Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

[udha]

As an addendum to my post above, think of this if you will:

We are assuming now that Windows is "Ready for the desktop" as it were. But then in the same move, many of us have un unrealistic expectation of GNU/Linux saying that because it is too difficult to install, it is not ready for the desktop. What kind of double-standards are we trying to push here? Using this logic, we are saying that we expect every user, at home, in business, buyer of Dell and HP etc, to purchase their computer, and be given a copy of Windows on a CD, and for the manufacturer to say, here you are, enjoy installing that, and then the drivers. And then the updates. Oh and don't forget your anti-virus software, the latest definitions, and remember to install any number of the firewall applications out, and you may also want these applications too, they'll be extra, and you'll also need to install those yourself too.
But they do not, they say, here is your computer, and OS, and various applications and drivers installed and configured out of the box, enjoy, this is called "Ready for the desktop."

So in that light, a computer novice, given a computer with any mainstream flavor of GNU/Linux, preinstalled, drivers taken care off, hardware configured, and ready to go, will have no problems whatsoever in using this for the very same tasks, and, just like with Windows, if something goes wrong or causes problems, they call a tech, just as they do now with Windows, Linux is ready, right now, and it's only getting better.

[ShadowVlican]

As an addendum to my post above, think of this if you will:

We are assuming now that Windows is "Ready for the desktop" as it were. But then in the same move, many of us have un unrealistic expectation of GNU/Linux saying that because it is too difficult to install, it is not ready for the desktop. What kind of double-standards are we trying to push here? Using this logic, we are saying that we expect every user, at home, in business, buyer of Dell and HP etc, to purchase their computer, and be given a copy of Windows on a CD, and for the manufacturer to say, here you are, enjoy installing that, and then the drivers. And then the updates. Oh and don't forget your anti-virus software, the latest definitions, and remember to install any number of the firewall applications out, and you may also want these applications too, they'll be extra, and you'll also need to install those yourself too.
But they do not, they say, here is your computer, and OS, and various applications and drivers installed and configured out of the box, enjoy, this is called "Ready for the desktop."

So in that light, a computer novice, given a computer with any mainstream flavor of GNU/Linux, preinstalled, drivers taken care off, hardware configured, and ready to go, will have no problems whatsoever in using this for the very same tasks, and, just like with Windows, if something goes wrong or causes problems, they call a tech, just as they do now with Windows, Linux is ready, right now, and it's only getting better.

problem here is that installing drivers in windows is equal to clicking "next" like 15 times.... and that's all it takes.... (not to mention there's little need for driver hunting, since every piece of hardware i've bought came with CDs.... not that i use them...)

then there's autoupdate... nothing to worry about there... (same with ubuntu!)

antivirus and firewalls..... same deal... click "next" like 15 times...

for me..... install windows and ubuntu are equally easy... infact, ubuntu was easier! kudos to the programmers behind the installation scheme!

it's when it comes to other peripherals (or unsupported hardware... so blame the manufacturers...) and software equivalents (GIMP != photoshop... Games... etc...) that linux starts to fail

[Brunellus]

problem here is that installing drivers in windows is equal to clicking "next" like 15 times.... and that's all it takes.... (not to mention there's little need for driver hunting, since every piece of hardware i've bought came with CDs.... not that i use them...)

then there's autoupdate... nothing to worry about there... (same with ubuntu!)

antivirus and firewalls..... same deal... click "next" like 15 times...

for me..... install windows and ubuntu are equally easy... infact, ubuntu was easier! kudos to the programmers behind the installation scheme!

it's when it comes to other peripherals (or unsupported hardware... so blame the manufacturers...) and software equivalents (GIMP != photoshop... Games... etc...) that linux starts to fail

it's all about perspective. For me, Gimp > Photoshop--it's more capability than I could afford if I'd actually shelled out on an image editing suite. The learning curve doesn't faze me, since I never really learned Photoshop. And while I understand PS's total superiority in pre-press work. . . well, I don't do pre-press, so it's not an issue.

If you were never attached to proprietary solutions to begin with, you don't feel you've given anything up by using Free Software. My father certainly doesn't feel that way using OpenOffice, Firefox, or XSane. . .

[FLPCGuy]

Much like TDK800 I have over a dozen years of business computing support experience. But I didn't see one legitimate business reason in his entire argument.

Cost-wise, it is hard to justify Vista which adds hundreds to the hardware requirements of each desktop for comparable performance to XP let alone Linux, not to mention the price of Vista Business ($199) and MS-Office. We're talking at least $500 a desktop. You can buy a lot of transition training at those prices and be free of the SpyWare, viruses, adWare, plus all the restrictions and snooping capabilities incorporated into Vista. It cost businesses $Billions to clean up the Code Red Windows mess...add another $50 per desktop for the next Melissa-type virus.

