Why my uni should switch to Linux

[bashveank]

This is a letter I've been thinking of sending to the technology coordinator at my university.

This is a message I sent to the tech coordinator at Cedarville University.

Hello,
I noticed that all of computer on campus are running MS Windows XP, even the ones that are used for menial tasks such as clocking in and out of work. This is kind of fine, but you could have saved a lot of money by running Linux on these computers.

The most obvious way you could have saved money is by OS licensing fees; I believe WinXP OEM is $80 now, I've seen at least 10 computers that could, without a doubt be running a free, open source, OS with no complications what so ever. That's $800 in savings right there.

You could also save money on security, Linux does not require any type of anti-malware program, as it's underlying architecture makes it almost immune to an attack. If you're paying for a professional anti-virus/spyware program and firewall, I imagine that's at least $20/month per machine. If you were to run Linux on just those 10 machines, you would be saving $200 a month, or $2,400 a year.

Linux would also reduce maintenance costs. Unlike Windows, Linux does not require excessive maintenance as it's file system does not fragment. Linux does not require a reboot after every system wide action, nor does it slow down over time, requiring compulsive reformatting.
You would more obviously save time on this one (which is very significant) but you would also save money, as you would not need as many tech people to perform campus wide maintenance, and, due to Linux's lower system requirements, you would be able to use cheaper computers to do the same jobs.

Finally, Linux would ultimately be better suited to your campus because it is open source, and therefore infinitely more customizable that anything closed source.

In closing, using a FOSS operating system on campus would save you a substantial amount of money and time, and provide you with a way to better customize the machines.

P.S. The money/time saving estimates I've included above are not counting the many other computers that could make a transition with very little to a bit of training.

Am I right? Is there anything I should add? take away?

[urukrama]

I wouldn't mention exact amounts, unless you are absolutely sure they are correct. Universities won't pay the same to MS as individuals.

Using Linux also does not remove the need for an anti-virus. Perhaps the Uni computers won't be affected, but they could easily transmit virusses to other computers, and the university won't want to take that risk.

I also think the picture of Linux you paint is a bit too rosy. Chances are that the IT department and tech cordinator of your Uni know Linux much better than you do. If so, your email sounds way too patronising and arrogant.

[FG123]

My Uni is pretty much a Microsoft-house. You have to fight politics to even start the idea of thinking of converting to Linux. Merit isn't enough you understand.

[NotTheMessiah]

I suggest that you change the letter - it shouldn't sound like you've found this perfect OS. Since people fear change and resist it you should be suggesting a test run on a couple of PCs which aren't doing much just too see how the os would perform and bring to the uni.

[DarkOx]

It's hard to say, given the exact situation at your university, but I would say the message needs some research to be convincing.

In the first place, how many of the benefits you propose are fixing issues the tech coordinator has? Take the ability to customize the software; that only applies if a) he has a need to customize the software and b) he has people on hand who have the skills required to do so. Is this the case?

Another thing is cost. Licensing fees are annoying, but they're probably not the most pressing concern. The license for the XP computers will have either been already paid for or part of a bulk license -- in other words, it's probably a sunk cost. They won't save any money there, that $80 dollars is gone and won't come back.

Finally, there's the question of the students. How will this benefit them? Does Linux offer them anything Windows doesn't? More importantly, are there Linux equivalents for the Windows programs the students need? This last one will be complicated, since different departments may need very different functionality.

In a nutshell, find out if there's a problem here first, then present the solution. With some hard data showing that the same features they have on their computers today can be had much more cheaply and easily, you'll have a much more convincing argument.

[urukrama]

EDIT: nevermind

[samjh]

The biggest reason is merit, I'm afraid.

MS Windows is the popular desktop operating system on the planet. That is an indisputable fact.

If a university wants to educate people for the real world, it needs to use a computer system that its students are most likely to use in the real world, and that is Windows. Switching all the computers to Linux undermines the students' ability to familiarise themselves with an operating system and the operating system's software they are most likely to use in their future jobs or business. Most business and management courses teach Windows and Windows-based software such as MS Office, because that is the de facto standard for the corporate environment. By the same token you'll find a liberal arts and media faculties sometimes use MacOS, because Macs are popular in those fields. Information technology faculties will usually have a Unix-based lab somewhere, because Unix is popular for IT infrastructure. The relevance to real world is a pressing requirement in modern tertiary educational institutions.

It's fine for a university to use Linux on their back-end servers and within specialist teaching areas such as Engineering, Information Technology, and Science, but to demand an overall switch to Linux has little merit.

[p_quarles]

I just took a look at Cedarville's Web site, and two things stood out for me. First, they're running an Apache 2.0.52 web server, and second, the use Novell Groupwise for account access. In other words, like a lot of university campuses, they appear to already be using *nix systems extensively in the background.

So, I would rewrite the letter under the assumption that the technical coordinator already knows a great deal about Unix, Linux, and highly customizable software. What he or she may not know is the extent to which the GUI front-ends for *nix have come a long ways in the past few years, and is realistically a good solution for a pretty wide range of campus computing uses (e-mail kiosks, some computer labs, departmental administration, library searches).

Basically, Linux won't work for everything that a university needs to do, and it won't work for all its users. With that in mind, I would suggest the letter focus on specific, easy-to-use applications that can equal or improve upon specific Windows applications. Web kiosks, for instance, could very easily be replaced with Linux thin clients.

Just my two cents.

[bashveank]

Ok, see what you guys are saying. Thanks for the feedback.
Just because I feel like saying this, the team that does the on-campus computers is a completely different team than the web site devs. I've talked to a couple on the on-campus team and they didn't seem to have an understanding of Linux/Unix beyond what one gets from OSX.

I wasn't trying to suggest that all computers be switched over to Linux, just that the ones that perform menial tasks that are completely non-dependent on the operating system like the web kiosks, email kiosks, and computers used entirely for clocking in and out of on-campus jobs.
I see this as a very beneficial switch; they added almost 50 kiosk computers around campus last year, not all of them could be switched, but even so I'd imagine that's quite a lot on licensing fees that could be avoided.

Again, thanks for the feedback, I'll work the letter out more.

[n3tfury]

a good start, as long as you don't get upset when they don't change the entire campus over. start small like you are and go from there.

[regomodo]

My Uni Dept is useless. We have a unix cluster for fluids modelling. Other than that it is MS everywhere else. Even for very pointless uses.
Also, i've noticed the network all the computers are running on is getting slower and slower. But that is for another thread.

They do have Blender installed. The only foss app installed afaik.

[n3tfury]

My Uni Dept is useless. We have a unix cluster for fluids modelling. Other than that it is MS everywhere else. Even for very pointless uses.
Also, i've noticed the network all the computers are running on is getting slower and slower. But that is for another thread.

They do have Blender installed. The only foss app installed afaik.

please don't say that the slowing of the network has anything to do with MS. please.

[regomodo]

please don't say that the slowing of the network has anything to do with MS. please.

don't worry i wont. They do appear to be using samba for schoolwide document sharing though so i'm guessing they have a few more unix/linux machines out of site.

[RTSnLV]

There are a few reasons..
Stability

Cost(yes M$ offers educational discounts-usually 50% off) but compare that to free, if they want a paid product Red Hat, Novell, and Oracle is very price competitive

Security

Support-support life cycle are longer for linux than Windows

System requirements-takes alot less to run linux than windows

[gn2]

Am I right?

No, you should ask for the facility to run the OS of your choice to be made available.

Your IT department will already be well aware of the implications of exclusively using Linux.
There are reasons why they don't but there's no reason why as an individual you shouldn't be allowed to use the OS of your choice.