SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Bryan Lunduke at Network World calls out what other mainstream media have been too timid, or bought out, to call out. He starts by pointing out that choosing Microsoft Windows for your organization should get you fired and that if you haven't already replaced Windows, across the board, you absolutely stink at your job.
There. Finally the topic is broached in mainstream media and a proper discussion can now start among decision makers who can arrange complete migrations to GNU/Linux, Chrome/Linux, one of the BSDs, or a combination of them.
As Microsoft security problems continue to escalate since even the pre-networked, MS-DOS days, managers and front-line grunts will find themselves increasingly culpable for selecting unviable software, such as Microsoft Windows. If they wish to pay big bucks for maintenance, there are plenty of companies around to participate in the money. Canonical, Red Hat, M:Tier are just a sampling.
[Ed. Note: I debated whether or not to run this story — in some respects it's just the Windows vs *nix argument all over again. Also, there are proprietary programs which are critical for certain industries which currently only run on Windows. On the other hand, gaining a mention like this in the more mainstream media, does that mean we are approaching an inflection point? Witness the increased displeasure with Windows 10's telemetry and the difficulty in completely blocking it. What programs do you use that are only available on Windows? What keeps you from moving to another OS? --martyb]
(Score: 2, Disagree) by ilsa on Friday June 30 2017, @02:55PM (2 children)
Sure... an organization can just drop windows and switch to a different OS easy peazy. What an idiot. HE's the one that should be fired.
A wholesale move away from Windows requires buy in from not just IT, but the major stakeholders such as business owners, the board, etc.
It also requires a very carefully thought out transition because there is a LOT of software that is only available in Windows. Even if there WERE equivalents, there's an excellent chance that the software will be inferior, possibly incredibly so. That means you'd have to move a lot of your operations to service-based solutions, assuming there are no legal issues that prevent you from doing so. I despise Outlook for example, but it's like night and day compared to Thunderbird and Evolution. LibreOffice, despite their improvements, still feels like something that fell out of the 1990s truck. Impress in particular, is so shockingly bad for anything but the most trivial of presentations, that they'd probably be better off to just scrap it entirely.
At minimum, you'd *still* need copies of windows floating around to support the software that can't be migrated, whether due to lock-in or cost.
Assuming that you're able to do THAT, you still have to deal with retraining your workforce.
The unfortunate fact is that while Linux/BSD/*nix are fantastic server operating systems, but they are flat out shit for desktop, and always will be. Even the best desktop environments still feel like they were build in the early 2000s.
I myself use a Mac cause I at least have access to decent software and while it's not as customizable, it doesn't give me grief. And THIS is why Apple is charging stupid amounts of money for their products. Because they know that the people who walk into an Apple store are desperate enough to pay whatever they want to charge. There are literally no other options for a half-way decent OS that doesn't spy on you, compromise you, or require you to be a sysadmin just to plug in a printer.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 30 2017, @08:31PM (1 child)
Is he an idiot?
Nope. Ernie Ball, Inc. has already been mentioned in the (meta)thread.
They did it last century.
Burlington Coat Factory did it before them.
Munich has been mentioned.
When Munich's mayor was talking to Bill Gates while giving him a ride to the airport, the mayor said that the reason they were making the switch was FREEDOM.
"Freedom from who?"
"From YOU, Mr. Gates."
Gates was very quiet for the rest of the trip.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by ilsa on Friday July 07 2017, @03:36PM
I never said it was impossible. It's totally doable if you a) care enough, and b) have the resources to do so.
But at no point has anyone ever said that it was even remotely easy. You effectively need to refactor your entire business when you do such a move.
If you look at the work Munich did, for example, they had to do a *LOT* of work to do the transition, including roll their own custom linux distribution, and a whole bunch of other headaches. Any and all custom software made for windows, now needs to be rewritten. Windows-only software (eg: quickbooks) needs to have replacements sourced.
Anyone who says (or even implies) that a switchover is a trivial exercise is misguided at best, and an outright liar at worst. I personally would be delighted to kick Windows to the curb at any and every opportunity. But I am also a realist who understands that such a thing can't be done with a simple snap of the fingers.