Changing a Windows Network to Linux? 150
Charli125 asks: "I have been a Windows administrator ever since I got into the tech industry. I have no working experience with any other OS except for those from Apple. I am currently working with a small company that has 1 server and around 15 workstations. I would like to faze out all of the Windows software, in order to avoid having to deal with viruses, save money, and learn how the other half lives. Since I have never so much as installed Linux, I am looking for resources or advice on how to get started, and how to plan the change over. Can anyone help me?"
"My current setup is like this:Server-Windows Small Business Server 2003, Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition(and for Exchange)
Workstations-Windows XP Pro, Office 2003 or XP, Symantec Antivirus, IE for most of the browsers (Firefox for mine and a few others). The main apps used are like every other office, Word and Excel.
I have OpenOffice installed on my home computer, and it works fine. I do see a problem with non-tech types saving in the default format though, which would result in other users not being able to read the documents/spreadsheets.
Yeah, I know, I'm so MSFT, I'm everything you guys hate about the IT world, but I would really appreciate anything that would help me get started.
Thanks"
A basic strategy: (Score:5, Insightful)
Since I have never so much as installed Linux, I am looking for resources or advice on how to get started, and how to plan the change over. Can anyone help me?
Not to sound condescending here, but honestly...if you've never even installed Linux, much less used it long-term, you really have no idea what you're letting yourself in for.
My advice would be to install Linux on your home system in a dual-boot configuration with your existing Windows install. Then, use the Linux system exclusively. If something comes up that you don't know how to do in Linux, don't boot into Windows...figure out how to do it on Linux. Only switch to Windows if you have no other option, and if you do, keep a detailed record of the transgression in a notebook (hereafter referred to as the 'Book of Shame'). Also, remember to try to do things your users at work will be expected to be able to do...after all, you're evaluating the feasibility of Linux in your workplace as well as your home. After you've figured out how to do something you couldn't do previously, check off its entry in the Book of Shame.
After a few weeks (months?) of this, sit down with your Book of Shame and see what you've learned. How many entries do you have? How many were subsequently checked off? At this point, you should have a good idea of whether or not deploying Linux in the workplace is a viable option for you.
One more thing...use the resources available to you. Here's a good link [tsf.org.za] to some online Linux courses...you might want to check them out for starters. Also, the Web and the newsgroups usually have good information about whatever question you might have, if you have the patience to dig deeply enough, and the self-esteem to withstand the few elitist jerks who scoff and call you a n00b. Finally, read those man pages!
I'm looking forward to seeing what you find out...please remember to let us know. ^_^
Re:A basic strategy: (Score:2)
You may also want to look into courses/certifications. For example get a book or two on RedHat's certification or any others and read through them (maybe even go after it).
Re:A basic strategy: (Score:2)
Good advice (Score:4, Informative)
Of course start with your home machine. If you can't use Linux, you can't support it. Try at least two distros.
Also, since you're completely green, you'll have to switch in stages. Take small steps. It'll take longer, but you'll be better off for it.
Buy and read at least three Linux books. Start with a general one to give you an overview and some basics. Maybe get one on Samba, perhaps another on whatever e-mail or groupware server you decide on.
Stop upgrading your Windows software. Standardize on what you have now, and don't buy a new Dell with Office 2005 whenever it comes out. It will only cause more hassle. Standardize on Firefox immediately. Decide if you need to use Office and Crossover on Linux or if you can switch some or all users to OpenOffice.org. If you can switch, start now.
Once you're completely comfortable using and configuring Linux for yourself (this will take you six months), start by replacing the Windows server. If you do it correctly, your users won't even notice. That's the goal.
From there, switch your worst user to a Linux desktop. Explain to him how Linux works, that it's open source, and that any problems he encounters should be reported and fixed. Make sure this user tears Linux apart. Make it clear this is only a test, and that you want to find problems. Use this time to get acquainted with the bug reporting tools.
Switching to Linux, even in a small network, is a long term project. Problems will crop up along the way. You may need to modify your intended path. Linux comes with lots of options. That's okay. Don't be afraid to try different options as long as you end up with the best configuration for your application. The benefits are definitely worth it.
Re:Good advice (Score:2)
I highly recommend Samba-3 by Example [amazon.com]. It's the best book on Samba that I've found, in that it approaches the subject from the POV of someone like yourself, who needs to implement this in various office situations.
Re:A basic strategy: (Score:3, Insightful)
In addition to Parent's good advice, I'd suggest looking at the Munich strategy for Win -> Linux conversion. As I understand it, they are basically moving a lot of their folks from MS Office and MSIE to FOSS equivalents, but holding off on changing the OS itself until employees are up to speed with the applications. I think that would be a good strategy for a lot businesses.
