| Perceptions: Is Linux a suitable desktop platform? |
by John H. Terpstra
In this guest column at DesktopLinux.com, former SCO evangelist and Samba.org team leader John H. Terpstra weighs in on market perceptions about Linux and its suitability for the desktop. Interviewing a sample group -- that included 30 people evenly split in the Linux and MS camps -- Terpstra discovered each group cited the very same arguments in defending their OS of choice! The author sought definitive answers about the state of Desktop Linux and reasons for and against a switch to Linux. The results, and key factors, were not as expected . . .
Perceptions: Is Linux a suitable desktop platform?
by John H. Terpstra
Reality often interrupts an otherwise perfect impression of life. This article started out as a simple exercise to collect background information for a presentation at a conference. The design and intent were simple enough, but my findings came as a rather rude challenge to return to present consciousness.
My presentation was titled, “10 Reasons you CAN use Linux on the business desktop”, surely this was an easy subject to address. Anyone who is familiar with Linux could complete a simple argument to prove the point. Think about it, Linux is a truly viable alternative tool compared with Microsoft(tm) Windows. After all, what is MS Windows other than just an operating system platform? Add in a few office automation tools, a web browser, an email client, and bingo! Proof positive, Linux can replace MS Windows. Right? Simple isn't it?
Wait, wait, I hear a call, “What about this and that?” So to put the critics to bed, let's collect a little information from source published on the Internet. Surely one could expect to find a solid discussion somewhere that analyses user needs and wants. That examines buyer behaviour and that recognizes the task challenges that common people use their computers for. Oops, I did not mean that you dear reader are “common”, no injury intended.
So Google to the rescue. You know how it goes. If I ask the right questions Google will yield a rich reward of simple proof, throw the facts together and out pops another presentation. Not this time though. I did a few searches that yielded the first set of confusing findings. Just try this yourself. Look for “Reasons for Linux”, “Windows better than Linux” and follow a few links around. What I found almost immediately were two articles that gave the same reasons for and against Linux on the desktop. One and the same argument for staying with MS Windows as for using Linux. Hey, wait, perhaps the same authors, maybe is someone playing a prank on us all? So I searched a little further only to find more evidence of a similar and conflicting nature. From a total of over 23,000 hits I filtered out 22 key articles that I selectively decided to use as my “proof material”.
Just one thing bothered me though, I know people who have VERY strong opinions regarding Linux and MS Windows. I reviewed my list of well opinionated victims with the intent to poll their opinions. I was certain that if I were to choose two groups of 15 people, people for and against Linux, each of whom were technically competent individuals, all of who make rational and comprehensible deductions involving information technology issues. I was sure I would find some positive facts to support the use of Linux as well as some really solid road-blocks to it's use. That is what I wanted to find – hard evidence, I would report the obvious, tell everyone how journalists get it wrong and move on to the next conference. I was hoping to isolate factors that would help someone to improve Linux and to make it a more viable desktop platform.
Market Poll Method:
I rang each individual on my list. Each call took around 20 minutes. The questions asked:- Please give 5 top reasons why you CAN use Linux on the desktop
- Please give 5 top reasons why you CAN NOT use Linux on the desktop
- If you had to affect a significant reduction in IT expenditure, what would you change?
So as to not bias the feedback I listened and took notes, in most instances more than 5 points were offered. I was looking for simple answers – not a dissertation. Thankfully, most answers were brief and to the point. One or two went on a little longer but all came to a clear conclusion. How does one classify the responses? Simple, look for common key words, or trigger issues. To do justice one has to retain each response within the context in which the answer was given. After all responses had been noted down I asked a few questions to get a better handle on what motivated points that seemed out of balance.
Findings:
The 300 responses could be classified into around 10 key issues:- Cost
- Reputation
- Applications
- Security
- Hardware Support
- Software Support
- Familiarity
- Ease of Installation
- Trust
- Performance
What follows is a review of key feedback items that demonstrates the each issue. It was disappointing that several answers related to Linux as a server platform, not as a desktop tool. What was even more significant is the not one person asked offered a reply to the third question. This interview was the perfect vehicle to reinforce the message that Linux is the best means of reducing the cost of ownership of an IT infrastructure. This message is thus not to be!
Cost:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
The economic environment is tough and IT budgets are being cut
Linux is Free (10 mentions)
Freedom from Operating System License Fees (server)
No Client Access License Fees (also called the Microsoft Tax by two respondents) (fees levied to access servers)
The cost of acquisition of a complete Linux based solution (server) is much lower than an equivalent Microsoft Windows solution.
