Microsoft Free, One Year Later

madgreek writes "Last year I wrote of my switch from XP to Ubuntu at work. Now a year later, I am back to reflect on one year of being extremely productive at work using (almost) nothing but open source software in a Microsoft world."

Linux has been business-desktop ready for years.

I'm sure that many people will point at his failures (IE6 for some activeX websites & visio) as proof that linux is still not ready for the desktop. But these apps aren't available for the Mac either & few are suggesting OS X is not ready for the desktop.

Unfortunately, what's preventing business's adopting Linux or OS X is the fact that the various 'solution providers' & VARs make more money reselling Microsoft products.

Linux Visio Clone.

Linux has a Visio Clone: Kvivio. Import the Cisco Symbols from DIA and you are all set.

Re:Linux Visio Clone.

Linux has a Visio Clone: Kvivi

The article was talking about interoperating with .vsd files. Unfortunately, neither Kvivio nor Dia can do that (not last time I needed it anyway).

Import the Cisco Symbols from DIA.

Why not just say "Linux has a Visio Clone: Dia"

Re:Linux Visio Clone.

KDE vs. Gnome, Terminal vs. GUI, Vi vs. Emacs, ... and now Kivio vs. Dia! Nice!

Re:Linux Visio Clone.

Linux has a Visio Clone: Kvivio.

Don't you mean Kivio? [koffice.org]?

I use Koffice quite often, and Kivio is one of my favorite apps in there.

Re:Linux Visio Clone.

As much as I like dia and kivio, naming them "visio clones" is at best far fetched; If you're using visio seriously, they're not really playing on the same level yet.

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

I find Linux more capable on the Desktop than Microsoft. There are often times when MS's (using XP) internal burning software is inadequate - like burning images. I don't know if it's fixed yet, but for a long time XP just would not burn an image with its built in software and you had to use something like Nero. Never had a problem burning an image running any linux distro. Same with mounting .iso right from the harddrive as a cd-rom. It usually required some pay-for software (Alcohol 120%) in Windows, while a 2 minute search yield a few command lines to do it in Ubuntu. I know I'd rather save the money.

A typical mainstream Linux distro is ready. It's often superior in many ways to MS, as MS seems to deliberately makes their OS do almost nothing useful beyond the basics it seems (or was it that Monopoly ruling that caused this?) It's now just 3rd party apps for most people. Web Browsing has reversed itself (there are enough people who wouldn't switch from Firefox due to plug-ins they can't get in IE).

On the Corporate Level, solution providers are slow to change if they're an MS only shop. I even know the university/college level has problems. Blackboard and other such garbage.

I suspect the oncoming economic shitstorm may finally get corporations to really tighten their belts and that company-wide OS licenses may just not fit in the budget anymore looking ahead 5 years in some places. I just hope the current/next generation of purchase managers learns from the past and looks to do away with vendor lock-in in so many areas as much as possible.

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

I find Linux more capable on the Desktop than Microsoft. There are often times when MS's (using XP) internal burning software is inadequate - like burning images. I don't know if it's fixed yet, but for a long time XP just would not burn an image with its built in software and you had to use something like Nero. Never had a problem burning an image running any linux distro. Same with mounting .iso right from the harddrive as a cd-rom. It usually required some pay-for software (Alcohol 120%) in Windows, while a 2 minute search yield a few command lines to do it in Ubuntu. I know I'd rather save the money.

A two minute search on Google yields CDBurnerXP [cdburnerxp.se] as a freeware CD burning tool and Daemon tools [daemon-tools.cc] as an image mounting tool for Windows.

It might not be free as in speech, but it sure is free as in beer.

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

Personally I'm very wary of installing random non-open-source apps on my desktop. I feel a lot better about something that is in the main Debian repository and more or less gpl compatible.

Hell, check out that daemon tools page you linked:

"Dear DAEMON Community,

it come to our attention that someone released a fake DT PRO version that is
contaminated with trojans and viruses, among the fact it is only a DT Lite and
not a PRO version!

