corporate linux

[miKeyBabid]

I've never really used computers before... I've previously used Windows and Macs but that pretty much just involved a few word docs, going on the net etc.. no real knowledge base of how the system worked. However, 6 or so months ago I found myself with a second hand computer with a -- dare i say it -- pirated version of xp. I saw no reason in leaving myself open to any form of lawsuit (or virus), and so I immediately downloaded kubuntu and installed it over the top of the xp install. Ever since I've been amazed at how proficiently kubuntu and linux have worked for me.

This has meant that I've spoken profusely with people -- including my Dad -- about the benefits of using Linux. I've found that (nearly) everyone (including my Father) has been opposed to changing OSs due to the perceived differences and difficulties in making such a change.

However, my father has quite a large business and recently attended a conference where a prominent national airline talked about the fact that they'd made the switch to linux -- and all for the better. Incidentally, my father found that he was the only person in the room that knew what linux was. He's now interested in looking into the possibilities that linux provides, including : servers ; desktops ; and cloud computing.

I'm keen to provide him (and his IT people who are windows based) with some more info on linux and what would be best for his business. However, I'm also aware of my own lack of knowledge as far as Linux is concerned. I've done a bit of research and I've found that Red Hat and Ubuntu seem to be the front-runners as far as corporate Linux is concerned (personally I'm leaning more towards Red Hat as they seem to have a more solid corporate outlook).

I'd be interested to have any feedback from people that have implemented a change-over from windows to Linux as well as any advice on which distribution to "push" to my father and his business.

Thanks for any thoughts on the matter. I'd just add that I've already researched everything but I'd appreciate any additional information / thoughts, since if he tries out linux and it ends up a complete mess due to my over vigour and lack of knowledge it could just end up in the dust bin.

Thanks for any input.

Mike

[dibl]

Re: corporate linux

I came over from Win-World about 4+ years ago.

Honestly, I would advise "slow and easy" -- don't push too hard. There are worse things than a business that's not using Linux, namely, a business that tried Linux, experienced a bad result, and is now an apostle for Microsoft.

Find a modest beginning -- word processing and spreadsheet users are obvious candidates for OOO. I recently put together a little presentation with OOO "Impress" and was pleasantly surprised.

AFAIK, the MS Office Outlook suite is still pretty superior to Evolution or other Linux alternatives, in the area of resource and meeting scheduling, so I wouldn't push that unless you can prove out all the requirements first. But I think Kontact and some of the Koffice applications are coming along reasonably well -- you should look at them one at a time.

If the business has a web site or SQL databases or things like that, there are some obvious Linux targets.

Beyond that, I'd say find out what the people need to do for their daily work, and especially what aspects of their current system are causing wasted time. Business people are looking for "savings" -- be it time or money, so that's what you need to look for in your candidate Linux solutions.

[miKeyBabid]

Re: corporate linux

i agree as far as desktop environment stuff goes... best go slowly but surely...

However, and maybe I wasn't clear enough with my question, which would be the best way to go as far as desktop + server + cloud ? Obviously a mix of distributions is quite possible but I only really know Kubuntu, puppy, and (a bit of) slackware as far as desktops go (no server knowledge whatsoever).

I'd eventually like to write up a paper informing him about the different possibilities that Linux offers (of which there are many) but it's always helpful to have some "real world" feedback (both Canonical and Red Hat claim their software is the best but I struggle to see the difference myself).

As far as desktops go : His average user needs to get things done as quickly as possible, and so I'd look at a more productivity based desktop like blackbox etc. (rather than a more resource heavy KDE). But I think that's the advantage of Linux : his average user can work on blackbox, and his sales, accounting and marketing on gnome / kde ...

[skunk]

Re: corporate linux

However, and maybe I wasn't clear enough with my question, which would be the best way to go as far as desktop + server + cloud ? Obviously a mix of distributions is quite possible but I only really know Kubuntu, puppy, and (a bit of) slackware as far as desktops go (no server knowledge whatsoever).

Peppermint OS has lots of "cloud" buzz currently.

A good source for distribution news is http://distrowatch.com/

[MoonRise]

Re: corporate linux

I moved to Linux @ home about 5 years ago. Best move. However, at work I've kept to mostly M$ due to corporate and software limitations. I do, however, have quite a few tools I use there that are Linux based and a few security servers that are Linux based. So in that respect we are a mixed IT department. No problems. As Dibl said:

"Beyond that, I'd say find out what the people need to do for their daily work, and especially what aspects of their current system are causing wasted time. Business people are looking for "savings" -- be it time or money, so that's what you need to look for in your candidate Linux solutions."

Take it slow. You don't want to shock users too much. Not a good thing.

[GreyGeek]

Re: corporate linux

My advice would be to be EXTREMELY CAUTIOUS about the "cloud". It is, after all, just a remote server accessed via tcp/ip. The real questions are:
1) What kind of hardware the "cloud" server will be run on,
2) Which OS the "cloud" server will use, and how secure is it,
3) Which COUNTRY the "cloud" server will reside in and dependent on that, how secure will be any sensitive data residing on that "cloud" server be if the server is in a country which has commoditized system administrators (i.e., slave labor, poor working conditions, access by dictators, etc...)

IF your data has any value at all it should be kept on servers under your physical control, to which remote access is strictly controlled. IMO, client-server LANs are still the best way to go.


It may not be possible to replace all Windows boxes in your situation due to the possibility that you may be using specialized software for which no equivalent FOSS/Linux solution exists. But, it is possible to convert your workstations to Linux and allow them to connect to the few Windows boxes via a VPN in order to run those certain programs. Above all, make sure any Internet connections to your LAN come through a Linux proxy server with a well maintained firewall and AV software. Oh, and never let any Windows machine you keep connect directly to the Internet, if at all.

The state agency I worked at was converting all of their Novell and Windows servers (30-50 of them) to Linux and was starting to replace Windows workstations with Linux. The previous OS conversion was from Win95 to XP and cost $3M in hardware, software and license fees. The conversion to Linux was costing less than a few thousand dollars, mostly hardware replacements. Then, a new governor was elected. He appointed an assistant who apparently was friends with an MS account rep. The new gov's assistant (a lawyer, btw) dictated a total Microsoft shop. I retired before that became a complete reality, but you can count the cost for 10,000 exchange and office licenses, plus the CALS for the servers, SharePoint, etc... Now, I hear, the lock-in is complete, after abandoning the contents of around 200 databases that couldn't port to SharePoint easily. (That was one thing I was working before I retired. The least expensive conversion product cost $5,000 and the best one cost $25,000. Neither could convert more than half the data without requiring extensive hand massaging. We couldn't afford to buy MS licenses, conversion licenses or hand-convert data.)

With Novell or Linux one could open a directory on a server and browse instantly. With "Active Directory" when you click on a directory YOU have to actively wait until its cache is repopulated before the file manager will display files. Very slow. Crashing servers, which rarely happened with Novell servers and never with our Linux servers, I hear is a common occurrence again. A very close friend told me that the entire Windows LAN was down most of the morning a few days ago. You'll never see the hourly wages for 400 people, idle for 4 hours, appear in any Windows TCO or ROI calculation.

So, to avoid what Microsoft strives to do the most, trap you with a lock-in, do not acquire or use any addtional Microsoft or Windows dependent software. Make sure all new software used is FOSS where ever possible. Remember, when Netscape was king people switched to the inferior Internet Explorer because it was "good enough", and because it was bundled with Windows considered "free", even though it wasn't.