Re:A basic strategy: (Score:3, Insightful)
DON'T dual-boot. Makes it WAY too easy to use windows as a crutch. When I finally went pure-linux on the desktop, the only way I managed to pull it off was by purging the MS software altogether, so I had no choice but to make Slack work.
Re:A basic strategy: (Score:2)
For myself, I have 10 years of working with RedHat and its children, and I'm fine with that, but I like SuSE for the less technical types. I *really* like it. The administration tool, YaST, has pretty much everything you'd actually need to actually manage the system, in one place. SuSE has windows-like auto-upda
Re:A basic strategy: (Score:2)
I have to agree with the parent. If you ARE going in blind, Fedora or SuSE are probably your best bets.
I agree, but I don't. (Score:2)
0. Linux is a perfect OS for your server, but consider strongly whether you really want Linux for your workstations or you really want OSX. OSX provides a vastly superior interface for untrained users and generally supports most Linux software and a very large amount of professional software that Linux doesn't. If you're going to go with Linux, though
Test server (Score:2)
First thing would be to find out what your main server does, and see what alternative replacements there are. Some examples:
web: apache
firewall/NAT: iptables
proxy: squid
fileserver: samba
printing: cups
ftp: proftpd (or better, SSH-based services with winSCP clients, etc).
However, as per the parent's recommendation, setting up a home server would probably not test it well for a
just don't do what (I'll call him) Bob did (Score:3, Funny)
Well, maybe rule number one:
Troll. (Score:5, Interesting)
One's job as an administrator is not to go with what is 'cool', but what works and keeps the buisness running. Throwing out the existing config in order to "save money" is wrongheaded. The first thing to do would be a total cost study to see if money will be saved. Making such a change to "see how the other half lives" is the sort of thing that is done in your lab, on a test network.
Avoiding viruses, while not as easy, can generally be done via proactive patching and ensuring that antivirus software remains updated via some sort of top-down policy which enforces updating.
So, yes, I'll fall back on my earlier statement that this is either a troll or horribly misguided.
Re:Troll. (Score:2)
I think you're jumping the gun.
Just because something is 'cool' doesn't mean it isn't better. While admitedly rare, it's not unheard of for things to become 'cool' precisely because they are better.
Also, just because what you have now is adequate doesn't mean you shouldn't be looking at alternatives. While I agree that changin
Re:Troll. (Score:2)
SugarCRM
SpamD
Less virus
Higher availability from better security (SELinux anybody?)
MultiSync
Essentially a lot of value add that doesn't exist now without spending a lot of money on proprietry software. Yes, a lot of this could be run under Windows if you REALLY wanted to. However, this isn't exactly the best supported scenario.
The other thing the business has to consider is, what happens when you get hit by a bus? What is the
Re:Troll. (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect the only troll here is you.
"Throwing out the existing config in order to "save money" is wrongheaded."
Really? Tell your boss that. He'll kill you. Your boss LIVES for saving money - even if he can't and everything he does turns to shit and expense.
Proactive patching for viruses? Dumb Windows idea. Read Marcus Ranum's recent rant mentioned here a day or so ago. It's bad enough you have to patch Linux and its apps for REAL vulnerabilities without having to patch for malware, too.
This guy is correc
Re:Troll. (Score:2)
Faze? (Score:1, Insightful)
Answer.com definition of faze is interesting in this context -
faze (fâz) pronunciation tr.v., fazed, fazing, fazes. To disrupt the composure of; disconcert. See synonyms at embarrass.
If that's what the poster wanted to do, isn't he wasting everyone's time? (I think disruption comes free when you have Windows servers and workstations - or did MS start charging for it separately?)
Oh dear! (Score:2, Insightful)
Poor customer. Seriously, I've got a Linux and no Windows background, but wouldn't be ready to dive into such a venture by asking advice on some random website. For god's sake this is Slashdot!
You must be new here.
No offense, but (Score:5, Insightful)
Install a system for you home use and use it exclusively for as long as it takes to get comfortable. Set up some services on those machines and tinker around with them. You should have, in my experience, at least a year with the operating system before you even think of deploying it in a business environment. Less, if you're familiar with similar operating systems.
Re:No offense, but (Score:2)
Re:No offense, but (Score:2)
That's unfair and untrue.