We cant underscore enough how important it is that you always download from our
official sites and affiliates!

Nowadays, and with the popularity of DAEMON Tools, it is not unusual to see such
attempts to harm others (and, after all, also our reputation).
Rest assured: we double-check all uploads to our official sites and frequently check
them further to make sure you get no harmfull viruses/trojans!"

Frankly just googling and then downloading stuff that looks like it could help is bound to lead to a malware infested computer. One of the very clear things that good Linux distros have over Windows is the use of a centralized software repository.

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

Knowledge is power:

- Windows Reskits have cdburn.exe and dvdburn.exe - very capable tools for recording media
- D-Tools is free and is an excellent tool

I have multiple machines running Linux and Windows (this particular laptop I am posting a reply from is a Linux only Thinkpad) and Linux is not really more desktop capable. I am playing the devil's advocate here: good for you if you managed to figure out that Linux works better for you.

It doesn't work better for everyone. I need Photoshop (Sorry, I am not too bright to use GIMP), I need a couple of my RTS games that I play casually and I need my Windows Rhapsody client. I use wine for Photoshop, Caesar3 and I use Vmware + Windows 2000 for Rhapsody. I also need Windows to watch streaming Netflix and I'll be creating an XP image in the near future just for Netflix (Netflix supports only WinXP and higher).

So now do you get an idea? Linux isn't desktop ready because a majority of the rest of the world isn't ready for Linux. This is a 100% Linux laptop and still I need to rely on wine and Vmware to use the applications I really want/need.

My first Linux distribution was Redhat 5.2 and it's been quite a journey - Ubuntu 8.04 for me is the closest I've seen to a perfect Linux desktop but as much as I love it and use workarounds to keep using it fulltime, the distribution isn't there yet. Linux *isn't* there yet. I want it to be and I'll rejoice the day I have to stop using my workarounds.

I love using my Linux laptop over my windows machines at home (one's a high end gaming machine, the other's a pretty decent Windows Media Center box) and I love using my Linux machines at work (5 boxes running Linux and one Windows notebook) but I do keep windows around for Windows does tasks that Linux cannot do for me yet.

I usually bash Microsoft and Windows freely but I also do acknowledge Linux's shortcomings. If you believe otherwise, well, there is this certain cliche about ignorance and bliss...

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

This is a 100% Linux laptop and still I need to rely on wine and Vmware to use the applications I really want/need.

That's all very well for you, but I still need to rely on Linux for my audio software, which just plain doesn't work in Windows. So, Windows isn't ready for the desktop either.

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

MS seems to deliberately makes their OS do almost nothing useful beyond the basics it seems (or was it that Monopoly ruling that caused this?) It's now just 3rd party apps for most people.

I may be wrong, but I was taught that there is a division between an operating system and the applications that it runs. The OS is supposed to handle things like IO and memory, while the real functionality comes from userland applications (often third party) interacting with the OS. True, Microsoft gives you almost nothing out of the box, but in a way, so does Linux in some instances. (some distros give you the kernel, bash, compilers, the core utilities like cp, rm, etc, and some sort of package manager and let you fetch the rest yourself, while other distros come fully loaded.)

If you want to compare raw out-of-the-box functionality, then I agree with you-- a default no-frills XP install is practically useless compared to the average default Linux install, which mostly gives you what you need, though there are exceptions.

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

Exactly. A Linux distribution is the OS plus userland applications.

The Linux OS itself doesn't provide any of the functionality the GP talks about.

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

few are suggesting OS X is not ready for the desktop

While I wouldn't say that OSX isn't ready for the desktop, I would say it might not be ready for the corporate desktop.

One of the places Microsoft has put a lot of effort is into large-scale enterprise systems management. Features of Windows like Active Directory, Group Policy, WSUS, etc are what corporate clients really care about. They want to be able to easily and centrally manage users, permissions, operating system updates, and software restrictions. Unless/until there are tools that allow you to do these kinds of things with OSX and Linux, I think you'll see some hesitation on the part of large corporations.

