Slashdot Log In
Tales of Conversion - Using Ubuntu at Work
Posted by
Zonk
on Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:56 AM
from the sneaky-penguin dept.
from the sneaky-penguin dept.
madgreek writes "Here is a short story about my switch to Ubuntu from XP at work. I have been Microsoft-free for 3 months now at a Microsoft heavy shop. Few people know I am using Open Office and Linux. I create countless documents that people open using Word, Excel, PPT and nobody can tell that they were created using Open Office. From the article: 'When I first started my experiment I was trying to keep it a secret out of fear of attacks from angry Microsoft worshipers (especially from the admins and desktop support). What I am finding out is that most of the folks that I was hiding from are sick and tired of supporting Windows and are proponents of Linux. Several of them are using Linux at home. One of the guys I talked to has Vista and XP installed on his laptop. He swaps out the hard drive when switching between OS's.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Applications are more important than the OS (Score:4, Interesting)
Ubuntu is still far behind Microsoft Windows, when it comes to Windows compatibility.
Re:Applications are more important than the OS (Score:5, Insightful)
While i agree that linux isn't ready for most business desktops and certainly isn't ready to the general public, that kind of logic escapes me. why SHOULD linux be focusing all this effort on being windows compatible? isn't the purpose to escape windows? it's also majorly retarded to sit there and proclaim linux is somehow inferior because windows is compatible with itself.
Parent
Re:Applications are more important than the OS (Score:4, Insightful)
Since Windows is the dominant OS as of today it is only logical for another OS to have some form of compatibility with Windows. An example would be applications for OSX or Linux that are used for XYZ, XYZ should/would like to make sure the application for Windows that is similar to XYZ can open XYZ files and also save them. This is only common sense, with your logic it would be like Apple only designing the iPod to work with Windows.
I think you maybe don't understand the purpose of compatibility. It's not about escaping Windows or Linux or OSX, it's about making sure whatever OS person "A" uses can create and share things with person "B" who uses another OS.
Parent
Re:Applications are more important than the OS (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm like that at home. I haven't even looked at Linux for home because I know that, regardless of any other problems, it isn't usable because it doesn't support the software I want. I am not going to compromise my computing experience, it's a tool, and I'll use what makes it do what I want the best, which is Windows in this case.
Well this holds true in many cases. You can't expect someone to realistically switch to your platform if you can't offer them apps that they need. Also it needs to either be that app, or one that is just as good. You can't start demanding compromise. You can't tell a professional graphics artist that GIMP should be "good enough" and they "don't need what Photoshop has." That's lying to them and to yourself. You can't expect them to make a switch unless you are offering something that's at least as good, and probably better.
So really, it is a big problem Linux faces right now. In so many settings, it simply doesn't offer the apps that people need and thus can't be considered, regardless of other merits. One real way to solve this would be total Windows compatibility. If you could execute any Windows app under Linux, well then there's nobody who uses Windows that won't be able to get all their apps. Then the argument is purely about technical merits, cost, familiarity and so on. I'm not saying that's the only way to go or even the right one, but it is a legit thing to consider. People need certain apps. If you can't offer them those apps or something very much like them, you aren't a contender, regardless.
Parent
Re:Applications are more important than the OS (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know for others, but myself I'm getting tired to hear about Photoshop everytime switching from Windows to Linux is mentioned. Does anybody know what is the market penetration of Photoshop? 50%? 20%? 3%? of Windows users? Thanks!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Windows is a proprietary software product. Much of what goes on under the hood is completely unknown - enough information has been reverse engineered for some interoperability (cf. Samba, ndiswrapper), but expecting any product to ever be as "Windows compatible as Windows" is asking for the moon.
Re:Applications are more important than the OS (Score:4, Insightful)
db
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I have to ask... (Score:5, Insightful)
Is OpenOffice not 100% compatible with Excel macros?
I ask because I remember hearing that it (or some other open source project) was 100% feature-complete, compared to Excel.
