Your thoughts on Linux

[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]

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.

[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.

[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.

[Grumpyoldretiredcop]

You forgot an option...

"Fun and fast, but sometimes frustrating."

I dual-boot on my work laptop because some of my required software doesn't like Linux so well. Same reason, I don't have it on my home desktop.

[subrosa]

...in a way Linux pays for my guns, so how can I not like it? (Linux/Unix sysadmin )

[fd15k]

Linux is good in theory - direct democracy. I prefer a republic - FreeBSD.

[tacticalcity]

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.

[Satex]

I use Linux on all our servers but one. Use Windows on personal computers.

[leelaw]

I installed Ubuntu 10.04 on my netbook and it runs very well. I will not go back to Windows 7 on my netbook. Then again, I would not install a Linux distribution as a primary OS on my desktop.

I've dabbled with various Linux distributions since Redhat 4.7, but the latest Ubuntu versions really seem like a home-run, at least for my application.

[nick]

I work with various Linux/UNIX distros, various Windows versions, Solaris, Mac OS X, etc. For all the promise (and that promise has been around for decades now), there're still different roles for different operating systems. I'm not likely to have Linux on my personal workstation anytime soon (haven't found one that would work for me), but I usually have a Linux or BSD VM running for work and for those things I can't do with Windows.

As for the cost of Microsoft software, it's not an issue for me, as I'm a Microsoft registered partner, so I get most of their software (more than I use, anyway) for $300/year with the Action Pack.

Mac OS X never really grew on me. I was quite excited when it was first introduced (a UNIX with a nice GUI and decent enough developer community), but the "UNIX" part turned out to be quite limited and locked down.

As for the Windows vs. Linux debate, people will likely use whatever they use at work. "Converting" them is likely to be counterproductive, if what they use at work doesn't match what they use at home. They probably won't thank you for it, and that's what zealots do, anyway

[locosway]

I used to use Slackware and Gentoo (lol I was a stickler for punishment). But in the end reverted back to Windows because of 1 reason.

I want to play games. It was too much of a hassle to dual boot also since it required me to reboot everytime I wanted to play some games for a bit.

Look into Wine and Cedega.

[locosway]

What's Microsoft? Sounds like a social disease.

7x57

It's a form of ED

[7x57]

What's Microsoft? Sounds like a social disease.

7x57

[mousegun]

Run Linux on an SSH accessible workstation and two servers (NAS, VPN, proxy, etc.) in the garage and via liveUSB device on my notebook. Two of the kids have run Linux on their desktops, and run it occasionally now from liveUSB devices. The proxy/NAS servers support a hybrid network (fast ethernet wired, WIFI) with five Windows clients, two Win/Linux clients.

Only reason we're not 100% Linux is requirements of school or law practice. Windows is mainly a legacy issue now.

Present dominant distro is PCLinuxOS. Have used Gentoo, Knoppix and SuSE.

Think I like it?