The community WILL tell you to RTFM if you have NOT even bothered to consult google or basic FAQ's AT ALL, but if you have a real question that ISN'T totally obvious to anyone that has spent 5 minutes of research, you will find that the responses are rather good and helpful.
See: http://www. [catb.org]
I don't buy it. (Score:1, Insightful)
First, he says his only professional experience has been working with Windows machines. Then he says that the only experience he has is with Apple systems. Which is it?
Second, he says he doesn't know where to start with regards to involving linux with the network, because he's never so much as installed linux before. Well, the obvious first step would be to start by installing linux.
Third, he ends with a comment intended to
Obviously retarded (Score:2)
Re:Obviously retarded (Score:4, Funny)
Boss: WTF?!?! Charlie, get your ass in here!! How come Outlook says it cannot find the email server.
Charli125: We'll, I replaced our Windows server with Linux, because it's free and will save us money.
Boss: Look, if you don't change everything back so I can get my email in the next 30 minutes, the only thing we'll be saving money on is your salary!
Re:Obviously retarded (Score:2, Informative)
Outlook is quite capable of spontaneously stopping people from reading their email for half an hour without any help from Linux servers (or Exchange).
I seem to remember several versions do quite a good job of this when you get more than 2^16 email in one folder. Then there is Microsofts idea of "security" which is to make it so complex to use certain sorts of attachments no one will ever try.
Heck I sent my boss an email with a
Re:I don't buy it. (Score:3)
> I have no working experience with any other OS [besides Windows] except for
> those from Apple.
Poor grammar, perhaps, but I think you misread it.
Re:I don't buy it. (Score:2)
Not to say it isn't possible, but you obviously didn't read what he said.
He said his only experience PROFESSIONALLY was with Windows, but he has SOME experience with Macs. I did NOT read that he said his experience was the same with both, which is your interpretation.
Step one (Score:2)
BTW, since you know Apple, why the hell are you planning on Linux? Apple kit may cost, but not as much as doubling the staff for a couple years, and the modern stuff has all the Unix advantages.
Only slightly kidding here... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously.
The first post on this thread has a good suggestion on how to begin getting personal experience with Linux, but seriously, you are talking about pretty big change here, even if you only have a few servers.
Which distro will you choose? Why?
Do you know enough about the system to handle a problem when it occurs?
How much does downtime cost your business?
Would signifcant downtime due to your ignorance of the platform cost more than maintaining and securing the Windows solution you already have?
If you don't have the expertise, it isn't reasonable to ask your employer to pay for you to acquire it in production.
Believe me, I am all for converting businesses, especially small to medium sized businesses, to an open-source infrastructure, but at first glance this seems like you are just begging for trouble.
I'm quite serious when I say if you want to do this, contract out to an expert who does this. I charge $95/hour plus travel/lodging expenses...
Otherwise, maintain what you have and develop sufficient expertise on your own. Convert when you know the answers to all the questions I asked above (and then some), but not before.
Re:Only slightly kidding here... (Score:1)
If you never had Unix in your schooldays, this may be tougher than it sounds.
After builing lots of crap on your home network, you will discover how not to do things. By the time you catch yourself using vi keystrokes in NOTEPAD and Slashdot comment fields, you ar eprobably ready to inflict your BOfH-self on the world.
Re:Only slightly kidding here... (Score:2)
No kidding. They run SBS 2003 and XP (not exactly old stuff) but he wants to rip it all out and replace it with Linux because he's afraid of viruses?
If he said "We are running Window NT 3.51 and a handful of Windows for Workgroups machines" then maybe his plan has some merit...
Re:Only slightly kidding here... (Score:2)
Re:Only slightly kidding here... (Score:2)
Guys, he has ONE fucking server and FIFTEEN workstations.
This is NOT General Motors.
He needs to put Red Hat or SUSE on the one server, and Fedora or SUSE on the workstations.
This isn't rocket science, even for a newbie.
Yes, he needs to get up to speed. He needs to buy a book (or two) on Linux administration which covers both the command line and GUI tools like Webmin, he needs to buy the "Linux in a Nutshell" book for a desk reference, and he needs to review a lot of tutorials on the Web.
If he has any smart
Re:Only slightly kidding here... (Score:2)
Re:Only slightly kidding here... (Score:2)
Can't disagree but my point is that he can learn to set it up in a lot less than two years of heavy study like other people have suggested.
He can learn what he needs to do this in less than six months - even three - if he applies himself to the right texts, and implements what he learns on a test machine (or two - necessary for learning networking on Linux.) Depending on how busy he is otherwise, of course.
Re:Only slightly kidding here... (Score:2)
I'm keeping busy.