Anyway, 100% compatibility is never required, because you don't use 100% of the capabilities of Excel macroes. What you want is 100% of the features I need (be they parts of Excel macroes or otherwise), and as OpenOffice gets better, more and more people are finding that threshold has been crossed for them.
Even if you have 95% compatibility, it can be enough. Consider if you had to use a spreadsheet once a day or once a month for a few minutes that didn't quite work properly in OpenOffice. I realize many people would instantly abandon ship for MS Office at the slightest sign of trouble, but if it was just the one spreadsheet, you could probably fix it to work in OpenOffice -- or, worst case, you run one copy of Microsoft Office on a terminal server somewhere, and let everyone run Linux on the desktop for everything else.
Well, fucking DUH. I bet Windows is still far behind Ubuntu GNU/Linux when it comes to Linux compatibility, huh, Sherlock?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The type of spreadsheet I'm talking about, Excel making the odd incorrect calculation is the least of your problems.
Besides, my understanding of Sab-Ox is that it makes spreadsheets an absolute minefield - because spreadsheets make it trivially easy to change things, save it under alternative names and otherwise mess about with the numbers with no audit trail. My former manager has apparently succeeded in making a specific spreadsheet compliant - that was with a team of a fe
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Paris Hilton looks more like Paris Hilton than any Paris-Hilton look-alike". Still, misses the point: Is Paris Hilton worth looking like, or emulating in any way?
Ubuntu drive partition (Score:3, Insightful)
Moral of the story is: the reason why Linux doesn't have a wide user base is because even though it is supposed to be the distro for noobs, it's still not user-friendly enough for the mass market.
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:5, Informative)
How does Wubi work?
Wubi adds an entry to the Windows boot menu which allows you to run Linux. Ubuntu is installed within a file in the windows file system (c:\wubi\disks\system.virtual.disk), this file is seen by Linux as a real hard disk.
Parent
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:5, Insightful)
No - you're reasonably windows savvy. The rest of your post makes that abundantly clear.
Try dual booting between windows XP & Vista & you'll find that your lack of knowledge about partitions was the problem, not linux itself.
it's still not user-friendly enough for the mass market.
By your own account, you didn't actually use linux, just attempted to install it - so you've no basis to make that judgment.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's because you're a troll - a sad, stupid troll at that.
Let me explain it in small words. You're comparing installing windows on a blank HDD, with installing linux on a drive shared with windows.
Installing windows on a HDD with an existing OS & preserving that OS is not easy, certainly not as easy as getting Ubuntu to coexist with other OSes.
By your standards, Windows isn't ready for the mass market (you dumbass).
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:5, Insightful)
*shrug* I don't think anything I say is going to affect Linux's market share, but calling you a sad troll & a dumbass is both satisfying to me & educational to fellow slashdotters who otherwise might take you seriously.
The evidence speaks for itself: Linux can't even capture market share with its software by giving it away for free.
Nonsense. Linux occupies (or dominates) many computing markets (embedded devices, servers).
I don't think its any stretch of the imagination to say linux is the most widely installed general purpose OS (I bet you run it on your router without even knowing). Pointing out it hasn't made much inroads into Desktops (or mobile phones for that matter) doesn't change that.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:5, Informative)
The default options selected in the installer are to resize the windows partition, install it. The boot loader updater program is set to automatically probe all partitions for other OS installations and set it up in the bootloader, so dual boot is ready out of the box.
Ubuntu will even give you a migration manager to migrate your settings from Windows such as bookmarks, documents etc.I honestly don't believe you tried Ubuntu from your descriptions.That's great and all, except the issues you complained about, don't exist.
Parent
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:4, Insightful)
Where to begin...
False assumptions:
1. Linux vs. Microsoft market share matters. Most Linux users couldn't give a hoot whether you are using Linux or not. If you can't handle Linux, stay in Windows. No sweat off my brow...
