Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business Software Businesses Linux

Where Is The Plug-and-Play Linux Office System? 396

Posted by timothy from the entrepreneurial-spirit dept.
cdlu writes "Where oh where is the plug-and-play Linux business computer? Robin Miller asks the question and makes the case for starting a business to sell a self-updating networked Linux system for small business. Any takers?" (NewsForge and Slashdot are both part of OSTG.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Where Is The Plug-and-Play Linux Office System? More

Where Is The Plug-and-Play Linux Office System?

Comments Filter:

  • As long as the user can say no to the updates (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mpost4 ( 115369 ) * on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:22PM (#10843488) Homepage Journal
    I have had a problem where a system will continue to pester you about updates, and there is no, I don't what that update option. aka SP2 in xp

  • Is this going to be a case of (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Megaweapon ( 25185 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:22PM (#10843490) Homepage
    "self-updating windows systems = evil" versus "self-updating linux systems = good"?

    • Re:Is this going to be a case of (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Qzukk ( 229616 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:36PM (#10843702) Journal
      More like "self-updating windows systems = don't work". Sure, it works most of the time, but of the computers I'm responsible for (about 10 of them) 1 has yet to fetch SP2, 2 has no problems fetching updates, but when I visit that satellite office I end up having to install several months worth of updates since despite being set to install automatically, it doesn't. My own workstation had the windows update icon in the task bar for nearly 4 weeks after the release of SP2, with its tooltip reading "Downloading Update: 0%" the entire time.

      So, if you're a member of the group of people who think "false sense of security due to broken software is evil", then yes, windows update=evil. Jury's still out on linux, since this company doesn't exist yet and therefore hasn't written a self-updater or shown whether it can get critical patches out in a timely manner while minimizing damage to the system.
    • One assumes that this is more from the business perspective where auto-update is good because the people scheduling the updates are sysadmins.

      J.
    • Self-updating Windows isn't evil. The problem with Windows is that a significant percentage of the major updates Microsoft pushes to Windows users break things instead of fixing them.

      One would hope that the QA department of this theoretical Linux-based office systems company would be a bit better.

    • Re:Is this going to be a case of (Score:5, Insightful)

      by aero6dof ( 415422 ) <aero6dof@yahoo.com> on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @01:47PM (#10844522) Homepage
      "self-updating windows systems = evil" versus "self-updating linux systems = good"?

      Yes... if you look a little deeper an realize that:
      Self-Updating Windows ==
      security fixes + MS business initiatives (.Net) + eula "upgrades"

      while (presumeably)
      Self-Updating Linux ==
      security fixes + version upgrades (optional)

      Can you spot where evil enters the equation?
  • They work well if you don't change anything but that isn't a normal desktop computer. People want to install the latest screensaver, watch the latest flash animation...

    Rus
    • I think the whole "locked-down office PC appliances" concept is the key...

    • Binary Updates are not for lusers to do. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Soko ( 17987 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:46PM (#10843824) Homepage
      I have to speak to this.

      As an IT mangager type, I just cringe when I see someone who has installed a new screen saver and/or tool bars. I do my best to not be overbearing to my user community, but there comes a point where you have to say "Enough." I've gone through more than enough machines removing malware and spyware and then explained to the luser who abuses the machine that they're breaking things by installing un-approved apps, and next time I get out the LART.

      The machine is there to help them get work done, not entertain them. It's like thier work area - we don't allow objectionable posters or dangerous items as decor, nor do we allow them to leave thier area in a dangerous clutter, so why should we allow them to do approximately the same thing to thier computer? It makes no business sense to do so. (BTW, the above analogy seems to actually sink in to a semi-intelligent luser's skull without applying deadly pressure - best clue I've found for them so far.) It's all about instilling the right culture into your organisation.

      I'd love for something like the articles subject to come to fruition. It would be easier to manage, users would benefit from little to no down time as well as a consistent desktop environment, and I could approve all apps before they're installed, installed once and installed correctly. Hell, I'd allow and even deploy MP3 players, some games and even the coolest screen savers I could. I want them to have as rich an experience as possible, but I want that experience to be safe and inexpensive to use - and the article's subject seems to have a plausible chance of providing just that.

