Is Linux a desktop operating system?
Greg Donald
destiney at gmail.com
Fri May 27 21:58:09 UTC 2005
On 5/27/05, Kreg Schlosser <liberaltugboat at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, its not just the efforts put forward by suse and Red Hat (both
> companies are doing a good job with it)
But you said "Tech support from distrobutions, internal support,
training and certification all need more work" but now you say they
are doing a good job? I'm confused.
> It all goes back to the context of "desktop". Getting the User
> switched from windows to linux is alot different then setting up a
> linux server that is admined by a technogeeky nerdish guy.
The average user couldn't install either, I agree. Doesn't make Linux
any 'less ready' for corporate markets. Corporate markets have
'technogeeky nerdish guys' that can do the installs.
> In an
> established company this can be very expensive (trainging, highering
> new tech support),
No more expensive that M$ support and training. Besides that 'Linux
guys' typically aren't trained. We enjoy the work and self-train
ouselves in our own spare time and thusly bring value to the company
that hires us, not additional expense.
> but where they need to target is companies not
> locked into the MS model yet. This is why developing countries are so
> important to linux. US companies are going to be the hardest sell on
> linux, but if we can get the rest of the world then the US may be
> force to follow.
The US will be the last to follow I think. Even if/when Redmond
starts to decline it will be a long time before those deep pockets run
dry. I think they will eventually embrace Linux in some half-hearted
way. They must have realized they cannot win against opensource by
now so from here on it's just grasping at straws.
--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
http://destiney.com/
More information about the ubuntu-users
mailing list