Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Operating Systems Software Linux IT

A CIO's View of Ubuntu 308

onehitwonder writes "Well-known CIO John Halamka has rigorously tested six different operating systems over the course of a year in an effort to find a viable alternative to Microsoft Windows on his laptop and his company's computers. Here is CIO.com's initial writeup on Halamka's experiences; we discussed their followup article on SUSE. Now CIO is running a writeup on Halamka's take on Ubuntu and how it stacks up against Novell SUSE 10, RHEL, Fedora, XP, and Mac OS X, in a life-and-death business environment." For the impatient, here's Halamka's conclusion: "A balanced approach of Windows for the niche business application user, Macs for the graphic artists/researchers, SUSE for enterprise kiosks/thin clients, and Ubuntu for power users seems like the sweet spot for 2008."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A CIO's View of Ubuntu

Comments Filter:
  • Print view (Score:5, Informative)

    by ELProphet ( 909179 ) <davidsouther@gmail.com> on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @03:52PM (#20062083) Homepage
    TFA is over 10 pages of 3 paragraphs...

    http://www.cio.com/article/print/41140 [cio.com] is much nicer to read.
  • by Infonaut ( 96956 ) <infonaut@gmail.com> on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @03:59PM (#20062197) Homepage Journal

    Good freaquin' googly.

    CIO.com sure has a hardon for online ad revenue. Seventeen pages for one article, the article itself taking up only 1/3 of the page real estate for each page. Talk about a pain in the ass to read.

    It's bad enough that nobody in Slashdot reads the actual articles. The next time I see a link to a CIO.com article, I'll just skip trying to read it, and go right to throwing down a random opinion based on the Slashdot summary.

  • Re:KDE vs GNOME (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @04:18PM (#20062463)
    What the hell is "UBUNTO"? Some sort of Ubuntu variant that makes you look like a moron?
  • by good soldier svejk ( 571730 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @04:27PM (#20062585)

    Sweet. And with my Macbook and a copy of Parallels, I can have them all. That's the beauty of virtualization on the Intel Macs. You cease worrying about which OS is the best compromise; you simply use the best OS for the task at hand.
    Actually, Halamka agrees with you. But he also needs a subnotebook and Apple doesn't make one. For work that requirement outweighs his preference for OS X. All this laptop needs to do is basic business stuff like email and presentations, and Ubuntu is more than good enough at that. At home, he uses a big clunky Macbook (see previous articles).
  • Re:KDE vs GNOME (Score:5, Informative)

    by kernelpanicked ( 882802 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @04:38PM (#20062697)
    I'm not sure how you got modded insightful but SUSE Enterprise, which is what was used, defaults to GNOME. So it's GNOME vs. GNOME here.
  • Re:A genius! (Score:3, Informative)

    by good soldier svejk ( 571730 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @04:42PM (#20062769)

    No, but he's a CIO publicly holding forth on the suitability of one Linux over another for certain applications based on the failure to understand that you can change the desktop environment! Maybe I'm a Linux snob but that seems like a striking lack of understanding. It's not like he was complaining about the lack of some obscure functionality and I chimed in with "its fixed in CVS so stop spredding FUD you M$ a$troturfer"!
    No, he actually understands the situation much better than you. For one thing, he knows that the default desktop environment in Suse is not KDE, it is a very customized version of GNOME. However, for purposes of this evaluation it didn't matter to him how customizable GNOME is. The important question was how the two distributions performed without massive re-engineering. Otherwise he might as well have started with Debian itself. I believe he made that clear in the article. Hence he concluded that the default GNOME config in Ubuntu was much better then the default implementation in Suse, and the default package management in Ubuntu was far better than the equivelent in Suse. He knew he could make either GNOME install behave as he pleased. I have actually seen him use gconf. He also knew he could install apt-rpm and all the OpenSuse repositories and make Suse's package management more like Ubuntu's. This is why we have distributions, to optimize GNU/Linux for specific niches. If we were just going to start with a ablank slate and customize everything to meet our need we would all be running Debian.
  • by good soldier svejk ( 571730 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @04:50PM (#20062879)

    6 minutes? 20 seconds? Is that true? I use Thunderbird (on Kubuntu), and it starts up in a second. I can't imagine waiting that long for an email client to load up. What is it doing that takes so long? Is this typical behavior for Evolution?

