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