Which Linux

[bogeyman]

I knew you'd bite Bogey.

Why don't you try to make a positive and knowledgeable contribution in the Technical threads rather than your usual lameness? Keep that for general or LR.

Perhaps you don't have much technical knowledge.

[DimPrawn]

Why don't you try to make a positive and knowledgeable contribution in the Technical threads rather than your usual lameness? Keep that for general or LR.

Perhaps you don't have much technical knowledge.

I have plenty of technical knowledge thanks. Enough to know the few quid spent on Windows licence represents far greater value for money than a week spent trying to get hardware item X working on an OS that clearly doesn't cut it.

HTH

[darmstadt]

A fair bit of work that I do now days is Linux based but these are very bit systems and applications, not x86 based but mainframe based. IBM are porting or have ported many applications to zLinux and as most of the large companies have mainframes they are slowly moving many applications from either the traditional mainframe or from their server farms to a zLinux system. A company in the USA has just bought 30 mainframes just for that purpose and I know of one in Germany that has 27 (remember you can also run multiple Linux images under zVM and IFLs are pretty damn cheap nowadays.) If you go to www.bahn.de, this is a zLinux system also this runs on a mainframe: http://www.taikodom.com/

Not only is it now possible to run Linux on a mainframe (years ago I even worked on AIX on a mainframe) but Solaris has now been ported and this year there will be an announcement of Windows (possibly not the whole OS though) on a mainframe

[TheFaQQer]

I use Oracle Unbreakable Linux.

It's great.

[bogeyman]

I have plenty of technical knowledge thanks. Enough to know the few quid spent on Windows licence represents far greater value for money than a week spent trying to get hardware item X working on an OS that clearly doesn't cut it.

HTH

It sounds like your 'experience' consists of fiddling around with desktop boxes.

What is it you do again?

p.s. Linux is very efficient at posting on CUK several hundred times a day and can also access the Daily Mail website quite effectively.

[lightng]

I agree that Windows is easier for most users and the productivity tools are better in quality (at least for now). We are beginning to see companies look at open source more seriously though. Economic times will drive the change to open source. Companies only succeed if their products/services are cheaper than competitors or if they offer something different than their competitors. This is true more now than ever. If linux can help cut costs and if windows doesn't add any value to the end product then linux will look all the more attractive.

As trading conditions get tighter, we will continue to see the growth of linux back-end systems but also an increase in the use of linux on the client side.

[_V_]

I agree that Windows is easier for most users and the productivity tools are better in quality (at least for now). We are beginning to see companies look at open source more seriously though. Economic times will drive the change to open source. Companies only succeed if their products/services are cheaper than competitors or if they offer something different than their competitors. This is true more now than ever. If linux can help cut costs and if windows doesn't add any value to the end product then linux will look all the more attractive.

As trading conditions get tighter, we will continue to see the growth of linux back-end systems but also an increase in the use of linux on the client side.

Linux is the future. Who in their right mind would look at Windows in today's economic climate? Running Windows must be costing companies millions of pounds.

[bogeyman]

Linux is the future. Who in their right mind would look at Windows in today's economic climate? Running Windows must be costing companies millions of pounds.

Desktop OS costs are a drop in the ocean.

Better to stick with what people know than face the costs of retraining them or worse, the costs of porting specialist Windows apps.

Volume mid-tier server and mainframe OS costs are significant - desktop license costs are not.

Linux is fine, but it does not replace Windows as a corporate desktop OS.

[lightng]

Desktop OS costs are a drop in the ocean.

Better to stick with what people know than face the costs of retraining them or worse, the costs of porting specialist Windows apps.

Volume mid-tier server and mainframe OS costs are significant - desktop license costs are not.

Linux is fine, but it does not replace Windows as a corporate desktop OS.

Agree for large corporations. The change will start with organisations who can turn on a six-pence. i.e. small to medium businesses.

[bogeyman]

Agree for large corporations. The change will start with organisations who can turn on a six-pence. i.e. small to medium businesses.

But then you might be surprised just how many small businesses use key, specialist (and expensive) applications that are only available for Windows.