I'm open to the infrastructure work too. Experienced in both.
I'm one of the authors of "Multitool Linux" (out of print now) and "Java Applications Development on Linux" which is a Bruce Peren's Open Source Series book. They help convince potential clie
Windows vs Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
While many of us don't like Microsoft, for various reasons, we still use it, many of us exclusively. The network you manage is more important than you realize. You're being paid to reduce uncertainty for the users. It's not fair to your users to increase that uncertainty by orders of magnitude unless there is a massive benefit to the users. Replacement of Office with equivalent functionality is NOT a benefit, as it will only frustrate your users everytime anything unexpected happens. The users will also then have you to personally blame when ANYTHING goes wrong, reguardless of its relevance to the OS switch.
If you want to learn some Linux, get an older machine, put two newer NICs in it, and set up an IPcop firewall. You can use a web browser to configure it once it's installed, and peek around inside it via the console. This gives you the benefit of helping to protect the users, while giving you a linux box to manage.
Don't subject your users to your whim. It may suck for you, but Windows is what the users expect, and can cope with, slashdot bias be damned.
Feel free to ignore my advice, but you might want to update your resume if you do so.
--Mike--
Speak for yourself (Score:1, Offtopic)
While many of us don't like Microsoft, for various reasons, we still use it, many of us exclusively.
On the other hand, many of us don't use it at all, and don't miss it. I've got 5 boxes on my KVM switcher here, and every one of them is running some flavour of *nix. There's no reason that I can see to use Windows; we have exactly one Windows box in the office and it is used for 1) testing web pages and 2) testing anti-virus software.
Reading the rest of your post (You're being paid to reduce uncertain
Re:Windows vs Linux (Score:2)
Don't... Yet (Score:2, Insightful)
What to buy:
1. Two or three used machines (P3s or so). One for a file/print server and two dummy workstations to connect to it.
2. Copies of two or three different distros that are specifically designed for this kind of thing.
I've chosen Xandros Business for my office here (I'm the CTO) since it still lets us run some small windows apps and is very "windows-ish" in feel. Read: Easy to switch
knoppix is your friend (Score:2)
Buy the book "Knoppix Hacks" from O'Reilly. It is an book about Knoppix, but it serves as an excellent recipie book for linux in general.
For more info visit http://www.knoppix.org/ [knoppix.org]
Im all for Linux (Score:2, Insightful)
As the other posted mentioned, dont even think of doing it Live before you know how to do it. Install it at home, setup a PDC/Fileserver first. Setup a desktop to connect to the server, etc. I have used linux for 5 years personally, and didnt attempt to use it for my business until 2 years ago. I had 3 years of exp. with it before i used it on live servers.
Again, as a avid linux user, i always like to suggest it as a option. However in your case, the money is spent, the network works.
Dont f
Re:Im all for Linux (Score:2)
Again, as a avid linux user, i always like to suggest it as a option. However in your case, the money is spent, the network works.
Except that evetually he's going to have to look at upgrading everything at some point in the future anyway, so he might as well start looking at how to get himself and his company out of Microsoft's profit cycle now.
SuSE Pro (Score:4, Insightful)
Buy SuSE Profesional, the full boxed set. For roughly $100, that will get you most of what you need in order to install, run, and learn to use Linux. My personal observation has been that people who start with SuSE stick with Linux. If you really want to be an expert on Linux, there are other distros that you should consider switching to after you're comfortable on SuSE, but I wouldn't start a new user out on anything else.
Before you switch ANY workstations, you'll want to switch the server. Before you do that you need to do 2 things: learn to use *nix (I highly recomend taking at least "Intro to Unix" at your local JC), and verify that you won't be losing any functionality your users care about in the switch (maybe you don't use any of the unique features of Exchange, maybe you do; only you know).
IFF you can switch the server, only then should you even consider switching the workstations. The right way to do this is to start with the apps. Firefox is probably the easiest first step, then maybe email (Thunderbird or Evolution, probably), then OpenOffice (honestly, if everyone inside your company is using OOo, you're better off in the long run having them save stuff in the default format, and just teaching them how to convert stuff if they need to send it to the outside world for any reason), and finally any job specific apps your employees use. ONLY after all apps required for people to do their jobs have been replaced, and proven to be functional, should you even consider switching the workstations to Linux On the bright side, though, at this point no one will care what OS they're running, and some of them might not even notice.
In short, starting from the point you're currently at, expect it to be AT LEAST a year before you're ready to start considering the server swap, and if all goes well AT LEAST another year before the workstations are switched over. YMMV, mostly depending on how much you apply yourself to learning to use and administer Linux. It isn't easy, but it is worth the effort.