The cost of Linux support is much lower than a Microsoft Windows (NT4 / 2000) based solution.
MS Windows requires on-site support staff.
There are many free office automation solution choices (12 mentions) -- OpenOffice / StarOffice can comfortably replace MS Office; WordPerfect 8 for Linux can replace MS Office
Microsoft have increased the Licensing costs for MS Windows, they will do it again! (2 mentions)
The Linux development environment is free and very powerful (4 mentions) -- no vendor lock-in (2 mentions)
All needed business applications are available for Linux
Corel PhotoDraw for Linux is free (1 mention)
If a user MUST use an MS Windows application is can be run on Linux:- Using the WINE application (2 mentions)
- Using Win4Lin (3 mentions)
- Using VMWare (4 mentions)
Comment: Corel PhotoDraw appears to be a discontinued commercial product and it is not free. Also, it seems obvious to me that with Win4Lin and VMWare one has to pay for this software as well as pay for the MS Windows license – so why not just run MS Windows on the users' PC? Why does this fact escape the Pro-Linux opinions?
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
Microsoft funded IDC report that claims that the Linux TCO - 13% higher than an equivalent MS Windows solution (3 mentions)
Linux requires on-site Techies to keep systems running (2 mentions)
Linux requires on-site development staff or contractors to fix serious bugs and to apply kernel patches (3 mentions)
Ultimately Linux using sites need to out-source support since a company can not rely on internal staff to remain current on all issues
MS PowerPoint is the best presentation tool (everyone uses it) (10 mentions)
There are NO open source alternatives to MS Access
MS Visual Studio is much better than any open source IDE (2 mentions) -- Linux IDE tools are back in the Dark Ages! (1 mention)
Use of a CRM application that requires MS SQL, so it is cheaper to have just one platform.
Linux users do not know how to use dial-up networking
MS Windows networks can NOT be browsed from Linux workstations
Linux is immature – will cause high costs in the long run
There are no financial applications for Linux (MYOB and Quicken were mentioned: The issue raised was the ability to export data to users of these two applications.
Comment: The is a native Linux/Unix tool that can replace MS Access. It is called pgaccess and is a front end to the Postgresql SQL server. Pgaccess has an interface to SQL data tables, forms, reports, views, schema manipulation, stored procedures and scripts, as well as user management capabilities. It is possible to build a whole application in pgaccess, just as can be done with MS Access. There are other open source front end tools that allow replacement of MS Access as well as MS SQL server. Also, no respondents were aware that there is an ODBC driver for Postgresql and MySQL that will allow MS Access and MS Excel to use an open source SQL back-end system. It seems that Linux companies have NOT managed to get this message across at all. Also, not one respondent had seen the libsmbclient library capabilities from KDE konqueror that allows SMB network browsing.
Conclusion: Both sides of the opinion gap believe that their preferred platform costs least to maintain none offered any concrete proof.
Reputation:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
Linux is the fastest growing OS platform
Linux is COOL!
MS Windows users are “stupid”
Linux is a more productive platform
MS Windows is NOT a single platform – 9x/Me/XP Home, NT/2000/.XP Pro are all different platforms- Microsoft Service Packs punch further holes in the single platform proposition
- Try using a Windows 95 Video driver under Windows 2000!
Applications work faster and more smoothly than MS Windows applications- Linux applications are better for the job
- The Linux desktop offers more choices
Linux is more productive- applications works faster and smoother
- Linux applications and tools are better for the job
- Linux desktop has more choices
Comment: The comment of abuse of MS Windows users is a foolish jab that alienates and does nothing to bridge the credibility gap!
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
MS Windows is the MOST used OS Platform
ISPs do NOT support Linux (PacBell mentioned directly)
Linux users are “know-it-alls” (softened form of real term used)
Every Linux distribution is it's own OS - poor backwards compatibility between updates
OpenOffice loses MS Word document formatting
Windows applications allow the user to be more task focused than Linux applications- No need to do software programming to make it work (1 mention)
- Windows applications are the best for the job
- MS Windows has one totally consistent interface
Comment: I flew seated next to the CEO of an ISP who told me his whole company runs on Linux, that his company NEVER had a problem with a Linux user and that over 95% of support staff time is taken up helping MS Windows users to do things that are very simple to do! He mentioned that MS Dial-up networking issues were the singularly most frequent center of attention because Windows users tamper with their settings “all the time.”