2. Linux has to be compatible with everything Windows but the reverse isn't true. Try the reverse and installing Windows as a second OS and see how far you get getting them both working without special hacks. Try opening an ODF document in Office and see how far you get with a default Office install. Hell, even try something as simple to implement as reading you Linux partition from Windows and see how far you get.
3. That the general user is unwilling to learn new skills hence will always be in Windows. This is the most insidious, and quite frankly insulting, statement I've ever heard out of Redmond. Repeat something often enough and people start to believe it. The "Linux is too hard" mantra is an attack on the intelligence of their users. Not everyone is willing to remain ignorant of that expensive paperweight on their desk.
4. The install process dictates the "user friendliness" of the entire distribution. In general, people don't spend all their time installing an OS be it Microsoft, Linux, OSX, whatever... I installed my OS (Gentoo) exactly once in 2000 and haven't had to do it since. Can you say the same about your Windows install? In short, install process != entire experience. If you can't install it then do as they do in the Windows environment and find someone who can install it. Conversely, you could buy one with it pre-installed just like you did with your Windows box.
What all this boils down to is your Linux shortcomings are yours and yours alone. Millions worldwide have managed to install and use some flavor of Linux yet your failing is somehow the fault of the OS?!?!?! To somehow suggest that the failure of Microsoft to inter-operate nicely with other OSes is the fault of those OSes is the height of hypocrisy.
Parent
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:4, Insightful)
- Guided -- Resize Master and use freed space
- Guided -- Use the entire disk
- Guided -- Use the largest continuous free space
- Manual
You apparently know little about partitioning yet chose to use "Manual." That's akin to the Windows users who know virtually nothing about the filesystem yet insist on changing the install path for every program they install. Why didn't you use the (chosen by default) setting which would have handled everything for you automatically? Were you trying to make your life more difficult?Parent
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:5, Informative)
But then, try installing Windows for daily office tasks on a Ubuntu/Kubuntu system, where is the resize option? What is a unknown partition type?
If you figure this out and resize the partition in Linux so you can install windows along side with your Ubuntu/Kubuntu install, where did Linux go after installing it?
Where is the dual boot menu?
Where is the Windows application, registry entry, configuration file for setting up the Linux dual boot under Windows even?I didn't see a need to understand partitioning with the Ubuntu/Kubuntu installer, I did for the Windows installer.No, he has been told that Windows is more difficult to setup with preinstalled Linux system than Windows being preinstalled and Linux being setup after.Here is the thing, Ubuntu/Kubuntu already do this, it's been in the installer for ages.
Parent
Re:Ubuntu drive partition (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's have a look at the problem from another angle: What if your computer had only Ubuntu, or BSD, or Solaris, or OS X on it and your friend recommended this great new 'Windows' product to you. How easily do you suppose the Windows XP installer would make it to get your computer dual booting?
Does your XP installer disk offer to repartition your disk and fully explain what will happen to your existing partition, along with the risks?
Does the XP installer detect what OSes are already on the computer and incorporate them into the boot menu?
Does the XP installer offer to import settings from the existing OS?
Will it mount all partitions with read/write support?
The argument that Ubuntu or any other Windows-competing OS is inferior simply because it has failed or threatened to fail to leave every brick of the Windows shrine untouched is both stale and lame.
db
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's setting the bar ridiculously high if capturing market share is all that's required. For a Windows power user,
Re: (Score:3)
The Windows installer has less documentation than the Ubuntu installer. It *can't* resize a partition, and it has absolutely no online help. It makes no attempt to dual-boot with another OS. It can't share partitions betw
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, most new machines I see have a recovery partition. That's what I didn't want to mess around with. And no, there was no automatic partitioning option. I assure you, the following did NOT take place:
"Ubuntu has detected Windows XP installed on this system. If you would like to create a Dual Boot setup, click 'Create Dual Boot System' and Ubuntu will automatically partition your drives for you." Click.
Sorry but... (Score:3, Insightful)
As long as you are the only guy in your company who does things "your way" as opposed to "their way", as long as you use OSS yourself but adapt it to MS software when used for any collaborative purpose, you are helping nobody and doing nothing but wasting time and being an extra pain in the ass for the sysadmin.