    Since this was one of his major complaints with Linux (and it's a valid one: six minutes is much too long to wait!), it seems like it's something that should be fixed ASAP if it is a widespread issue.
    It is a real issue. Evolution's Exchange connector basically does not cache anything locally. There is a setting for it, but it doesn't work. Based on Halamka's recommendation, Novell has written a caching patch for Evolution and submitted it to the upstream code tree. They also patched a bunch of other bugs he identified. So Evolution/Exchange users can thank Halamka for finally getting this fixed. I have tested these patches and they work.
  • by jc42 ( 318812 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @04:50PM (#20062883) Homepage Journal
    6 minutes? 20 seconds? Is that true? I use Thunderbird (on Kubuntu), and it starts up in a second. I can't imagine waiting that long for an email client to load up. What is it doing that takes so long? Is this typical behavior for Evolution?

    Well, I've experimented with Evolution off and on for some years, on various chunks of hardware, and I'd say it is typical. Whenever you tell Evolution to do something, you can go to the kitchen, make coffee, and be back with a cup before the results are on the screen. After a while, you're really wired ...

    Maybe there's some config problem that's wrong everywhere I've tried it, but I haven't seen enough clues to diagnose the problem. If anyone knows, especially if you have some fixes, you might try contacting the Evolution folks and tell them that this is a major barrier to getting their toy widely adopted.

    It's not just me, either; I've mentioned this to a number of people who've tried Evolution a few times, and they report the same molasses-like slowness.

  • Re:African language? (Score:3, Informative)

    by zeromorph ( 1009305 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @04:52PM (#20062903)

    Is there African language?

    No.

    There are a lot. It's not even one family. Really a lot! [ethnologue.com] (Every red dot a language.)

    What is probably meant: It's an African concept [wikipedia.org]. This notion is not restricted to one language/speech community and in that sense (sub-Sahara) African.

  • by RAMMS+EIN ( 578166 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @05:03PM (#20063031) Homepage Journal
    I have a hard time imagining why you would think there could be things that could not be done remotely.

    As others have pointed out, you can do a lot of things (I would say every kind of maintenance) remotely over SSH. That basically allows you to do everything that doesn't require a graphical user interface. If you do need the graphical user interface, you're in luck, though. One of the hidden strengths of Unix [inglorion.net] is that GUI is provided by X [x.org], which can be accessed over the network. A convenient and secure way to do this is by tunenling it through SSH (try ssh -X user@host xterm, for example). Even if that isn't enough (e.g. because you're on a machine without an X server), you can even access your desktop through RFB [wikipedia.org].

    Of course, you can't perform any maintenance that requires physical access to the machine remotely. However, in all my years working with *nix systems remotely, I have never needed physical access.
  • Mac's in research (Score:5, Informative)

    by or-switch ( 1118153 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @05:15PM (#20063153)
    There was a quesiton in there as to why researchers seem to prefer Macs. When I was in grad school the Mac with OS X was a perfect machine for us. Everything we need could run on it.

    You could run the Linux apps that did the number crunching (not high end physics stuff, but still datasets around a gig or more that took an hour or so).

    You could run the visulaization software and model building softare, also Linux based.

    You had shells to log into the Linux cluster if you needed access to more power.

    Disk mounting and sharing was easy amongst other Macs, nfs clients, and even the PCs.

    The entire Microsoft office suite ran. I realize OpenOffice provides all the same utilies, but most journals, conferences, and employers in our field require papers, abstracts, and resumes be submitted in Microsoft Word, and slides in Powerpoint. Other programs were not accepted, or, when tried, we ran into compatibility issues.

    Photoshop ran really well for making figures.

    So it wasn't uncommon for someone to be sitting at their computer running a job, building a model, putting the results in powerpoint, writing the figures in word, sending the results out on their integrated e-mail client, letting your advisor know all was well with a quick video conference through the integrated camera, all while listening to music on iTunes streaming off a neighbor's Mac through the library sharing feature, and all without any specific new training required.

    For our group the hardware was expensive of course, but we made up for it by lab-wide shared software. If you bought your own Mac essentially all the software was free and you'd be up and running in an hour at full productiivty. This is one reason Macs do well in research environments. It's not that you couldn't rig a PC or a Linux box to do all of this, but it would take some serious effort and know how that many grad students outside a computer science/physics type have (we were a biochemistry and biophysics group), and university labs generally have little to no IT support. The Macs just work and you can get you research started with little thought to the computer on your desk that rarely crashes, and that is worth the extra cost of the hardware in a grant-driven environment anyday. (I mean, the Mac is $500-$1000 more than a comparably configured PC, but how much IT support can you buy over a period of 2-4 years for $500-$1000. . .not much, it pays for itself indirectly).