Conclusion: Clearly, the anti-Linux sentiment is reflective of pro-Linux opinions that alienated the pro-Windows people. No-one likes to be told that they have made the 'wrong' decision.
Applications:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
The Linux Graphical Interface is just as easy to use as MS Windows
Linux uses Industry Standards compliant protocols -- Industry Standard File formats also
We can never be certain which Microsoft patches need to be installed:- Too many to choose from
- Don't trust MS patches because of many instances of downtime caused by faulty patches
Linux offers great Interoperability
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
There are very few Linux applications- We can NOT do without MS Outlook Client
- You can NOT buy MS Exchange Server for Linux
- Linux is NOT compatible with the Internet Explorer 6 standard
- Can't buy a decent live email backup client for Linux like the one we bought for Outlook
- There is NO PC Anywhere for Linux (and that is our help-desk and administration standard)
Linux printing “stinks”
Linux Media Players “stink”
Interoperability will NEVER happen!
Comments: Ximian Evolution looks and works just like MS Outlook but no pro-Windows respondent knew of this tool. Pro-Windows respondents saw MS Exchange as synonymous with Internet email – Mircosoft have done a good job with their messaging here! I also asked the pro-IE6 respondent how compatible his IE5.5 and IE5 systems were with IE6 and he could NOT see the point of my question. When I mentioned industry standards compliance he replied that I should just accept the fact that what “everyone uses is the standard.”
Conclusion: Opinions share no common ground. Both sides come from a “my world is best” perspective and solve the same task problem a different way.
Security:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
There is no such thing as a Linux virus, all viruses are just programs!
Linux has no obscure protocols/services – makes it easier to “lock down”
Linux us not vulnerable to WORMS- The IRC Trojan IIS Worm just can not happen with Linux
- The Slammer worm killed many networks in January because MS SQL is too hard to secure
Windows security breaches are on the increase
Microsoft shipped a faulty NT4 patch that took my network down in December 2002 – MS had to withdraw this patch!
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
Linux is NOT secure, after all it is made by back-yard hackers!
No-one is responsible for Linux Integrity - Who do you sue if Linux fails?
MS Windows has a single sign-on facility that is much more secure than anything Linux has to offer
There are lots of reputable 3rd party companies that produce (anti-)virus software.
Microsoft have been focusing on solving the security issues and will release a hardened Windows soon- 1 year in the making and no small task
- There is NO Linux equivalent!
Conclusion: Each respondent answered from their own experiences and with their own specific biases.
Hardware Support:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
Linux has comprehensive support for:- Video Controllers
- USB (Plug and Play)
- Modems
- Mice
- Monitors and Everything
HP, Lexmark and Epson offer great Linux printing solutions
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
Linux does NOT support- GDI Printers
- Winmodems
- Video Cards
- PCMCIA cards
Conclusion: Linux does NOT work well with devices that are more or less specific to MS Windows (surprise!) and that means that the companies that produce them are going to miss out on purchase decisions made by the growing number of pro-Linux buyers. But both platforms clearly offer a usable choice of alternatives.
Software Support:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
Community help is fast and free
One can use VNC to support BOTH Linux and MS Windows network clients
Linux software is easier to keep up to date- Also easier to deploy
- Does not need as much support as MS Windows
Linux has the best remote administration tools (like rsh, ssh, webmin)
With Linux it is easier to “image” hard disks for replicated deployment
MS Windows is too complicated to manage / maintain
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
Many vendors do NOT support Linux- Vendors can not make any money from Linux users
- Some Linux vendors do NOT support Linux
- Can't buy help desk support contract for Linux
We can not find anyone who knows how to do things that are simple in MS Windows
There are not unified Linux network management tools: nothing like Microsoft MMC
MS Windows has the more mature rapid deployment tools (eg: Norton Ghost)
Linux is way TOO complicated
Comment/Conclusion: We are still suffering a knowledge gap. Neither side has come to grips with the other's perspective and believes their own stories regardless of reality. Clearly, Linux support is NOT as comforting to all corporate administrators as advocates might believe. Equally, The pro-windows respondents are unwilling to weight the real cost of the liabilities of their current infrastructure solutions – this leads to an unwillingness to seriously consider alternatives. One respondent severely criticized Microsoft for problems some users experienced with Internet Explorer but then excused this as a necessary side effect of a maturing technology while at the same time laying aside all consideration that Linux might be going through the same maturation process.