I've supported over 1,000 Office users but can't recall one who relied upon a feature not included in Open Office. AbiWord is far more like the MS Word most users will find familiar than the one in Office 2007 is. Add training costs for Ofc 2007 plus incompatibility issues with it's new default format.

Installing fonts, codecs, drivers, or even applications is NOT something a business desktop end user should be doing. They don't need Admin/root privileges. That's all best reserved for Tech Support.

Real concerns about running Linux on the desktop in all but a small business include:
1. backing up user created files or forcing users to save files remotely. Windows has all the tools for an Admin to insure all user data gets backed up AND can be restored by the user when lost without Admin assistance. See Shadow Copy.

2. Locking down desktops for sw license control and limited use by all is not a design goal of any Linux distro I know. See Local/Active Dir Group Policies.

3. Directory Services administration and software publishing reduces admin costs and insures license compliance while enabling those users who access networks from multiple PCs have the apps and files they need. This still needs work but is about six years ahead of Novell's efforts in this area.

4. Exchange mail server is the clear alternative to Lotus Notes, the only other mail system capable of filtering and supporting mail to over 1,000 users over a period of years without database/performance problems. Meeting coordination and resource scheduling are not yet available to Exchange Linux clients.

5. Rapid deployment and Automatic Update is possible with Linux too but without intermediate testing/control by local admins. See SUS/WUS services.

6. Automatic encryption is available only on the Business and Premium versions of Vista, but are superior to this capability in most Linux distros.

7. Driver rollback and automatic recovery to Last Known Good Configuration can solve some driver problems without tech support intervention.

8. Some of the very best software for business is not Linux compatible (Quick Books, for example).

Fortunately, Linux with MONO 2.0 will eventually be able to utilize all the vital business features of SQL Server databases such as data mining very large databases via sampling tables. That's something even Oracle can't do and well beyond the capability of any open standards database.

These are a few legitimate business concerns with Linux desktop readiness.

[aysiu]

FLPCGuy, thanks for the breakdown.

Those sound like legitimate concerns.

[Brunellus]

Much like TDK800 I have over a dozen years of business computing support experience. But I didn't see one legitimate business reason in his entire argument.

Cost-wise, it is hard to justify Vista which adds hundreds to the hardware requirements of each desktop for comparable performance to XP let alone Linux, not to mention the price of Vista Business ($199) and MS-Office. We're talking at least $500 a desktop. You can buy a lot of transition training at those prices and be free of the SpyWare, viruses, adWare, plus all the restrictions and snooping capabilities incorporated into Vista. It cost businesses $Billions to clean up the Code Red Windows mess...add another $50 per desktop for the next Melissa-type virus.

I've supported over 1,000 Office users but can't recall one who relied upon a feature not included in Open Office. AbiWord is far more like the MS Word most users will find familiar than the one in Office 2007 is. Add training costs for Ofc 2007 plus incompatibility issues with it's new default format.

Installing fonts, codecs, drivers, or even applications is NOT something a business desktop end user should be doing. They don't need Admin/root privileges. That's all best reserved for Tech Support.

Real concerns about running Linux on the desktop in all but a small business include:
1. backing up user created files or forcing users to save files remotely. Windows has all the tools for an Admin to insure all user data gets backed up AND can be restored by the user when lost without Admin assistance. See Shadow Copy.

2. Locking down desktops for sw license control and limited use by all is not a design goal of any Linux distro I know. See Local/Active Dir Group Policies.

3. Directory Services administration and software publishing reduces admin costs and insures license compliance while enabling those users who access networks from multiple PCs have the apps and files they need. This still needs work but is about six years ahead of Novell's efforts in this area.

4. Exchange mail server is the clear alternative to Lotus Notes, the only other mail system capable of filtering and supporting mail to over 1,000 users over a period of years without database/performance problems. Meeting coordination and resource scheduling are not yet available to Exchange Linux clients.

5. Rapid deployment and Automatic Update is possible with Linux too but without intermediate testing/control by local admins. See SUS/WUS services.

6. Automatic encryption is available only on the Business and Premium versions of Vista, but are superior to this capability in most Linux distros.

7. Driver rollback and automatic recovery to Last Known Good Configuration can solve some driver problems without tech support intervention.

8. Some of the very best software for business is not Linux compatible (Quick Books, for example).

Fortunately, Linux with MONO 2.0 will eventually be able to utilize all the vital business features of SQL Server databases such as data mining very large databases via sampling tables. That's something even Oracle can't do and well beyond the capability of any open standards database.

These are a few legitimate business concerns with Linux desktop readiness.

To what extent would many of these concerns be addressed by a thin client setup? Take away the headache of maintaniing separate desktops/workstations, and many of the problems simply vanish, in theory. With thin clients, users simply wouldn't be *permitted* to break anything.

[koenn]

To what extent would many of these concerns be addressed by a thin client setup? ...