  • Re:Well known? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @05:42PM (#20063495)

    Heh, I knew instantly who he was, but then, I work at Harvard Medical School, which he is CIO of!
  • by SwedishPenguin ( 1035756 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @06:18PM (#20063895)
    Ever heard of adblock plus? I didn't see a single ad!
  • Close but Limited (Score:5, Informative)

    by pravuil ( 975319 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @06:44PM (#20064201) Homepage Journal
    Most of his observations are actually spot on but he did fail to bring up several items that I believe need attention. These are things that need to be fixed in order to have a better product IMHO. I'm coming from my experience with Red Hat, Fedora, Ubuntu, SuSE (SLE/open), Debian, and Mandrake (Mandriva). I have yet to test PCLinuxOS, CentOS, Mepis, Gentoo, Solaris, FreeBSD, etc. Whereas I'm not a so called "expert", I am a regular end user.

    • m4p format (all distros)
    • Evolution/Thunderbird sucks, Sylpheed/claws is close to anything that I would use. (all distros)
    • Codecs not verified to run on Linux listed here (http://soggie.soti.org/linux/linux-codecs/ [soti.org]), here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_ codecs#Operating_system_support [wikipedia.org]) and here (http://labs.divx.com/DivXLinuxCodec [divx.com]) are illegal to use without owning Windows. (all distros)
    • Flash properly displayed in web browser so it doesn't cover up page content. (all distros)
    • The UI in Ubuntu still has more bugs than Red Hat and SuSE.
    • Red Hat uses anaconda for the OS install which complicates the partitioning process.
    • YUM and Yast suck compared to Synaptic. Thankfully there is a RPM based version of Synaptic Package manager for Red Hat. I believe SuSE has it as well.
    • Updates for SuSE suck because of how long it takes and some hurdles you have to go through just to get the update started.
    • The most stable version out there, even with unstable packages, is Red Hat but Ubuntu fixes unstable packages faster than other distributions.
    • Updates for RPM based systems take longer than DEB based systems especially if you don't configure SELinux the right way.
    • MPlayer feels incomplete but does some neat things. Totem is fine but needs to have more options.

    Now that I gone over some of my pet-peeves I want to cover some of my opinion of what makes Linux great.

    • Beryl (Love it, makes the desktop easier to use)
    • OpenOffice (There are some things that can be improved but overall it works great)
    • Synaptic Package Manager / APT / APTitude (Great way for people to find out more of what Linux can offer to them depending on how their repos are configured)
    • Amarok (Best audio player out there for Linux. Has the ability to minimize to task bar, Options to turn on or off the OCD, works great for organizing online radio streams, plays Linux restricted formats fine and last but not least, it's pretty light weight.)
    • Firefox and it's extensibility (Most of the extensions are shared between OSs)
    • su (Once you got what you want set, you'll never have to use this again except for maybe updates depending on how you configured you package manager)
    • Complete control to customize the GDM, KDM or XDM
    • Gconf-editor saves time on configuring for people that don't want to know how to program to get something simple done
    • Sylpheed/Claws provides the most realistic extensions for an email client available on Linux (especially in terms of spam filters and how the mail is viewed / organized)

    For hardware support, this area has improved over the past several years. In Ubuntu it takes a couple of clicks to have 3D hardware support whereas it took a long process before. Used to be that I would have to live without a certain piece of hardware because of incompatibility but most of those concerns have been taken care of for the majority of the distributions. I could go over some of the terminal apps but I am talking about a desktop environment so apples and oranges.

  • Re:A genius! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Doctor O ( 549663 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2007 @07:12PM (#20064447) Homepage Journal

    Hell, I'm ready to make the switch to Ubuntu, but for my slavery to Quicken.

    Then switch to Ubuntu, download VMWare Server [vmware.com] (free as in beer), install your Windows license in a VM, put Quicken on it and be done. With the snapshots in VMware you can easily test install stuff and just roll back to the state before the install if you don't like the results. Burn the VM onto a DVD and never reinstall Windows again.

    "I would love to switch but I need $windows_app" is not a viable excuse anymore.

    If you need assistance with installing VMWare Server under Ubuntu, feel free to ask.
  • CIO.com sure has a hardon for online ad revenue. Seventeen pages for one article, the article itself taking up only 1/3 of the page real estate for each page. Talk about a pain in the ass to read.

    That's simple to solve, just click the print link. It all is on one webpage. Unfortunately my browser print preview shows it's still 11 pages without changing any settings. But there's no ads.

    Falcon

"Here's something to think about: How come you never see a headline like `Psychic Wins Lottery.'" -- Comedian Jay Leno

Working...