I would throw in a few more thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)
Second, DON'T try to convert everything in one day. Try to reproduce the working conditions of one computer - preferably a non-critical one - in every detail, just using Linux. Once you've done that, and you've i
Re:I would throw in a few more thoughts (Score:2)
Re:SuSE Pro (Score:2)
FWIW, it took me about 2 years to get to the point where I was ready to use Linux as my primary OS, though I was hardly on a mission or anything, and a lot of that time had to do with the fact that I started playing with it in fall of 1999, when Linux was definately ready for the desktop, r at least not mine anyway. Particularly missing were video ca
if it ain't broke (Score:2)
allow me to don my flame proof suit before continuing.
i'll start with a little example to illustrate. i do a lot of prototyping of image processing algorithms. typically, this is done in matlab ($$$ and then some); however, the powers that be are not willing to buy a copy of matlab at present. i am therefore forced to work with octave. octave does about 80% of what i need. unfortunately, the remaining 20% is incredibly painful. i did a little nu
Re:if it ain't broke (Score:2)
The problem with this concept is that it is HIGHLY unlikely that the lost productivity cost will stay the same year after year - whereas the cost of Windows licenses and TCO WILL or will INCREASE.
Assuming no great turnover percentage in a given company, if
I don't quite get it. (Score:3, Insightful)
1. It won't make you save money (on the short run) since you already bought everythink and Linux is not free as in beer also.
2. It will be a lot of learning for you - without proper experience and knowledge your Linux installation will fail miserably - and spending time on learning, gaining experience also costs.
3. Linux is not suitable everywhere (as any other operating system) - it works well in some areas. It does not work in others. For example for common office desktop use it simply lacks applications - sure there is office suite, mail client and web browser - but this is not all that common office needs - go examine what your users need to do their job done and check if there are some Linux equivalents - also mind that Linux software can also be costly (as in money).
So with that in mind I think it is, a completely retarded idea to convert evertyhing to Linux.
What I can suggest you is to pop in one Linux server box to you existing network - integrate it with Windows Networking and see what this baby can do for you. Constantly add features to it. Explore the world of its software - learn what can be done with Linux. Think of any purposes for this system, f.e.:
1. File/print server.
2. Web/application server.
3. Database server.
4. Backup server.
5. Remote access server.
6. Mail server.
7. Lowend net infrastructure server (DNS/DHCP).
Etc. etc. - see if any those roles can help you in your work, can help you save money and so on. Then after some time you will be able to *extend* your network, pop in some other Linux boxes, maybe even on desktop. And make Linux work for you where it is best suitable - but you must know yourself. Linux is completely different world.
And also for more concrete information consult your distribution documentation - and for learning I think the best is task based aproach - so you give yourself a task and then explore to allow you to accomplish it. Like set up a web server.
Re:I don't quite get it. (Score:2)
Exactly - it WILL save him money in the long run.
Something wrong with thinking in the long run?
However, your advice about phasing in Linux is sound. Obviously a rip and tear replacement without adequate planning is going to cause more problems than it solves. The operative phrase is "without adequate planning."
A simple plan. (Score:1)
Sign up with no-ip to get yourself a (yourserver.no-ip.org) domain.
Install whichever linux your research leans you toward (I recommend FreeBSD) on this machine.
Now set up a workstation, with whatever distro your research leans you towards.
Now pretend to be the user and the admin for a while. Given enough time you should be able to master this small set up and do a fairly decent job administering it.
Macs (Score:2)
Since you've actually used Macs before, you would gain some of the advantages of Linux + have some basis of knowledge with which to support these users if you replaced their machines with Macs.
Additionally, you can continue to use Microsoft Office--like Windows, but no viruses.
The hardware would cost more than using Linux to be sure--so do it a step at a time. I would replace the Win Server with Mac OS X Server running off of a low-power Xserve or a even a nice G5 tower; then replace the workstations as
Re:Macs (Score:2)
This is actually a pretty good plan for a small company. Not as good as going all OSS, but still better than staying with Windows.
Openoffice Default Format (Score:2)
Re:Openoffice Default Format (Score:2)
Instead of migrating (Score:2)
The netfilter docs will get you started, and there is a more in depth tutorial which illustrates some of the fancie
Bad advice (Score:4, Funny)
Second, many studies have shown that command line is more productive than GUI, so don't install X.