I know you can do some of this stuff for Linux (user management with LDAP, customized package repos, etc) but I don't know about OSX. I do know however that there is a big difference between "ready for the desktop" and "ready for the corporate desktop".

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

I am a Mac OS X sysadmin. You can do many of the same things with Mac clients that are possible in a windows world. Mac OS X server allows you to push down group or user policies, or policies based on computer (if the computer is bound to open directory). Open directory is based on LDAP. It is also possible to setup Mac clients to authenticate against active directory or Novell eDir in theory. In the latest version of Mac OS, it is very easy to bind to active directory.

It is also possible to authenticate against an open ldap server (actually osx uses open ldap) and setup kerberos. The LDAP schema (i suck with ldap) has two fields that are used to push down policies. Apple uses an XML format to describe all the policies which can be used even without OS X server.

The reason I feel that OS X is not ready for big environments is that it's inflexible. You can only hack around so many "features". For instance, we had a hack that's worked for 10.4 to bind to a Novell eDir server on campus without using Novell's schema changes for Mac support. We do not control the Novell servers. However, this appears to be broken in Leopard (10.5).

For the most part, we've had good luck migrating from a windows and mac environment to Mac only. I work for the computer science department at a university. I did not make the decision to migrate as I would have chosen BSD or maybe Linux based on our needs.

Re:Linux has been business-desktop ready for years

Unfortunately, what's preventing business's adopting Linux or OS X is the fact that the various 'solution providers' & VARs make more money reselling Microsoft products.

It's not just the Microsoft products that keep businesses using Microsoft products...it's the business processes that are wrapped around the existing software. Upgrades are expensive, but less expensive than conversions to new software (and processes). There are also costs (and questions) regarding conversion of legacy data.

Until businesses can migrate to systems that are agnostic to specific processes (and applications) , it will be difficult to show a positive return on investment for the large expense.

Technologically inclined person successfully uses

... a computer.

Film at 11.

What I dont get..

I really fail to grasp why corporations (NOT individuals) fail to understand the ramifications of such EULAs and MS software contracts.

Negotiating a seat deal with MS leads to a very nasty possible outcome: invasion by Business Software Alliance. If you refuse, you invalidate all your licenses... and they always find something "illegal". It's one thing to switch because of some perceived wrong or being high and mighty, but a corporation is a corporation. When it comes to software, they literally open themselves up for heavy liability if they accept MS and other COTS software.

GPL means something else too: if you dont create software, you can ignore any "bad side effects". Only violators who refuse to share source are gone after. Usage is truly free of legal ramifications.

Re:What I dont get..

Not to flame, just giving my perspective.

But...You are right...kind of... (you must be a CISSP?)

The funny thing is that the compliances you speak of, are from more respected UNIX/LINUX sources than you think (or care to Google). Just because "Microsoft" is stamped on the box doesn't mean you get a free pass from the NSA or other government security office.

True UNIX and Linux admins don't (and won't) fit into most company IT budgets. Which is why 90% of them are consultants (such as myself), and are treated like rogue warriors, and don't necessarily warrant a full time position. At $75-$125 per hour, they are the true guru's who fix your HP-UX and AIX machines that run your accounting software and gets your numbers to your "precious" shareholders. They are the admins who come in and do "forensics" to figure out where the DOS attacks came from, or how to get your systems running in a hurry.

MSCE's on the other hand ARE $0.10 per baker's dozen, and fit well within the 25K-40K budget for most company IT wages. (And they get the double bonus acting as Windows Help Desk personnel for regular end users.)

They are the ones pointing to the "mystery box" that holds the magical number software as I walk in. Quite often I deal with horrified executives that wonder "Why can't Joe Mcse get it up and running, he's got a certification?!?!" The answer is because it's above their "Geeks" head, and they don't have time to do the research because their phone is ringing off the hook, answering why Outlook isn't responding, or some guy lost his "Start" button.

You're not the first.

Protip: You're not the first person to use linux for a whole year.
*Gasp*

Re:You're not the first.