      Soko
      • The machine is there to help them get work done, not entertain them.

        This is an important point that people should be encouraged to remember. If you work for a company, and that company provides you with a computer, that computer belongs to the company, not to you. You should expect that the company or its representatives are monitoring every keystroke you make at that computer, and choose your actions accordingly.

        Just because you are able to take advantage of holes in your company's IT policies to

  • Self Updating (Score:5, Insightful)

    by clinko ( 232501 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:23PM (#10843507) Journal
    Wasn't there a huge stink about WinXP and its AutoUpdate feature, now this guy wants to base his marketing around that idea w/linux...
    • Yeah, I think the idea is that you have a choice to use this distribution. People who want an office-oriented PC which automatically updates would chose this.
    • Some people don't like Windows Update. Many others are just fine with it.

      You know, not everyone wants to muck around with dependency hell, which rivals and in many cases surpasses .dll hell.

      Not everyone is or wants to be a computer geek, you know. These are some of the basic things that will keep Windows on top for the average user: ease of software / hardware installation (No command line! Don't have to make complicated choices about where to put things! The latest packages, so stuff actually runs!).

    • I have to tell you (from some experience on a mixed linux windows desktop env.) That the Windows admins don't like windows update. They might like it if it was more configurable...e.g. you could stand up your own windows update servers locally.

      Now being that Linux would be a more open way, I'm sure the linux desktop admins wouldn't mind having an auto updater which they could push updates through...again a locally controlled update server. This is certainly possible with Linux but unlikely with M$, so Wi

    • Re:Self Updating (Score:4, Informative)

      by AstroDrabb ( 534369 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @01:05PM (#10844042)
      The stink about the auto update feature in WinXP is because MS patches are know to break things. I have never seen a Linux update break a system. Most major Linux distros have had auto update for a long time now. Even if they didn't, a simple nightly cron job to run yum or apt-get does the job.

      My work desktop has a broken MDAC 2.8 install. WinXP SP2 doesn't let you reinstall it! When I try to reinstall MDAC 2.8 I get a message that I already have these features, though WinXP doesn't care about the fact that MDAC 2.8 is broken. I searched the web and MS knowledge base, the only option is to _remove_ sp2, reinstall MDAC 2.8 and then reinstall SP2, a _very_ slow process which could result in more things breaking. The only solution I have right now is to downgrade some of my programs to MDAC 2.7. Again, I have never run into this type of madness on my Linux computers at work or home.

      • Allow me to disagree (Score:3, Interesting)

        by edremy ( 36408 )
        Can't say I've been very impressed with Red Hat's Up2date.

        I actually got it to work the other day on one of my machines- it usually hangs on the "resolving dependecies" step, requiring a force quit. It's been months since I updated either of my Linux machines, but I keep hoping, and I got "lucky". Happy that I could actually update, I did the whole hog, and xemacs now dumps core complaining that font resources aren't available. An auto-mounted share is totally corrupted as well- trying to go to / hang

    • Could it be possible that "this guy" didn't contribute to the huge stink you speak of?

  • I'll pass. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kenja ( 541830 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:23PM (#10843508)
    Given how many times an update has broken an app or caused a conflict I cant say I would welcome an auto updating autonomous Linux system. As with any modern OS an admin must review what an update does and test it out prior to rolling it out to the unwashed masses. This is true of any and all oporating systems, be they MacOS, Linux, Windows or what have you.
    • The article isn't talking about autonomous systems, it's talking about remotely-administered systems. The company sells the systems, but also sells the maintenance and administration as a service, so that the client companies don't have to even think about it.
      • "The company sells the systems, but also sells the maintenance and administration as a service, so that the client companies don't have to even think about it."

        ok, that still fails to adress the problem of updating a system without checking what the updates will do. How will a remote admin who has no idea how the box is used or what software gets run on it be able to check if an update will cause problems? System admin' is a full time job, and then some. Most full timmers dont get woken up at 3:00 in the m

        • Re:I'll pass. (Score:3, Informative)

          by woobieman29 ( 593880 )
          I can sort of visualize how this would be done properly. Since the vendor is selling a complete maintenance package, it would certainly make sense to maintain a workstation onsite configured *exactly* the same as the units that the customer has onsite. At the bare minimum, the vendor could just have a copy of the disc image, and load it up on a box when work needed to be done. This way any updates/new software/drivers etc can be tested by the vendor before deployment to the customer site. This is similar to
  • Problem should not be solved like complete migration at once.