You'll find that your users will love having a choice of software, instead of being locked into a single application.
email: mail, elm or pine
word processor: troff or LaTex
web browsing: Lynx or wget
The list goes on and on.
Enjoy!
Clever troll... (Score:2)
Surely you're joking. That distro hasn't been supported for at least five years. The lightest distro you will find supported today is Debian Woody, and it's slated for retirement soon.
many studies have shown that command line is more productive than GUI
That's probably true. I've had attorneys come to me and ask about using a system like LaTex for document production. While it's a lot of training and work up-front, it would definitely save effort in the long run.
But the effort involved
Re:Bad advice (Score:2)
What a half-baked idea. Because you have problems using a modern distro, why not use something that is 7 years old. Something not supported by anyone, and which there are no security updates available. No way is this a remotely good idea. You might as well install unpatched Windows 98 across the whole network. Come on, you honestly believe there hasn't been any improvements
Re:Bad advice (Score:2)
Baby Steps! (Score:2)
I installed Linux at home as dual boot, playd with it; freaked over video drivers, install it again, then later again because I found another issue or distro... many many installs... ok, you will be re-installing a few times at first...:-) Also you will be getting used to using the terminal to run the configuration too
Re:Baby Steps! (Score:2)
Never tell someone - especially a newbie - to use vi - or emacs.
That shit has been obsolete for the last decade, except for die-hard UNIX dinosaurs and crazed developers who have their fingers glued to the keys of their keyboard and are too dumb to want to learn something new.
I see my boss hunting and pecking with two fingers through vi every day and it drives me nuts. Just today I told him again, "Get jEdit! Use it!" Plus he uses sqlplus from the command line to connect to Oracle instead of SQLTools! Insan
Re:Baby Steps! (Score:2)
Your point about it being utterly worthless "except for die-hard UNIX dinosaurs and crazed developers who have their fingers glued to the keys of their keyboard and are too dumb to want to learn something new" is entirely false.
vi is small and mature enough to live on
vi is a sysadmin's friend. Not a newbie's.
Re:Baby Steps! (Score:2)
Nowadays you boot a live CD and run any editor you want.
This hoary old "vi is the only editor you can count on" crap is obsolete, too.
Today there are a half dozen easier command line editors you can throw on a rescue floppy and a zillion you can put on a rescue CD.
If you're working on a system that has only got vi to work with in an emergency - get a job on a real system. Obviously the sys admin has no clue.
Besides, ninety nine percent of the time when you have to edit a config file, do you NEED a fancy edi
Re:Baby Steps! (Score:2)
Sure, there are countless command line editors I can put on a "rescue floppy" or "rescue CD". Neither of which is worth a damn without a 2-hour+ drive to the datacenter.
If you want to trust "young" code on your root partition, be my guest. My sysadmin is a cynical, paranoid, and strikingly handsome guy who decided to expend the effort to learn vi and save some gas. I..err. he finds it MUCH easier to use than pico. Smaller and more mature, too.
Re:Baby Steps! (Score:2)
Don't waste my time with this nonsense.
Migration Assistance (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.versora.com/products/ [versora.com]
and services page:
http://www.versora.com/services/ [versora.com]
We have also published various white papers on some of the technical issues associated with migrating from Windows to Linux:
http://www.versora.com/support/documentation.php [versora.com]
To reiterate (Score:2)
Just like many other posters here, I'm going to side with them when I say, "don't do it." I work for a company that sells Linux solutions. Together, the four of us have at least 45 years of Unix/Linux/FreeBSD experience. And I can tell you from some of the jobs that we've done, suddenly converting a decently-sized Windows office to an exclusively Linux one will end your career.
We recently outfit a new office with an insanely fast Linux terminal server running KDE, Firefox, OpenOffice, the whole nine yards.
Re:To reiterate (Score:2)
Sounds to me like your "Linux solutions" weren't sufficiently solutions...
You didn't plan - or suggest to the company to plan - for new hires getting a Linux orientation? Did you think they were going to hire Linux experts - or even people with ANY Linux experience - to do clerical work?
This sounded suspiciously like a troll post masquerading as a Linux supporter, except I clicked on the Web site link and I see you're running Slackware 8.1 - so you're not a Windows shill.
What you should do is prepare a Lin
Re:To reiterate (Score:2)
You didn't plan - or suggest to the company to plan - for new hires getting a Linux orientation? Did you think they were going to hire Linux experts - or even people with ANY Linux experience - to do clerical work?
