ASP.NET on Microsoft platforms, Mono might have a better chance of hitting it big with large organizations, which use J2EE application servers. Even then, the question will be "why .NET over J2EE?". I seems to be running very well for a lot of large organizations. I don't think Mono will ever become the development platform of choice; and even if it becomes that, they are adding so many libraries that are not available on the native Windows version. But then, Mono has a Windows version as well. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
You know what I don't like on statements like this? Let me tell a small story: Around 2 or 3 years ago, trying to stop music CD piracy in Brazil, authorities came to TV and warned that by simply playing pirate or home-burned CDs on your home stereo you would surely damage your equipment, and this would be much more expensive than buying CDs. Guess what happened? People believed on this lie for a while, but soon everyone realized it wasn't true, and people who used pirate CDs still probably use their home stereos until today. Now, let's get back to Linux x Windows: it's not by saying "Linux is more expensive!" that you'll beat it. I'll take you an example: I have an old AMD 650Mhz machine, with 128MB RAM lying around; I built a Linux Server based on Suse , and it took me an afternoon to set it up. It's serving: 1. Bugzilla 2. CVS 3. SMTP Server 4. SSH (every connection to the CVS is served through SSH) 5. rsync for offsite backup 6. Samba client (so it joined our W2K AD) and a Samba server (so we can do on-site backup using Windows tools) Bear in mind I'm no wizard at Linux. So, a challenge: can anyone point me to a cheaper solution based on non-Linux products? I see dumb people
I hear what you say. Here are some difficulties I think you will have. 1 Harder to find system admins who are good and have experience at linux. Its easy to find admins for windows. Most unix admins are really good and will command a price. 2 Harder to find developers. Or if you do find them they will cost you much more. 3 You won't need CP anymore :) This I'm sure is a bad thing But I think the reason it'll cost you more is simply that good trained professionals for Linux are a lot harder to come by than Windows ones. " Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill ? "
-
Daniel Turini wrote: It's wise to develop your new applications with an eye on Linux: avoiding technologies that can't be deployed on Linux is one way. Depends on your software. Linux is not taking over the desktop before you have rewritten your software several times anyway. (I dont see linux take over the desktop market for several years, actually I dont think it will ever happen) On the server... Well, the server stuff I make, uses some Windows only features like IO Completion ports, and I dows threading the Windoes way, not the *nix way, and I have no problem with that. There might be Linux servers running out there, but not as manu as Windows servers, and I dont think that will change sometime soon. Sure, more and more Linux servers are running everywhere, but It's the same with Windows Servers... - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!" ShotKeeper, my Photo Album / Organizer Application[^]
Anders Molin wrote: Depends on your software. Sorry, I don't agree: it depends only on your customers. It doesn't matter if you like or not the Windows development model; it's up to your customers the decision wether your software will run on wich OS... Anders Molin wrote: Well, the server stuff I make, uses some Windows only features like IO Completion ports, and I dows threading the Windoes way, not the *nix way, and I have no problem with that. I used to think like that until a few months ago, and I'm starting to face several problems. I also wrote code that used all available features on IE and SQL Server 2000, and now my customers are starting to ask for Oracle and Mozilla... I see dumb people
-
Anders Molin wrote: Depends on your software. Sorry, I don't agree: it depends only on your customers. It doesn't matter if you like or not the Windows development model; it's up to your customers the decision wether your software will run on wich OS... Anders Molin wrote: Well, the server stuff I make, uses some Windows only features like IO Completion ports, and I dows threading the Windoes way, not the *nix way, and I have no problem with that. I used to think like that until a few months ago, and I'm starting to face several problems. I also wrote code that used all available features on IE and SQL Server 2000, and now my customers are starting to ask for Oracle and Mozilla... I see dumb people
Daniel Turini wrote: I also wrote code that used all available features on IE and SQL Server 2000, and now my customers are starting to ask for Oracle and Mozilla... Mine are not :) And the Windows maket is still the largest one, so I have no problem what so ever developing only for Windows. And with the quality the Linux dev tools are, I dont wanna develop anything for Linux. I would rather find another career than using that crap ;) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!" ShotKeeper, my Photo Album / Organizer Application[^]
-
You know what I don't like on statements like this? Let me tell a small story: Around 2 or 3 years ago, trying to stop music CD piracy in Brazil, authorities came to TV and warned that by simply playing pirate or home-burned CDs on your home stereo you would surely damage your equipment, and this would be much more expensive than buying CDs. Guess what happened? People believed on this lie for a while, but soon everyone realized it wasn't true, and people who used pirate CDs still probably use their home stereos until today. Now, let's get back to Linux x Windows: it's not by saying "Linux is more expensive!" that you'll beat it. I'll take you an example: I have an old AMD 650Mhz machine, with 128MB RAM lying around; I built a Linux Server based on Suse , and it took me an afternoon to set it up. It's serving: 1. Bugzilla 2. CVS 3. SMTP Server 4. SSH (every connection to the CVS is served through SSH) 5. rsync for offsite backup 6. Samba client (so it joined our W2K AD) and a Samba server (so we can do on-site backup using Windows tools) Bear in mind I'm no wizard at Linux. So, a challenge: can anyone point me to a cheaper solution based on non-Linux products? I see dumb people
Linux may currently be less expensive for developers, but that will certainly change if SCO wins it law suits - every workstation will cost at least $200 just for the Linux license. As for non developer applications (like Open Office or Star Office - which is what the majority of the desktops would be using) - I recently read that at least one of the applications is going to a yearly subscription model Steve