    Theres a lot of solutions, but every company also has a lot of history

  • Accounting (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MikeMacK ( 788889 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:24PM (#10843521)
    But it's not just migrating from Office to Openoffice, what about accounting and business apps like Turbotax and Quickbooks that most small businesses use extensively? How is open source doing in these areas?
    • From my understanding, it's easier to get wine to run Intuit products as a user account that it is to run those same products as a limited user in XP.
      • But if the idea is to have the computer "just work" for someone running a small business, isn't adding WINE to the mix potentially complicating things?
        • Not if all the applications are installed and maintained by the vendor. Once the vendor develops a custom disc image for the customer, all updates should be handled by the vendor as part of the maintenance package. Perhaps there would be a scaled pricing structure, where x dollars covers basic maintenance and updates, and there is an x dollar additional charge for adding new things to the disc image such as new applications.
    • Just go to sourceforge [sourceforge.net] and do a search for "accounting".

      The trick is finding people who know enough to decide which is a good candidate for a bundle.

    • Re:Accounting (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      There's GnuCash http://www.gnucash.org/ and Lazy8 http://www.lazy8.nu/

      And Jim blogs his thoughts on many others.
      http://www.jimohalloran.com/archives/0004 31.html

      And this was just a quick google. There is progress on a number of fronts.

    • Re:Accounting (Score:3, Informative)

      by MooseGuy529 ( 578473 )

      GnuCash [gnucash.org], while not suited to heavy business uses, can be used for simpler accounting tasks. I know of no replacement for TurboTax, however.

  • Why? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Aadain2001 ( 684036 )
    Why does it seem like Linux is always being held to a much higher standard than Windows? Whenever I talk to someone about how nice Linux is, they always ask it can do this or that, and when I say no it can't yet or that those features are till in beta, they laugh at Linux. But Windows can't do those things they ask about either! It confuses the hell out of me why Windows is concidered OK, and if Linux had all the features of Windows it would still be just a "toy" OS and not taken seriously. It just conf

    • What tasks are you talking about? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mgkimsal2 ( 200677 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:30PM (#10843611) Homepage
      What are questions you're getting that Windows 'can't do either' ?

      Pretty much any time someone's asked me something about Linux's capabilities, it's generally because they already *do* that particular task in Windows and wonder about compatibility, similarity, etc.

      I've not come across people that just make up random words, then ridicule Linux because it doesn't measure up when Windows doesn't measure up either.

      • Biggest problem with Linux is still the kernel. How in the hell do you make something convenient when more than half the drivers need to be compiled into modules first before loading into the kernel.

        Yes, windows drivers are still terrible by a billion-dollar-company standard. But really, Linux's achilles heel is all its own strength, the kernel.

      • Are you aware that Linux *can not* do automated trans-mapping of sync stack variables? And if it could, it would prob. be command line for God's sake! It's true, tell me it's not.
    • Or you could be over here on the OSX side, where we actually have many usefull features that Windows does not come with (stock) and still be called a toy.

      There seems to be a certain class of Windows users who feel the need to belittle the other choices.

      Oh wait, Mac and Linux users have those folks as well. Oh well, I guess partisian-ship isn't just for politics.

    • This would be potentially insightful if EVEN ONE example were given rather than just revolutionary hand waving.