Familiarity:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
The Linux Desktop is just like the Microsoft Windows desktop
OpenOffice is very familiar to users of MS Office
Linux is easier to deploy than MS Windows
Comment: The respondent who answered that Linux was easier to deploy than MS Windows had never deployed MS Windows! Rather an uninformed opinion!
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
Familiarity is Microsoft's key score card item!
Linux is daunting to new users
Windows is more predictable than Linux is
Windows XP Pro is easier to deploy (esp. for 1,000's of desktop installations)
Comment: The “Linux is daunting” comment came from an administrator who had NOT used Linux in over 2 years. The last comment came from a respondent who had tried to automate the roll-out of Red Hat Linux but complained that 'kick-start' preparations for his 3000 plus workstations would be too time consuming. He claimed that a single auto-install profile for MS Windows XP Professional roll-out could meet the needs of ALL workstations and that he was more familiar with rolling out MS Windows than Linux.
Conclusion: More evidence of a knowledge gap, although the criticism of difficulty of Linux deployment seems like an informed comment.
Ease of Installation:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
Linux GUI installers are easier to use than MS Windows XP's installation process
Linux Mass roll-out is easier (requires fewer staff) and is less costly than Windows XP
Linux installation is a once only affair
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
Linux means I have to get rid of all current software and deploy all new stuff -- means I can not use my existing MS Windows application servers
Nearly all new machines come pre-installed with Windows- so why throw it away?
- why go through the pain of installing something else?
Everyone (users) know how to install MS Windows software, with Linux I'd need and army to install applications
Conclusion: Respondents from both sides admitted to not liking to deal with installation, no matter how easy it might seem. While there is a knowledge gap here, responses ring of “I prefer what I know best”
Trust:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
Linux is based on the same open source software that powers the Internet
I KNOW Linux CAN be trusted
Anyone who buys Windows SHOULD get fired, Windows is not reliable, can't trust it!
I trust OpenOffice
Microsoft are too dominant
Open Source means:- No restrictions EVER!
- No Vendor 'lock-in'
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
I have NO idea who to call for Linux Help, we have no trained staff to support Linux
Linux desktop Interfaces are confusing (KDE/Gnome/etc)- Don't feel comfortable with adding to menus
- Had past bad experience with setting up menus
I could get fired if Linux fails
I trust MS Office tools
No-one gets fired for buying MS Windows
Open Source means:- No roadmap
- No future
- No money for resellers and that means no resellers
Conclusion: There is a big gap in the area of 'trust' , some of which is due to lack of exposure and lack of familiarity. Fear of exposure is the key factor here.
Performance:
Pro-Linux Perceptions:
Apache is faster than IIS
Samba Rocks!
Squid is great! MS Proxy is a dog!
Postgresql/MySQL are better and faster
One can comfortably use older hardware with Linux (it is fast and lesser hardware)
Linux is Stable with good uptime
MS Word is big and clumsy
Comment: The assertion regarding Postgresql and MySQL referred to use of an SQL server for web applications. The observations were NOT based on any actual comparison with MS SQL server. They thus represent a bias and not an evaluation!
Pro-Windows Perceptions:
Samba has locking problems, it corrupts files and that is bad, bad, bad, bad!
MS SQL is the best, it is fast and easy to configure
Windows 2000 Server supports bigger files
Old hardware is unreliable and should not be used
Linux has NO answer for MS Terminal Server
Windows 2000 Server is NOT the faster file and print server, BUT it is 100% compatible!
Comment: The comment pertaining to Samba was based on a web search and NOT from experience, the fact is that locking problems could easily also be experienced with MS Windows (and the respondent knew that but was of the opinion that if Samba could NOT solve problems that MS Windows has then there is no reason to use it). The MS Terminal Server issue was raised by two respondents, neither of whom were aware of VNC, the Citrix ICA client for Linux, nor of other tools for MS Windows terminal server access from Linux systems. Additionally, MS Windows specialists knew only of Telnet and hated it! When I mentioned the ability to run remote X-sessions with Linux there was a stunned disbelief that this would work. The assertion that Windows 2000 Server supports larger files was based on the understanding that Linux has a 2GB file size limit. Windows 2000 supports files of up to 4Terabytes, Linux 2.4.x with the XFS or JFS file systems support much larger files than MS Windows 2000, but I am NOT aware of anyone who has hit either limits for MS Windows 2000 or for recent Linux implementations (Samba is limited by the file system on which it runs).
