|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
RE: [PLUG] Linux on the desktop (was: rationalizing .Mac web pages)
|
When my company replaced our copier with a Minolta CL 2000 R copier &
collater - I was very frustrated. See I was using a Canon model 92L at
home, which was the same as the old office copier. So it was very easy
for me to make copies at home as easily as I could at work. Man did I
have trouble making collated copies with the new copier, since I was
used to collating by hand. The interface was completely different than
what I used at home, which made it even harder. But luckily, my company
sent me to advanced copier and collation training - and now at work I
make better copies that can be collated faster. After I was comfortable
with the new advanced copier at the office - I got one for home too!
Ok this is stupid - but it illustrates to 2 points:
1. Why does someone need a business tool in their home? Does your office
have a home entertainment center? The general purpose Windows desktop
has permeated home and business to the point that we don't even realize
anymore that they server two similar but distinctly different purposes.
Businesses are pragmatic - if the business case for desktop Linux can be
made - it will find it's way into businesses.
2. If someone requires a home system to augment their business system -
it's the business system that will dictate what they use at home - not
vice versa.
On Fri, 2004-02-27 at 13:02, Matthew Ozor wrote:
> Sorry to butt in on the conversation but I don't think Linux is going to
> hit the desktop anytime soon. According to google.com
> http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html
>
> 90% of there users are using Windows. The average person will not be
> changing there current OS or desktop. Mostly because they just don't
> care. The biggest thing I see is that the average computer user is just
> that a user they have specific goals and if there current system
> completes them why change. Ever update a person computer?? If the reply
> button in there email client moves they get freaked out. "Hey
> something's wrong", "what did you do" , ect. Then there is Linux which
> 100 choices of software that all do the same thing. It's like putting 10
> gas pedals in a car. Sourceforge is a big source of problem. They need
> to stop giving space to 100% waste full programs.
>
> The FSF needs to work on getting open source onto the Windows Desktop.
> Get people hooked then sneak the OS under there feet.
>
> Ok that was my rant :-)
> Matt
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: plug-admin@lists.phillylinux.org
> [mailto:plug-admin@lists.phillylinux.org] On Behalf Of Ron Kaye Jr
> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 11:51 AM
> To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org
> Subject: Re: [PLUG] Linux on the desktop (was: rationalizing .Mac web
> pages)
>
> its interoperability with the 95% windows world.
> 95% dont want the extra hassle.
> i am learning linux to bridge the 2, and of course improve employment
> prospects.
> i'll keep trying
>
> ron
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "W. Chris Shank" <chris.shank@acetechgroup.com>
> Sent: Feb 27, 2004 10:09 AM
> To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org
> Subject: Re: [PLUG] Linux on the desktop (was: rationalizing .Mac web
> pages)
>
> Our formula for Linux desktop success is the inverse computer
> sophistication equation. The more sophisticated the user means they are
> more comfortable with Windows, even it's flaws. They get good at
> predicting when the system will crash or hang, the nuances and tricks of
> the applications they use that cause the system to freak out. They have
> gained a level of comfort knowing that Windows isn't perfect but they
> feel that it's not any better for anyone else, since everyone complains
> about it. They are extremely frightened of anything else.
>
> However, the unsophisticated user doesn't know or hasn't learned any of
> the "tricks" of the Windows environment. They expect it to work in a
> certain way and when it doesn't they figure they did something wrong
> (this is opposite of the sophisticated user - who knows it's the
> computer's fault but feels powerless to do anything about it). So the
> unsophisticated user has a much easier time switching to linux,
> openoffice, mozilla, etc - because after a little training - the system
> pretty much works as they were shown. I almost never hear a peep out of
> these people after they have switched.
>
> Sophisticated users never seem to be able to get over the mental block
> of not using a Micosoft product and look for every excuse to complain.
> The trick that I've learned is sizing the user up before hand - so that
> you don't push Linux to an unsophisticated user.
>
> And as far as OpenOffice not handling MS Office formats well. From our
> experience that is baloney. There are a few things openoffice doesn't
> handle well - but that number is relatively small and those features are
> only used by the most advanced users. which is one reason that we don't
> see desktop linux as an option in big companies for a while - there are
> too many users on all ends of the spectrum. Whereas in small companies -
> they tend not to have that many users across the spectrum, and when they
> do - it's easier for Window and Linux to coexist in these small
> environments. After a few hours of formal training on OpenOffice, most
> people learn the few things that don't translate between office packages
> well and can pretty easily work around them.
>
>
> On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 07:46, Magnus Hedemark wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Paul wrote:
> >
> > > I was told that Linux just passed Mac in percentage of desktop
> users.
> >
> > I'd like to know how anyone could get numbers on Linux desktop use.
> If
> > Apple were cooperative, it wouldn't be hard to pull Mac numbers.
> >
> > I don't know of any Macs at $WORK, where I support about 500 users. I
>
> > know of several dozen Linux machines, most of them desktops. I can
> hardly
> > walk to the men's room without someone else approaching me asking if I
> can
> > upgrade their Windows desktop to Linux.
> >
> > In the corporate environment, I think the things that are holding back
>
> > Linux adoption (IMHO anyway) include:
> > * Office suite. OOo doesn't score too well on interoperability with
> MS
> > Office, which is pretty much a requirement. Lots of complaints from
> users
> > about ease of use, performance, and UI consistancy.
> > * Groupware. I know the KDE camp has some neat stuff going on here so
>
> > this may change.
> > * Applications. I work for a company that does E911 location
> services.
> > As you might imagine, we use a lot of software for mapping. The
> options
> > on Linux are pretty slim here. This seems to be true for a lot of
> > application types. There are a lot of half finished projects, and
> about a
> > zillion finished IRC clients. Clue: We don't need any more IRC
> clients.
> > * Network filesystem. NFS (<v4) should go the way of telnet.
> > Unfortunately it is the defacto standard. AFS sounds good in theory
> but
> > is a nightmare in practice. There are some other options, mostly
> academic
> > experiments, but nothing stands out as a good way to mount remote
> > filesystems in a secure fashion.
> >
> > In a lot of other areas, Linux beats the snot out of Windows and even
> > Macs (on the corporate front, anyway). I've put a system in place to
> > automate the deployment and patching of all of my Linux systems, and
> it
> > should scale well. Deploying a Linux desktop takes about an hour of
> real
> > time, but about five to ten minutes of real work (most of that is
> staging
> > the hardware) while the rest is passive time waiting for the automatic
>
> > kickstart process to complete, and the post-install script that
> automates
> > the customization of the box.
> >
> > Deploying a Windows desktop, however, can
> > take an hour or more of real work plus another hour of downloading the
>
> > base image. Deploying software packages on Windows is really a messy
> > process and many apps cannot be pushed as they need to be installed in
> the
> > context of the end user or have some other odd requirements that
> require
> > manual intervention.
> >
> > Thanks also to gr for shaming me into brushing up on my shell
> > scripting-fu. ;-) It could be argued that Windows has VBScript but I
> have
> > yet to see any sysadmins effectively employing its use.
> >
> >
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ___
> > Philadelphia Linux Users Group --
> http://www.phillylinux.org
> > Announcements -
> http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
> > General Discussion --
> http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
--
W. Chris Shank
ACE Technology Group, LLC
http://www.acetechgroup.com
(484) 713-0075
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|