    • Human Nature to resist change. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jellomizer ( 103300 ) * on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @01:05PM (#10844044)
      Most people don't want to change their platform or even their Windows 98 to XP. So you are marketing to them that they should switch to Linux. People respond to Joy and Pain, they will react more strongly to pain, it is human nature which helps us survive from getting hurt. So you are pushing all the Pluses of Linux and tell them how much Joy it will give them. So they asked the questions to determin how much pain is involved. So they ask if it has these features that are on windows, if they are not there or not as good as windows it is a level of pain. While I am sure they are feeling pain from using windows but it is pain they know of and learned to cope with. Now switching to the pains in Linux although in reality may be less then that of windows, is an adventure in descovering and dealing with new pains. It is much like a person who broke there arm. Now they will probably not try to set the bone back, and will stop someone else from trying, unless they intectually know there is no other option, because that would require attempting new pain. ALthough it may help eleaveate the current pain which is much higher.

      Windows User: Doese Linux have a Disk Deframenter?
      - Experiences pain of defragmenting due to slow disks.
      + at least know how to defragment the drive.

      Linux User: No because the way that linux handles the files the drive doesn't get fragmented, so it doesn't need one. *
      + Disks dont get fragmented.

      Windows User: I am sorry I need a disk defragmenter.
      - Afraid of not being able to defragment a Linux system.

      *Yes I know they are diskdefragmenters for Linux and a Linux file system can get fragmented.

  • I think it will be plausible when... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mytec ( 686565 ) * on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:24PM (#10843533) Journal

    More business related software runs on the Linux platform.

    • Right now, while there is less software is the time to start this. Once it is in place, then there is less of a battle about it when a company decides to move to Linux.
    • I just installed FC3 and it seems like it's pretty much there. Is there a specific functionality you are thinking about? You have all the basics, office, email, browsing etc.

      I am curious to see what you feel is missing?

      • I just installed FC3 and it seems like it's pretty much there. Is there a specific functionality you are thinking about? You have all the basics, office, email, browsing etc. I am curious to see what you feel is missing?

        Respectfully, there is a lot more to business software than the basics. Beyond the basics is where the functionality is missing.

        Here is a quick list of software that is missing for us: ERP client software, SQL report writers (Crystal Reports for example), legacy DOS applications (that

  • Chicken and egg scenario (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jimicus ( 737525 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:24PM (#10843535)
    Nobody wants to spend months getting everything necessary up from the "90% done" state it's in now to the "98-100% done" state necessary for such a project. There's still a lot of work involved, and no guarantee that any business would want it.

    At the same time, a lot of businesses don't want a Linux plug n play desktop because they don't perceive it as being sufficiently mature.

    Red Hat, SuSE et al are doing a lot to correct the first problem. Various organisations with well-publicised rollouts (think Munich) will help with the second problem. But I don't think there will ever be a year of "Linux on the Desktop" - simply because it will take more than a year to get there.

  • Lindows - er, ah, Linspire - is aiming there... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:25PM (#10843537)
    ... and they come pretty close, with the best installer in the market, and a very easy-to-use setup. Why is it that the snooty Linux gurus always pooh-pooh Linspire anyway?

  • MEPIS? (Score:3, Informative)

    by serutan ( 259622 ) <snoopdougNO@SPAMgeekazon.com> on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:25PM (#10843541) Homepage
    I think MEPIS Linux [mepis.org] is like that.
  • I think Apple made what you're looking for. Seriously, I've been able to do everything I would do on a linux system with no problem on my mac.

  • Thoughts (Score:2, Funny)

    by Apostata ( 390629 )

    Obviously this article was too interesting/pertinent for linux.com [linux.com], which continues to be the most boring Linux site on the internet.

    (NewsForge and Slashdot *and* Linux.com are both part of OSTG.)

  • Read the Article (Score:4, Informative)

    by Gates82 ( 706573 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:26PM (#10843563)
    The author isn't talking about auto updating software or and OS, he's talking about prebuilt Server/Clients for small offices. --> So really, who is hotter? Alley or Alleys sister?
    • Correct. And my best guess is that almost no one read damn article.