Yes, we did train them. Specifically, I trained them as part of my job in the project as a whole. Their work didn't require Linux training specifically (they never touch a command line), just familiarization with the KDE desktop and OpenOffice. They caught on remarkably well at first, but after th
Re:To reiterate (Score:2)
Okay, if you did the job right in training them and THEN they got some bozo manager who's scared of learning something new, well, nothing you can do about it.
Maybe you could go over the head of the new manager to her boss and suggest a support contract that would handle the trivial issues - or maybe some retraining to handle the issues that have arisen. If that didn't work, probably you might as well dump them, especially if they're going to dump you anyway and then badmouth you.
However, it might still be u
Re:To reiterate (Score:2)
Starting with Linux (Score:2)
1. First of all, grab Knoppix, [purdue.edu] burn it to a CD, and spend a few days (or a few weeks, whatever you feel comfortable with) playing with it. The base CD doesn't install anything to the hard drive, so you can't harm anything. This is a completely safe, non-intimidating way for you to initially get your feet wet.
2. While you're exploring Knoppix, there are a few things to read which will really help you. This [tldp.org] will give you a very good introduction to Linux, in terms of a little history of the sy
Re:Starting with Linux (Score:2)
I'd say he doesn't need any of that "Linux from scratch" stuff.
Yes, he needs to get his head around the structure and layout of Linux, the file system hierarchy, the UNIX way of doing things with small, scriptable, linkable utilities, etc. But delving into writing his own init scripts and the like isn't immediately necessary.
A good text on Linux administration such as the classic "UNIX System Administration Handbook" (or more properly the Linux edition) would go far to explaining things if he has real sys a
Re:Starting with Linux (Score:2)
Why not? Because it isn't what all the other lemmings are doing?
As he bangs along replicating the existing Windows system on Linux, he'll learn enough about Linux - and it will be knowledge he can apply directly to his work.
Ah. Here we come to the central premise of your (well, actually I suspect it isn't *yours*, but anyway) argument. Heaven forfend that we simply allow Linux to be Linux. As we all know, the only legitimate, allowable use f
Re:Starting with Linux (Score:2)
I call bullshit on all counts.
He doesn't need "Linux from scratch" to set up one fucking server and some workstations. He's not a distro producer, he's an admin. He can do that crap later when he wants to deepen his knowledge of Linux. Telling him to do LFS is like telling an MCSE to write his own version of Windows. Bullshit.
My point on replicating his Windows system was not to make Linux look like Windows, but to enable the office to continue doing what they're currently doing on Windows but in the Linux
Re:Starting with Linux (Score:2)
http://www.gnu.org/software/sourceinstall/article
makes source installs on an RPM system somewhat easier.
You can almost always get back to a pre-source install state by uninstalling (using the GUI), and then refreshing the RPMs.
Re:Starting with Linux (Score:2)
Thanks, I wasn't aware of this. I've used Checkinstall and the like in the past, but this seems very useful, too.
Re:Starting with Linux (Score:2)
No, he might not be a distro producer, but a couple of points:
a) His life is likely to be a LOT easier as an admin if he has an intimate knowledge of the system he's using...where everything is, how it's set up, and so on. LFS will give someone that.
b) Having at least some kind of knowledge of shell scripting is not only a prerequisite for LFS, but also definitely for being a
Re:Starting with Linux (Score:2)
Okay, your post is much more reasonable. I apologize for any excessive responses in my earlier post.
My point, which I think you underestimate, is that he really doesn't NEED to be an EXPERT Linux sys admin to make the conversion. It wouldn't hurt, of course, but it isn't an absolute requirement. And he DOES need to know a certain minimum to be a Linux sys admin at all.
He can do all the things you suggest EVENTUALLY. I have no problem at all with that - I'd like to do all that myself if I had the time. All h
Re:Starting with Linux (Score:2)
For something quick, and for only a few different types of usage, and in a scenario where he most likely does want the type of support that SuSE and such can offer, then yes, I agree.
He can do all the things you suggest EVENTUALLY. I have no
Re:Starting with Linux (Score:2)
Well, my point on the timetable is that he presumably would like to do this short of the two years some other people suggested he take to learn system administration under Linux.
Also keep in mind he DOES (supposedly) have a real job administering the Windows system, and presumably even with one server he's busy much of the time. So I don't think he needs to be loaded down with more training than he immediately needs.
If he could handle it, I've no problem with it - I just don't think it's necessary for being
Replacing RAS? (Score:2)
Ed Almos
Re:Replacing RAS? (Score:2)
Re:Replacing RAS? (Score:2)
It's of moderate difficult to setup, but once its done it just works.