Brunellus has a point.
'If I replace all these Windows desktops wit Linux desktops, what Linux alternative can I use to replace active directory, Group Policies, WSUS, ... " is the corporate sysadmin's version of the home user's "I want Linux to be Windows but without the visuses, and without the license fee".
All these management tools were invented because Windows was originally a stand-alone single user system, but as it entered the networked business scene, the need for remote management emerged, and was solved with active directory, Group Policies, WSUS etc.
A server-based environment (where the roots of Linux lie) would require much less of such tools so in the Unix / Linux world, they hardly exist. Compair to the lack of filesystem defragmentation tools etc.
( more thoughts : http://users.telenet.be/mydotcom/how...igration03.htm )

[darrenm]

I'm no Windows sysadmin so I don't profess to know everything you are talking about. But I have to question a few things:

Real concerns about running Linux on the desktop in all but a small business include:
1. backing up user created files or forcing users to save files remotely. Windows has all the tools for an Admin to insure all user data gets backed up AND can be restored by the user when lost without Admin assistance. See Shadow Copy.

2. Locking down desktops for sw license control and limited use by all is not a design goal of any Linux distro I know. See Local/Active Dir Group Policies..

But all of the restrictive stuff is surely far better served in the Nix world with proper permissions, thin client booting of read-only NFS mounts? Limited use by all is built-in to Linux from the very start and Windows is only just catching up. Root can allow users to do as little or as much as they want on any machine.

3. Directory Services administration and software publishing reduces admin costs and insures license compliance while enabling those users who access networks from multiple PCs have the apps and files they need. This still needs work but is about six years ahead of Novell's efforts in this area..

Licenses aren't that much of an issue with mainly open-source software. I don't get how accessing the network from different machines would stop users from accessing apps and files they need in the first place?

4. Exchange mail server is the clear alternative to Lotus Notes, the only other mail system capable of filtering and supporting mail to over 1,000 users over a period of years without database/performance problems. Meeting coordination and resource scheduling are not yet available to Exchange Linux clients..

To myself and everyone I've ever worked with, Exchange is the big joke of the email world. We used to be able to bring the Exchange server down by sending a mass mail to a distribution group with some external users. It would take a few hours before mails started catching up. No-one in their right mind ever operates Exchange on an external connection, it's only ever meant to be a groupware server. It does shared calendaring and shared contacts which are priceless things for the enterprise and something Linux is really lacking.

5. Rapid deployment and Automatic Update is possible with Linux too but without intermediate testing/control by local admins. See SUS/WUS services..

Can you explain what you mean by intermediate testing/control?

6. Automatic encryption is available only on the Business and Premium versions of Vista, but are superior to this capability in most Linux distros.

7. Driver rollback and automatic recovery to Last Known Good Configuration can solve some driver problems without tech support intervention..

Not really an issue for Linux and desktops that are set up so users can't fiddle.

8. Some of the very best software for business is not Linux compatible (Quick Books, for example).

Fortunately, Linux with MONO 2.0 will eventually be able to utilize all the vital business features of SQL Server databases such as data mining very large databases via sampling tables. That's something even Oracle can't do and well beyond the capability of any open standards database.

These are a few legitimate business concerns with Linux desktop readiness.

But also not really very widespread concerns. Businesses will take on Windows servers thinking they will use all the functionality that a salesman has FAB'd to them and only ever end up using group policies incorrectly, then just giving everyone admin privileges anyway.

The only widespread show-stopper is Exchange functionality. And the worrying thing is that there doesn't seem to be anything coming through to solve this. You can share Calendars through Thunderbird using webdav and share contacts via LDAP but its fiddly and scares I.T. managers who think (foolishly) that the Windows servers will be a walk in the park.

[koenn]

Quote:
Originally Posted by FLPCGuy View Post
5. Rapid deployment and Automatic Update is possible with Linux too but without intermediate testing/control by local admins. See SUS/WUS services..

Can you explain what you mean by intermediate testing/control?

SUS/WUS (or WSUS as it is currently called) is "Windows Update" for a local network.
It's a webserver (on your LAN) that caches patches from Windows Update servers and offers a management console where they system administrator can approve or refuse patches. Common practise is to approve patches for installation to a limited number of computers (preferrably a test lab), to see if there are any side effects, then approve them for all workstations.
It can go further than that, eg apply certain patches to predefined groups, manage how patches get installed, etc.
It's good stuff, since the alternative is to let users do their own patch management of to just accept any patch windows updates offers. patches have been know to break applications or introduce bugs, so some form of control and testing is interesting for system and network administrators

[FyreBrand]

Maybe we'll see some of these issues addressed here: The Linux Foundation.

There is a lot of potential here. I hope it starts gaining momentum. Standards and multiple distribution compliance is what will make the foundation to meet these issues head on. We can't really address them unless we're all on the same page at some level.