      There's a talk about creating a plug'n'play system that would enable offices to perform their job. Mostly talking about best solution to solve migration to new environment and new solutions

  • Um, what about Debian? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I run Debian, with a nice little script that keeps everything automatically updated for me. It's been working great for months. I rarely reboot, OOo and KDE are kept up to date for me, as well as all the things in the background which I rarely worry about.

    With the many variants on Debian, I'm sure this guy's idea has already seen light.
  • I've thought about doing something like this myself, but having to make the mortgage payment makes it impractical...

    It would be nice if somebody made a "channel" to provide the basics, and allowed for inexpensive or free franchise rights.

  • It should be coming... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by debrain ( 29228 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:29PM (#10843598) Journal
    A plug-and-play Linux computer is a logical step, technically, from Knoppix et al. Economically, it may be in a prime situation for a well priced subscription model.

    The barrier to entry of the humble plug and play corporate desktop actually seems to be a consequence of the lack of commercialization of Linux to date. Though the economic incentive exists to break into the enterprise marketplace, it has not trickled down to the small business.

    With time, I am sure that a start-up will capitalize on this in a grand way. The technology is there, as evinced by the variety and capabilities of the many distributions. A simplified distribution, reflecting an appropriate commercial incentive, may soon be in a position to go a long way.

  • Great idea... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:31PM (#10843635) Homepage
    ..and something that most of us have been doing for years, whether the customers know it or not.

    I don't know about the rest of you, but I have stock systems that I go with, both hardware and software wise. I get a customer order, I already know which systems I'm going to use ( hell, I have ghost images of the damn things ). It's just a matter of what extra software packages they'll need.

    There's another aspect of this, and one that people can't quite grasp: Customers want to feel special. I don't care how much they belly ache about wanting it fast and cheap and good ( heh ), they want to feel like they are your most important customer. On the opposite side, most IT contractors are cock-chokers, and will spend as little time on the customer as possible. You see the potential problems arising from this situation?

  • From the Article (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rueger ( 210566 ) * on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:32PM (#10843646) Homepage
    To most people, "The Internet" is like a black box. They connect to it, and all they care about is that it works. They don't worry about routers and nodes and traffic-balancing and all the sweat that goes into keeping the infrastructure running. A small office computer system should be the same way. It should ... arrive, pre-tested, in boxes and get plugged in ... by a local, low-level network wiring contractor. As soon as everything is hooked up, people in the office should be able to sit down and go to work.

    Actually the author is right on the nose. Small companies should like the option of having a working network installed in their offices, and routine upgrades and/or maintenance handled remotely.

    I think that he has identified a possibly profitable niche, supplying companies too small for a staff IT person, but big enough to want consistency and support. These are the people who don't want to do-it-yourself, they just want systems that work, out of the box, without headaches.
    • I know several people who have started up exactly this kind of set-up, targeted mainly for students and universities, where the turnover in equipment - combined with a low budget - makes any low-cost solution very very attractive.


      The subscription model that seems to work best is renting the computer per month for students and per year for Universities and other educational facilities.

  • It is in the works! (Score:3, Informative)

    by jkinney3 ( 535278 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:34PM (#10843671)
    My company, Local Net Solutions [localnetsolutions.com] has been working toward that goal for about a year now. The system is about ready to go. Depending on the office size and bandwidth from that office, I am looking at a local machine to be the master update server. The SOHO office will update directly from my servers.
  • ... then you don't need any security updates.
    Really. Lots of business desktops don't need
    full Internet access.

  • Down with Usability! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mulletproof ( 513805 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:41PM (#10843764) Homepage Journal
    It's ironic that somebody who is trying to address one of linux biggest problems- user friendliness -is being flamed and compared to that very same product. I'm not saying the service is good or bad. I don't know. And neither do half of you, but we're associating it with Windows- a bad comparison to begin with -anyway. What's hugely ironic is that you have to pay for a service to get an open source product that user friendliness to begin with.

    And for God sakes, people, you can turn the windows auto update manager off. If that's your biggest bitch, go whore yourself somewhere else.

  • apt-get install cron-apt

    Edit the config file.

    That it!

