Re: sick of Linux bias

From: Hairy One Kenobi (abuse_at_[
Date: 01/06/04

Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:00:24 -0000

"John" <> wrote in message
> On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 00:18:56 +0000, Leythos wrote:
> > In article <>,
> > jimwatt@aol.no_way says...
> >> On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:22:50 -0500, Jim <> wrote:


> Anyone who genuinly wants to save money should go Linux. You can buy
> 1 copy of say, SuSE 9 for $79 and install it 10 times for the desktops
> one more for the server.

<Sigh> The same old claim, the same old error. Or does noone read license
agreements anymore?

> OpenOffice comes with it and can do 90% of what
> Office does which is about 50% more than most people use. I admit Linux is
> weaker in project management software. You may need wine (free and
> included) to run Project. Dia and other diagraming programs may be
> adequate but Visio is better so run that under wine also. That means you
> will total $877 for the whole thing. Oh and you can run it on your
> existing computers if they can handle Win98 or NT 4.0. No need for
> expensive hardware upgrades.

That's true, and one reason that SuSE in particular are apparently
flourishing in MS-hating Germany. (Or should I call them Novell..? SuSE, not
the Germans.. ;o)

The current distros have come forward in leaps and bounds - IIRC, RH5 & 6
were very finicky with NICs and graphics cards. This variable hardware
support is one of the major problems, IMHO - you don't have to be operating
/that/ many machines before you have to start exchanging your six days'
consultancy for hardware. As I've discovered to my cost, RH9 can't handle my
generic 15" LCD panel.

> There will be some training costs but not
> much. Linux can operate pretty much like Windows for office people if
> desired and OpenOffice is too close to need explaining for most people.

<Cough> You met any genuine business users recently?

> Oh yeah, you will also get the leading DNS software (BIND), leading web
> server (Apache), leading e-mail server (Sendmail), a good firewall
> (iptables) that will probably require hiring someone to setup but then all
> firewalls should be setup by someone who knows what they are doing. You
> also gain immunity from most (not all) viruses, increased reliability,
> better user support and flexibility should your needs change. Both SuSE
> and Microsoft are easy to update but SuSE needs it less frequently since
> it is less of a target and arguably more secure.

I'd argue about the better user support. I'd also argue against a Linux
newbie attempting to setup Sendmail without knowing what they're doing (or,
more accurately, deconfiguring it from a machine that doesn't need mail).
Thankfully, basic firewall config is now included as part of the
installation - something that Solaris has had for years. (Shock horror -
something on-topic for this froup ;o)

Glad to see that you've mentioned the update frequency, though - always a
major headache for a large organization, who tend to think in five-year
financial cycles. A techie's glee at frequent updates is a depressing cost
overhead for a CFO.

Talking of ongoing support costs.. I'm still trying to puzzle-out where all
of these cheap Linux experts are hiding - the evangelists always mention
them, but I never seem to find any. Cheap idiots claiming to know Windows
are, unfortunately, ten-a-penny - as one would expect with that sort of
market share.

> I used SuSE for the example but there are other distros that work as
> well. RedHat has recently ditched the home user/SMB market for the
> enterprise but you can buy/download RedHat 9 still.

True - I think that you'll find this happening more and more - particularly
as more business people see it as a valid competitor to MS. These companies
are around to make money, after all.

And finally, a declaration of non-interest: I don't give a toss what OS I'm
using, just so long as it's the best for the task in hand.

Hairy One Kenobi
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this opinion do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of the highly-opinionated person expressing the opinion
in the first place. So there!
P.S. Anyone want to step back 20 years and reopen the Unix vs. VMS argument?