Your thoughts on Linux

[maverickmage]

Look into Wine and Cedega.

I did. But I didn't want to pay for those programs and it didn't support a lot of the games that I played.

[Canute]

I started using Linux in 1994. I actually downloaded my first distribution in fall '93. It just took that long to figure out WTF and get a working installation. Things were much harder back then.
I have basically been all linux all the time since then. Even work has mostly allowed me to use Linux most of the time.
I have a Linux email/web server, a laptop, a router I built myself (Soekris with a T1), a netbook in the garage, and two Android devices .
A mechanic friend of mine has been complaining about WGA, etc. on Windows so I finally pointed him to Ubuntu 10. He's not particularly computer savvy but he's mechanical and I think he's enjoying the learning curve.

[locosway]

None of the programs I need are available for it, and the knockoff versions that are just don't get the job done. So while it is a nice OS, its just not very practical. In a pure office enviorment, where word processing, email and the net are all you need, its a great affordable alternative. If you need specific applications...not so much. As far as servers go, its nice provided you are not planning on taking advantage of Windows Domain type security. Given a choice I would want to impliment it at our office, and manage the user access to resources more closely. Sadly, I've been overruled.

I do keep a Knoppix disc handy just for the heck of it. Fun learning tool.

Linux can do domain duties.

[nick]

Linux can do domain duties.

Gotta add a qualifier here. Yes, there're LDAP directories available for Linux. However, "can do" in Linux isn't the same as, say, in Microsoft, Sun, etc. products. With those, a supported feature means that it's been tested, it's quite likely to work, and if it doesn't, there's normally support available, several levels of it (from moronic first level to pretty good 3rd and 4th levels), and when you need it. With Linux and community-supported applications, it's a bit more dicey. The applications usually come with a lot of potential and features, provided you write half of it yourself in the course of deployment. The adherence to standards depends on whether the people who wrote the app felt anti-establishment at the time, if they were writing the app for their particular system or network (with the idea that if someone needs it for a different kind of network, well, he can then rewrite it to fit that network, right?), other such qualifiers. The same goes for support - if you're lucky, you'll get to work with someone who wrote the app you need support for, and can slip in a few improvements and new features you want while fixing the issue you have. If you're not lucky, you'll be dealing with a forum where the average time between posts is measured in months or years, and the posts are usually of the "I have this problem too, did you guys figure it out" kind.

So, while Linux is very good where customizing the OS and applications is a requirement, it doesn't shine where adherence to standards out of the box is needed. To give an example, if I'm building a network/systems for a new client every month, each client with different requirements, apps, etc., I won't go with something unpredictable there. I'll go with something that I know works in a certain way and fits the bill (and unlikely, not impossible, but unlikely) to cause me unexpected issues which would delay the project and be a deal-breaker. Cisco/Microsoft would usually be prominent there, as will many other similar vendors be.

However, if I need something customizable, where the client's requirements allow for the time to do the customization, or I'm building an appliance that many clients will use, that's where Linux and Linux apps would be my choice.

As for the price, to most companies I work with software cost is only one of the many parts of a project, and it's usually not the greatest cost (labor usually is), and not the most important one (bringing the project to completion sooner allows them to make much more money than they'd save on software). The cost of support also usually matters less than the speed and reliability of support.

[locosway]

Funny, every Windows domains I've worked on, there's always some feature that's supposed to work that doesn't.

Also like to add, Windows doesn't follow standards, it follows it's own protocols. Always has. If you want a standard, then you would run something that's based on open IEEE or other standards.

Besides, if you're paying someone $80k to manage a server farm or something, why not pay them to make your network work how you want it, instead of everyone else conforming to the network?

[bigmike82]

"Besides, if you're paying someone $80k to manage a server farm or something, why not pay them to make your network work how you want it, instead of everyone else conforming to the network?"
9 times out of 10, Windows AD fits that bill *way* better than the Linux equivalents.

"Funny, every Windows domains I've worked on, there's always some feature that's supposed to work that doesn't."
Examples?

[danito]

Back in the very early 90's I had the great fortune or miss fortune (depending on how you look at it) of working with SCO Unix, this was before they tried to sue everyone and their brothers for Linux patent rights (but that another story) At any rate back in the day SCO Unix was a true system five Unix variant that would run on Intel processors which made it very cost effective when compared to other System Five Unix variants such Sparc Solaris systems (Good, Bad or indifferent BSD is a whole different animal) That experience was useful in adopting Linux a few years later. I stay true to my roots and prefer the Fedora distro.