  • I don't think that's the problem... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:46PM (#10843823)
    Most of the small business owners I speak are reluctant to migrate to Linux (or *BSD) because of the perceived lack of business oriented software. They are perfectly happy with the Linux offerings today when it comes to setting up things such as firewalls, print servers and backup mechanisms.

    As a specific example, a small handful of these businesses run some very specialized sales tax tracking software. (Think stores that sell both taxable and tax-free goods.) Conceptually, the software is trivial. However, the software is so old that the minimum recommended operating system is DOS!

    Let me be more clear. Sure they can run it in a DOS emulator on Linux. That's not the problem. What they want is "external support" for that particular configuration, and they don't have the time or the patience to chase down dozens of Google leads, whenever a problem comes up. They'd rather pay (and expense) for a dedicated vendor, but the market is too small to support one.

    I have spoken to accountants who plan to move to OSX as soon as all of their accounting software gets ported over. I believe Peachtree has taken this step. I'm not sure about Quickbooks or some of the more specialized packages. If these companies sold Linux specific, supported, and certified editions, they would move.

    They would even still move if you simply "repackaged" existing software for Linux and provided support for the Linux specific issues (and acted as a go-between for the other issues).

    That said, I doubt businesses are looking for a zero-administration box. I sincerely doubt they want one that's administered remotely, unless this company was willing to assume the legal risks and obligations. If they break the box when you're trying to submit quarterly financials, will they pay the penalties?
    • As a specific example, a small handful of these businesses run some very specialized sales tax tracking software. (Think stores that sell both taxable and tax-free goods.) Conceptually, the software is trivial. However, the software is so old that the minimum recommended operating system is DOS!

      Agreed, and almost every business has something like this wheather it's a POS system or a locksmithing database, there's always something.

      Let me be more clear. Sure they can run it in a DOS emulator on Linux. Tha

  • local auto-updating (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TheSHAD0W ( 258774 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:53PM (#10843908) Homepage
    I don't think having systems update automatically based on a distro manager would be that smart. I do think the auto-update function would be very useful if distribution were controlled locally, say by a company's MIS department. They'd have a better handle on what hardware was out there, and could test and make sure updates won't start breaking things. It'd also work if a computer manufacturer and distributor did it, assuming owners limited what changes they made to hardware.
  • IMO the basic idea has merit.
    Forgive me if I missed it in the article, but the addition of offsite, secure, encrypted(private) backup to the mix would make it much more attractive.
    Alternatively, XUL behind Firefox browser makes it possible to shift office applications to an offsite server farm which in turn might have offsite backup or even a secondary site for disaster recovery.
    Beginning with a mix of the two and slowly moving applications off site as one is able to seems a reasonable approach to buildin

  • Really talking about a business-model... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by adjuster ( 61096 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @12:58PM (#10843973) Homepage Journal

    The article is talking about a business-model, and Free Software is only a component of that model. The idea of using free software to bootstrap a service business by leveraging the (a) low cost of implementation, the (b) support via remote access technologies, and (c) utilizing commodity hardware, sounds like a great idea, but then the author moves into less sensible territory. The author says things like "A central company should supply the hardware, software, and behind-the-scenes tech support...", and talks about franchising, etc.

    I find this "central company" model flawed. Free software opens the door for small companies to compete on a level "playing field" with larger companies, on the basis of their familiarity with the software and their skills. PC hardware is already commodity.

    To me, the door is wide open for thousands of small companies to compete deploying, servicing, maintaining, and administering computer networks for businesses who are too small to have a full-time IT staff (or employee). Why bring a "central company" into the mix, when all a "central company" brings into the picture is additional overhead, lack of agility, and administrative burden?

    I'm biased, perhaps, as a member of a small employee-owned IT services firm. My firm is quite small, but provides exceptional service to our Customers through our extremely high skill levels, intelligent decisions made in deployments to enable "scaling" of our human resources and emergency response component, and clearly documented contractual arrangements with Customers. We recognized that "loss leader" work, such as selling physical goods, performing "break / fix" services, and playing "lowest bidder" games for RFP's from large corporations were bad business models. Instead, we've focused on businesses that lack and IT staff, and provide these Customers with a level of support far better than they could receive if they attempted to hire-in a worker themselves (and for a fraction of the annual cost of such a worker).