Neither Microsoft itself nor it's dominance is impacted if the whole company uses it's software on the main basis. You can be the black sheep and avoid MS stuff, but look: you STILL have to synch with that MS server, STILL have to produce documents in MS format, STILL have to synch with MS print servers... And so on and so forth. Neither MS's grip on the company (be it the technological slavery, the lack of following standards, or the money going down the MS drain) are reduced by your activism.
Not only that, but you completely and utterly defeat the purpose of using OSS if you are forced to adapt to MS on every single turn. What's the advantage in open document format if you have to produce all documents in Word format anyways? As much as MS formats are bad, even you have to admit that MS software does a better job at following THEIR OWN formats than you can do at following THEIRS.
If you want to be truly MS free, get your company to drop MS. Get EVERYONE to kick the habit. Work to reduce or stop corporate-level contracts with MS. Make open standards the CORPORATE basis, instead of using OSS as a slave to closed source. THEN, and ONLY then, will you actually make a difference, and only then your actions will actually have some result instead of being a waste of time.
Yes, you made your point that you can have a rose grow in the middle o a pile of turd... But guess what, as nice as the rose smells, it won't make the turd stink less unless the said turd is removed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If, however, you chose oss because you feel more comfortable with it or need to run a particular software that doesn't run on Windows *and* your company doesn't oppose it, go nuts and t
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Furthermore, there's no point in walking anywhere unless you can walk right around the world. So until someone gets around to draining those nasty, inconvenient oceans, you might as well just sit
Good in theory (Score:3, Informative)
However, at work I use Windows XP. The office I work in relies heavily on Nortel VPN + Outlook + Exchange for e-mail and calendar/scheduling access. Not to mention the application I'm working on is strictly for Windows (despite being written in Java, go figure). Most of the GUI code is WORA but there's some middle layer issues that will come up if not run on a win32 machine.
Too bad, I guess.
Missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
- "Open Office is not 100% compat with MSOffice"
- "My Visio docs cant be used on linux/other-non-MS-os"
- "I cant connect to our exchange servers without Windows"
- "Our company intranet requires active-x controls"
- "Yada Yada Yada, etc, etc, etc, ad-infinitum, ad-nauseum"
- "And therefore, linux is no good, and will never catch on until it does this and that, and anything else that Windows makes possible"
None of these arguments demonstrate anything lacking with Linux. The ALL demonstrate how very badly your organisation's IT policies and strategies has backed itself into a corner and locked itself so deeply into a closed and proprietary architecture
If Linux has a hard time co-existing in your current infrastructure, then that should be a huge red flag that there is something seriously wrong with the way you are operating, and the strategic decisions that have been made in the past. If your organisation doesnt have the agility to adapt to what is happening now in the wider world - then its only a matter of time before that lack of agility is going to hit you hard like a speeding train.
Thats all well and good if you are happy to thrive in isolation, like some extended family of inbred hillbillys far from civilisation, but in the meantime, the rest of the world will be passing you by. If thats where you want to be in 10-20 years time, then stick to what you are doing now, and ignore the obvious. Blame it all on linux if that makes you happy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There are many comments on here presenting the sort arguments such as :
- "Open Office is not 100% compat with MSOffice"
- "My Visio docs cant be used on linux/other-non-MS-os"
- "I cant connect to our exchange servers without Windows"
- "Our company intranet requires active-x controls"
[...]
None of these arguments demonstrate anything lacking with Linux.
On the contrary. If, by Linux, you really mean "Linux and the apps that run on it", then something lacking is exactly what each of those things demonstrates.
Take the corporate intranet example. We have various web pages that do rely on ActiveX, for useful things. What alternative do you propose based on Linux and your browser of choice?
We also use many of the automation and customisation features within MS Office to streamline our document creation and review process. Again, what alternative do you pr
Admin people (Score:3, Interesting)
Also if your job suddenly requires the use of some software you can't run then you'll be stuffed.