As an IT professional I believe in the right tool for the right job. Linux has its place, it’s great for things like SMTP and HTTP applications and other internet services that require adherence to RFC standards. Windows is great for directory services and delivery of end user applications. To each his own

[juicemansam]

I've used Linux since the '94. I've only held one IT position since then, which was a Computer Tech position for a school district. The district was very anti-Linux and very pro-Winders. I was left to my own devices, no training on their techniques or protocols, only who's who and where's half of the equipment. Luckly for me I had Linux on my side. Linux got me threw the year, and never let me down, including when I had to clone whole computer labs. I know their pro-Winders side had to do with budgets and having to spend the money or lose it next year, but they could have spent a bit less on software and a bit more on technicians (I was covering 4 schools when everybody else had one or two). Woohoo Linux! Oh, and it's what I use on my PC. I only emulate Winders if I need to test something before I install it on my brothers' computers, and teh only time I touch Winders is when I service the PCs.

[advocatusdiaboli]

I've always had some Linux running somewhere, whether in a router, firewall, proxy server, or file/music/web server.We use Linux in a file/web server and I run a few VMs on my Desktop (8-core OS X Leopard UNIX) for testing sometimes. We mostly "use" OS X UNIX at home--it does everything my wife and daughters would do with Windows and more and much of it for free and with near-zero risk of viruses unlike Windows and it does the heavy lifting I need in After-effects, Modo, Photoshop, and Final Cut Studio--can't get those on Linux.

We use UNIX because I have to maintain all the systems so Ssh and Rsync are my friends. I consider it an evolved Linux by way of BSD UNIX.

Unlike some others, I have found OS X not to be locked down at all and as a former Sun systems engineer, I can tell you it's open. Just about everything that runs on Linux is ported to OS X through Macports even using GTK and X-11. The only Windows in our house is a Vista-64 game machine and a Window 7 and XP virtual machine--all three are used very rarely any more.

[JDay]

I used to use Slackware and Gentoo (lol I was a stickler for punishment).

Both of those work quite well if you know what you're doing. With Gentoo all you have to do is make sure you're running off the stable branch and make proper use of /etc/portage/portage.*. Slackware has a binary package system now so its much simpler than it used to be.

[JDay]

As far as servers go, its nice provided you are not planning on taking advantage of Windows Domain type security.

Not true at all, for one thing you can use kerberos for secure authentication.

http://web.mit.edu/Kerberos/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerberos_%28protocol%29

I forgot about LDAP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LDAP

[nick]

Funny, every Windows domains I've worked on, there's always some feature that's supposed to work that doesn't.

Sometimes that's due to an actual bug (there're quite a few, of course). However, in most of the cases I've dealt with it was due to the person in charge of configuring it not knowing what he was doing. Since I'm usually called in when a company's IT couldn't deal with something, I've seen quite a lot of that.

Also like to add, Windows doesn't follow standards, it follows it's own protocols. Always has. If you want a standard, then you would run something that's based on open IEEE or other standards.

They often diverge in their implementations (like most other vendors). However, that's the stereotype that's kinda old and outdated. They've changed their ways starting with Windows 2000, and got better since then.

To add to that, what's more of a standard, something that's used by 20% of the systems, or by 80%?

Besides, if you're paying someone $80k to manage a server farm or something, why not pay them to make your network work how you want it, instead of everyone else conforming to the network?

Because many companies, Microsoft included, have most features most companies want out-of-the-box, and because you don't want that farm to be a personal fiefdom of an irreplaceable IT guy, that with all the often unnecessary customizations he's introduced (which cause issues if you remove them though).

A client of mine got itself talked into a custom database engine (yeah, a custom database engine). There were few enough people who knew how to program it to begin with, fewer still working for this company. The makes of the said database engine went out of business, and my client was at the mercy of two people for whom it was a side job (they had regular jobs, as well, and those took precedence). It took quite an effort (and some padding of my savings account, as well as those of a few other people) to move them to MS SQL 2005. For which there're plenty of support people, DBAs, etc., not to mention Microsoft itself

There.

[JDay]

I did. But I didn't want to pay for those programs and it didn't support a lot of the games that I played.

WINE is free and supports a lot more than you might think, just because a program isn't listed doesn't mean it wont run.

http://appdb.winehq.org/

[JDay]

The same goes for support - if you're lucky, you'll get to work with someone who wrote the app you need support for, and can slip in a few improvements and new features you want while fixing the issue you have. If you're not lucky, you'll be dealing with a forum where the average time between posts is measured in months or years, and the posts are usually of the "I have this problem too, did you guys figure it out" kind.

That's why we have the Freenode IRC network, you can speak to the devs on there.

http://freenode.net/

Then there's the commercial Linux distributions such as Redhat that have professional support packages.

[nick]

As an IT professional I believe in the right tool for the right job. Linux has its place, it’s great for things like SMTP and HTTP applications and other internet services that require adherence to RFC standards. Windows is great for directory services and delivery of end user applications. To each his own

Exactly. One picks the right tool for the job, not try to fit the job to the tool. Hence the Windows vs. Linux/UNIX, Mac OS vs. Windows, other such debates are quite pointless. And if one wants to be employable, he better know them all well enough to be in a position to pick the right tool for the job, rather than try to fit the job to the only (or the few) tools he knows.