    I think our model works very well, and our use of Free Software complements the model nicely. Instead of grovelling thru a "knowledge base" and telling the Customer "well-- that's a <insert Closed Source "manufacturer" name here> problem", we "Use The Source" and can identify causes of issues and correct them. We provide a much higher level of customization to the Customer than could be achieved with most Closed Source software applications, and our labor costs are still lower than the licensing costs for Closed Source alternatives. The Customer ends up with a solution that they are free to use for as long as they like, without getting stuck on the traditional Closed Source "upgrade treadmill" of recurring licensing fees.

    The key to success in this marketplace, to me, is beng skilled, intelligent, and well managed. The "Ma 'n Pa Computer Shop", building PC's, selling hardware, and staffed by low-knowledge PC technicians, "paper MCSE's", and oft-shady sole proprietors is a dying breed, and I'm ecstatic to see it go. The "big" consulting firms are priced much too far out of the market for these smaller types of Customers. The market for small, agile, well-managed professional services firms who provide IT support, planning, and administration services to these "too small for an IT staff" firms is healthy, active, and growing. Having an intelligent business model, highly skilled staff, and spot-on management is key to succeeding in this market. Using Free Software to complement and extend your offerings only makes business sense.

  • What to name it (Score:2, Interesting)

    by paulexander ( 255666 )
    Call it Offix Linux.

  • There are (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DaEMoN128 ( 694605 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @01:02PM (#10844012)
    Suns Java desktop system is like that. I would highly recommend that the sysadmin removes all references to the install cd or any other source other than his dedicated ftp server. That server better be locked down tight.

    With that said, these will work with yast (the jds is based off os suse, as well as novells offering). The solutions are out there, but they are designed for the office only, and great care should be placed in testing the patches before they are posted on the server for the users to automatically download. Hell, that could be done with a cron job and a script.

  • One thing about most main-stream Linux distros that has annoyed me a lot is that they don't seem to support dynamic DNS (which most corporate environments that I know of use). In particular, a parameter usually needs to be passed to the DHCP client to "send the hostname" (which allows the DHCP server to update the DNS records). This parameter is almost always off by default. On Redhat this is just annoying; you can turn it on fairly easily. On Ubuntu and some other Debian-based distros, this is a royal

  • Small business isn't a horizontal market (Score:3, Insightful)

    by duffbeer703 ( 177751 ) * on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @01:28PM (#10844286)
    The small business market is a vertical market that centers around applications needed for general business administration and specialized needs.

    Linux needs some widely recognized accounting packages (ie Quickbooks) to attract the general market.

    The web-browser is the real secret -- porting applications to Linux/Unix still locks you into a platform... and why would you do that?

  • Been there Done That (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Skraut ( 545247 ) on Wednesday November 17, 2004 @02:28PM (#10844915) Journal
    I already have started this as an experiment in our office. I took about a dozen identical computers and installed Gentoo on them with Gnome, Ximian OpenOffice, Evolution, Firefox etc.

    Every Sunday night all systems do an emerge sync via a cron job. Monday morning I'll take my system and do an emerge -uD world world on it. If everything goes ok with the system on Monday, I'll allow the cron to run Monday night on the rest of the machines doing it to them as well.

    Granted it's not the perfect solution, but I've had no issues so far in about 2 months using the systems, and those who use them have had no issues . Literally this takes me maybe 2 hours a week to maintain, and most of that time is just my computer compiling the week's updates while I'm busy doing other things, so its hard to count that as "Time" I could cron my system to run Sunday night, and just check the logs when I get in Monday, but for whatever reason I just like to be there when the first machine compiles the week's updates.

    There's still a lot of things I'd love to improve, but judging by how many people keep asking when they can get that "leeenicks thingie" on their system, using the Gentoo portage system in this way seems to work pretty darn well.

Slashdot Top Deals

Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man -- who has no gills. -- Ambrose Bierce

Close