...And that's why Linux won't yet replace desktop Windows! True Story.

Wow... so much effort. So little accuracy.

over 45 days...

... and my coworkers still have no idea that I switched to free software.

Preventing Linux's 'Last year'

I suppose all the 'Year of Linux' people will come out and say 'This is the year of Linux' and so on and so fourth.

Linux has had many years, and for what it has been up against, an illegal government coerced monopoly with more and more stress being put on it from every direction, it has not disappointed me in the slightest. With a dignity I hope that I have a tenth of when I die, Linux users and Linux developers have fought, and some died defending the vision of Linux and the FSF to preserve a future where some of us still do control how our computers are used.

To that end, every year Linux stays alive and relevant is the year of Linux. You see, Linux is fighting constantly a war against complete eradication. Not just Microsoft, but many software vendors, hardware makers, governments, and yes, a malevolent user base hate Linux, and every minute of every day seek to find ways of eradicating Linux from this world. A world where Linux is quarantined into certain sectors like server environment, is a path to extinction like Netware.

As far as Linux in the social arena. Linux as a social movement in its aspect as a social reform movement need not die out. In the Internet world, Linux is a symbol of transparency, of honest behavior, and accountability. Without Linux we would all be staring at a dark Palladium filled future.

So, in the name of the secular Linux social movement for transparency, property rights, freedom of speech and what not. Try and see what you can do to prevent Linux the OS from going into that quite good night. Develop. Write code, fix drivers, create new ideas. That driver for that hardware, that new application may be the driver or the program that changes history.

Yes there are aspects of Linux that are difficult. So, lets make sure this year isn't the last year of Linux, the year Linux became as obscure as DR-DOS, and Amiga, and the Z80. because, I'm sorry, but some things have to be fought for.

Re:Preventing Linux's 'Last year'

With a dignity I hope that I have a tenth of when I die, Linux users and Linux developers have fought, and some died defending the vision of Linux and the FSF to preserve a future where some of us still do control how our computers are used.

I didn't realize that free software was such a dangerous thing to get into? Did someone overdose on pizza and coke while kernel debugging late one night or something???

Re:I went the opposite direction

Is your tricked-out Honda Civic as good as that BMW down the street too?

Yes. The Civic is cheap, fuel-efficient, probably more reliable than the BMW these days, and gets me from A to B without making a fuss about it. Why would I want the more expensive BMW? For a few extra toys? Fuck that.

Of course in this analogy the Civic is Linux and the BMW is Windows (though I believe everything I said is true about Hondas and BMWs too). I do have a real-life anecdote though to make this post more meaningful.

The Linux desktop experience today in 2008 has the appeal, driver support, and aesthetics of Windows 98. Oh wait, Win98 did have driver support.

I got two pieces of new hardware recently. A Kodak EasyShare P850 digital camera and an Epson Stylus E66 printer. Neither is exactly new, but the Kodak is still available first-hand.

The Kodak was an easy one. The instructions for Windows entailed installing the software FIRST (bad things can happen if you plug it in first apparently) and then doing stuff with the camera. Under Linux, installation involved plugging in the camera. Kubuntu detected the camera, and offered to start up digiKam for me so I could get the pictures. Worked first time.

The printer was a slightly more involved issue. My mum and the seller (both Windows people) were fussing about drivers. They knew the CD only included Windows drivers, but I ended up with an e-mail linking me to the website, where one or both thought I may find Linux drivers. As I expected, nothing was present (only Windows drivers, not even Mac OS X drivers, shame on Epson). So I plugged it in, went through drivers in KControl, found the printer, selected Epson Stylus E66 drivers, gave the printer a name, and found that it now worked.

The lesson I've learned with all this is that Linux either works with your hardware, or it doesn't. There's no driver installation or anything. It it works, it works right away. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work and won't work until it's in the kernel. So it's either perfect usability, or no usability at all. My idea of hell being forever made to try and get non-kernel supported hardware working with Linux. It's that bad.