Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ William Poaster ] on Wednesday 17 May 2006 12:36 \__
>
>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 06:07:41 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>>
>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That's what Canonical intend for you to do. I have handed out more
>>>>> Ubuntu CD's than I care to remember. People never whined.
>>>>
>>>> Of course not; they had a shiny, new coaster for the coffee table. You
>>>> don't really think they all just up and switched to Linux, do you?
>>>
>>> Probably not. However some may be using it now (while they also keep
>>> using Windows.)
>>
>> And some may be using it, & have ditched windows. ;-)
>
> Those whom I know have seen Linux will no longer be the victims of hearsay
> (i.e. FUD). They will either move to Linux immediately, make a staged
> migration (e.g. via dual-boot), or procrastinate a migration which they
> are willing to make. At worst of circumstances, people will say that they
> will wait until Linux matures slightly further, e.g. "I need Photoshop on
> Linux" or "my favourite game still doesn't run in Wine". They at least
> know what GNU/Linux is capable of and will move without hesitation/need
> for prodding thereafter.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Roy
>
Those I convert to Linux, home users with a client or companies with a file
server change, both tend to take the view that so long as they can carry on
uninterrupted with their daily tasks or work, then thats all they ask from
the migration. Other things that come with the change can be sorted out
later.
So for home users that nearly always boils down to office, email/internet
and multi media. Since Suse comes with the first two ready setup, and we
all now know how to deal with the third, the new users are willing to take
the time to learn other parts of the system to do with things they do less
often as they go along. (obviously this isn't true in all cases, but the
majority that I do have been this way). Many are still surprised at the
range of software on a Linux straight off the DVD. For example a planner,
cad, many graphics tools etc.
For businesses it depends what server they are changing from. If it is a
UNIX, then I would usually first advise another UNIX because the servers
and updated software for smaller systems is so cheap, why bother with the
expence and trouble of migrating databases and applications (unless they is
no choice). HP or IBM small and medium range servers straight from
misco.co.uk for just touching Â1000 ($1800). The choice can be determined
by the UNIX they are moving from of cause, but you no longer have to budget
and plan a year ahead to move a system to new hardware.
A move to a Linux server can be costly if a database application needs to be
moved. I avoid those because as a one man band who also has a main job too
it is too much to take on, but they are software companies well capable of
taking on those tasks, still expensive though mainly because they will
never come across two databases the same, they will also rarely come across
a well documented database, so conversion will take time.
But there is nearly always an interrim stage that is possible. A Linux
server for all of the office server functions, and a UNIX to keep the
company application on. We are still under the Â2500 mark. Probably spend
more than that anually on paper clips (I am obviously not trying to claim
that a server is more important to an office than a paper clip, but a Dell
Poweredge server does at least make a damn good side table, shame it
doesn't make for a good server.).
errrmmm. I got this far and realised that I had forgotten what the thread
was about, looking back I can now see that it doesn't have a lot to do with
what I just rambled on about. But I'll post it anyway because it might help
me get to the top of the news group statistics list.
|
|