Conclusion: Fear and lack of familiarity are the key issues among MS Windows users, excessive confidence among Linux users is just as much a barrier to convincing MS Windows devotees to at least become more familiar with Linux.
Conclusions:
If Linux were the same as Microsoft Windows then it would BE Microsoft Windows. Thankfully, it is not and thus there is a choice. Linux CAN substitute for MS Windows on the desktop, but it will NOT suit everyone. Linux DOES provide all the environmental tools that MS Windows users are familiar with, although they are not identical and they offer a different look and feel as well as different features. That too gives rise to choice that the user has the ability and freedom to exercise.
Some say the Linux desktop is wonderful today, others are of the opinion that it needs to mature further. There are some legitimate barriers due to the inability to run certain “essential” applications on Linux that are available for MS Windows. But there will always be someone who can find reason to object, no matter if the desktop platform is Linux or MS Windows.
No matter which way you analyze the responses, Linux is a contender for the business desktop. Users have every right to choose their desktop of choice. For the large organization the total cost of ownership will be a deciding issue, particularly in a tight economy.
The key battle for Linux is NOT primarily a technology issue today, it has much more to do with knowledge and acceptance. In many ways Linux is today where MS Windows 3.0 was in 1989 – on the radar set, and climbing.
Is your enterprise moving to Linux? Take our poll.
About the author: John H Terpstra is a respected business computing authority, John Tersptra co-founded Samba.org and specializes in transitioning businesses to Open back office alternative technologies. jht@primastasys.com.
Talk back! Do you have comments or questions about this story? talkback here
Copyright © 2003 by John H. Terpstra. Reproduced by DesktopLinux.com with permission.
Please note: The opinions expressed in this essay are those of the writer, not of the management or staff of DesktopLinux.com.
(Click here for further information)
|
|
|
Approaching the Linux Desktop
The purpose of this paper is to help organizations evaluate the Linux desktop against their own enterprise needs and discover what benefits the Linux desktop might bring to their organizations.
Migrating To Linux: Application Challenges and Solutions
Several solutions exist to help organizations migrate in an orderly fashion from Windows to Linux desktops. This paper establishes the characteristics of an ideal cross-platform solution and reviews these alternatives in light of this ideal standard. The paper takes a closer look at the pros and cons of various solutions and outlines the business benefits that can be achieved.
Linux Advantages: Publicly Available Information on Linux Software
This paper offers a brief summary of readily-available Linux information to help businesses sort out this widely misunderstood operating system.
Top 5 Strategies for Managing Linux
Despite continuous evolution in the manageability of Linux, a 2006 survey cited manageability concerns as a top reason why organizations are hesitating to adopt Linux. Levanta believes Linux can be as manageable, if not more so, than other operating systems by following key strategies. These strategic recommendations were developed from experiences in numerous customer environments, both large and small.
Why Choose Novell for Linux?
This paper outlines the benefits of switching to the Linux platform and choosing Novell as a high-performance, enterprise solution.
Enterprise Linux Selection Guide
Considering moving your enterprise to the Linux operating system? Since there are so many similar versions, choosing the right one can be tough. This paper offers a clear process to help you make an informed decision and get the features, support, and cost that are right for your business and technical needs.
Overcoming Challenges in Managing Linux
Levanta has created a new administration model with innovative technology that breaks down the barriers to making the most of Linux systems. This paper will provide an in-depth look at the workings of Levanta’s product, the first Linux appliance of its kind.
SUSE Linux Enterprise 10 for Retail Businesses
Discover why major retailers have switched to SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop in the back office. SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10 is a low-cost desktop that offers a complete set of productivity applications and interoperates seamlessly with the other Windows, Macintosh and UNIX desktops in your store.
Moving to a Linux Desktop
Migrating from Windows to Linux on the desktop can be a substantial undertaking because it has the potential for touching -- and perhaps disrupting -- every user in your organization. Unlike a data center (server and infrastructure) migration that is largely transparent to users, the cultural and administrative transitions and environment readiness required to support a Linux desktop migration are extensive.
Seven Good Reasons to Exchange Exchange
This paper describes seven compelling reasons why you should switch from Exchange to Scalix.
|
|
|
|
|
news feed