Re:Admin people (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Wait wait wait! (Score:5, Insightful)
Some quotes from your sig:
Ok, now please go ahead and educate us on bias.
db
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope you say the same to people here who help Linux and other OSS projects.
Re:Wait wait wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Tomorrow on Slashdot (Score:4, Funny)
Tension Mounts As Eleventh Hole Is Plugged
Parent
Re:why does this sound overtly bias? (Score:5, Insightful)
However I don't like it. It just doesn't work for me. So it's hopefully going to make someone happy through eBay while I get a Dell and stick Linux on it.
As for Windows, I still use it for games but never really get to see much of it (just the start menu and the games sub menu) and I find its interface rather confusing. My copy is licensed bought directly on-line from microsoft. I wouldn't use it for working though because like MacOS I probably would have to fight it to do what I want. Besides I have no idea what software is available (apart for the few games I follow) and I couldn't care less.
All this talk of bias is mostly people finding something comfortable and finally finding an environment that works with them instead of against them. For me it was a customisable X11 desktop (KDE currently) with all the nifty Unixy tools, for others it may be MacOS or even Windows. The lucky ones get to gravitate towards the environment that works for them. The others are stuck with whatever was forced upon them in the beginning.
The ones that fight their machine every step of the way are the ones that show no bias.
Parent
Re:right tool for the job (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:right tool for the job (Score:5, Informative)
Remember, the more skilled you are at programming, the more linux will suit you because you can modify it to suit your needs. Similarly, the entire working environment is far more easily customised.
So you see, most linux advocates are technically minded people, who use linux for the above reasons, which fulfills the same basic requirements that you have.
Oh, and OSX is nice too but if the frontend doesnt suit you (and it cant possibly, one size never fits all) then your screwed unless you replace aqua with X11, and then you may as well be running linux.
Parent
stop the bullshit (Score:3, Informative)
Me too (Score:5, Interesting)
Where I am it's not so bad - however, my (illegal) Xubuntu installation is on an external drive with the Grub RW CD for booting and I can pull the plug (literally) if there's a problem. Originally, I had a linux paritition but I've moved away from that and restored all my partitions to the way they were delivered. Although I use rsync to keep copies of my home directory on the D: drive just in case and I have dallied with the Linux swap on the Windows swap file (still working out the kinks). Xubuntu on an external drive is slow - but it's actually faster than Windows on the main drive.
Anyways, I would have two complaints from the point of view of someone sneaking Linux into the Workplace (Undermining the bastards from the inside!):
1. OpenOffice sucks. Now the response to this is the obvious 'Hey Stupid! OpenOffice isn't Linux'. To which I reply, 'Hey Nutjob! Wake up to the realities of the market you are trying to get in to'. It matters not that OpenOffice is not officially a part of Linux - it is a fundamental part of Linux in a business environment. OpenOffice is not able to handle the full array of rubbish that Microsoft Word produces leading to the inevitable - 'Oh that's strange I looks fine on my computer' {scramble to reissue document using Word in Wine} 'Try that version'. That said Word 97 works great under Wine, so I use that a lot - although I do prefer AbiWord.
2. It'd be nice to have a stealth Windows skin for Xubuntu. Needs to have all those nasty startup screens, skin the GDM, skin the window manager - and the big one, skin Xscreensaver especially so it can load 'corporate mandated screensavers' and ask for the password in a Windowsy way. Oh and some yoke that could be installed so that anyone enquiring from the outside using network tools etc (i.e. M$ Administrator), would be told 'Windows Machine - nothing to see here'.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For the rest of that, there's XPDE to make it look and feel like Windows, but then I guess you wouldn't want to be using it. You could screenshot Windows and then clip out a chunk of the taskbar and set it as the background on the panel. If you don't mind using a different window manager, I know there are Vista themes for Beryl. There may be an XP one too. Or just say you added a new theme in Windows if your company allows that. I'm
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)