It's actually remarkably easy to setup a PPP server on Linux, if you know where to look
This might help you start:
http://poptop.sourceforge.net/dox/howto1.html [sourceforge.net]
Personal opinion (From having been there before) (Score:2)
The users don't give a shit at all what you run on the server, so long as it works. That's your domain, as long as they don't get hit with problems, that's your first step.
On that server, you can do whatever you please. Installing additional stuff like CRM packages that integrate with what they have already is a great place to start. You will also have to train the users on this software. Something else you may or may not know how to do at the moment. Can't harm to hire a trainer thoug
A few additional thoughts.. (Score:2)
1. Learn all you can about Linux on your own test machines. There is a LOT of information out there (books, websites, user groups, classes, etc..) -- get as involved as you can. If possible, find a mentor that can help guide you. Unix/Linux is different from Windows and the mindset is different. You will run into many brick wall
Split this process into parts. (Score:2)
For each environment, see what you are running. SBS means you are running file and print services, email, (possibly) database, and (possibly) routing and firewall services. Setup
Bad idea (Score:2)
Spend enough time learning, to the point you dont need to ask how.
My Advice: (Score:2)
1)Don't do a thing. I mean a thing on converting anything till you KNOW linux.
2)Get into hardcore distros like Slackware (at first) or Gentoo.
3)Install Linux From Scratch yourself. (LFS is a distro and you will learn from that experience).
4)Set up a complete working environment from LFS with all the tools you need. Work on it and don't flirt with MS unnecessarily while yo
I've done this myself (Score:2)
1. Pick your distribution. The answer here is 'SuSE'. Enough Windows metaphors hold in the default SuSE environment that it will be easy to get used to.
Plus, YaST makes most sorts of basic configuration tasks really, really easy.
Also, make *sure* you buy SuSE. SuSE comes with excellent manuals in the box set. Any sort of user task that you can think of is covered in the user manual (burning a CD, hooking up a digital camera, SMB shares, NFS shares, printing sharing, the various web browser, Open
Re:don't switch, virtualize (Score:2)
Well, he could virtualize Windows ON Windows, without setting up Linux. There are anti-malware advantages to doing that even on Windows.
In the end, however, he's still running Windows and while he has fewer virus worries, he's paying more for the hardware to get the same performance as without virtualization, and then he's paying for the complexity of maintaining virtualization as well.
You're right that it's not as good an idea as dumping Windows for Linux.
Virtualizing SOME machines on Linux might be a good
Re:Open Office (Score:2)
Wow, you really helped him make up his mind...
Re:Open Office (Score:2)
Bwahahahahahah!!!!
Now THAT was funny!
Re:I can't think of a better way... (Score:2)
I think it was just an excuse for all the Windows shills to come out of the sewer again. Some of them are probably from New Orleans, so the sewers got flooded and they had nowhere else to go tonight.
I don't know if the guy was serious, but except for a couple useful posts (including mine), he sure didn't get much valid info or links to same.
I'm also assuming he doesn't intend an UNPLANNED migration. If he does, of course it will fail - unless he's amazingly lucky as well. But if he intended an unplanned mig
Re:I can't think of a better way... (Score:2)
I agree he seemed a little casual about the prospect of a migration, but that might has just been his writing style.
Or he might be the sort of small business IT guy with a Microsoft background who really doesn't have a clue. For his company's sake, I hope not.
While he didn't get a lot of good advice, he did get some. It sounded to me like he just wanted some idea where to go learn. You'd think he'd think of Google, but that can be overwhelming to a lot of people, too, especially when you see umpteen zillion
Re:Advice (Score:2)
As I've mentioned elsewhere, get the O'Reilly "Linux in a Nutshell" which is the best command line reference and also discusses some of KDE and GNOME. You'll use this a LOT.
Get texts on the following subjects:
1) Linux system administration. The classic UNIX text is "UNIX System Administration Handbook" by Nemeth/Snyder/Seebass/Hein from Prentice Hall, and there is one by the same authors in the same style called "Linux Administration Handbook", the second edition of which is due out in February 2006.
Don't g
Re:Advice (Score:2)
Read the manuals. They are *remarkably* good.
Step-by-step instructions for most *ANY* task you can imagine.
You can get the PDFs here http://www.novell.com/documentation/suse93/index.h tml [novell.com]
But its nice to get the things and hold them in your hand.
BTW: I posted a fairly long response to your topic above. I've described how I transffered my 8 man office to Linux. (mostly-- one guy refuses to use Linux, and sticks with Windows. I've told him that means he is on his 'own' IT wise---we no longer support W