Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
> Windows-to-Linux desktop strategies
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | With questions and uncertainty about Microsoft's Vista, and the
> | emergence of new Novell and Red Hat desktops, the buzz has never
> | been louder regarding Linux as an alternative client operating
> | system for enterprises.
> `----
>
> http://www.networkworld.com/newsletters/linux/2007/0326linux1.html
I had to laugh at this:
.----
| Key among all the things to think about is a Linux desktop support
| model. Organizations that have long supported their own Windows
| desktops must consider if this model will suffice in a new Linux
| environment.
`----
Right, so supporting *closed-source*, 3rd party software in-house, is
*easier* than supporting *open-source*, 3rd party software in-house.
What stupefying logic.
So IT Dilbert #4 hits a problem with foo.exe not working, and he is
supposed to do *what* exactly? Look up his MCSE handbook? Reboot?
WipeNReinstallÂ?
Oh, I get it. It's IT Dilbert #4's job to call the vendor, and create a
support ticket, then wait 3 months for an update. What does he do in the
interim ... make coffee?
Meanwhile Linux sysadmin #1 uses his Kung Fu, RHCE expertise, and the
source, to actually *solve* a problem on the Linux server. *That* is
"in-house".
Beyond hiring a team of monkeys to hit reset buttons, I fail to see what
the purpose is of having in-house Windows support technicians at all.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "Future archaeologists will be able to identify a 'Vista Upgrade
| Layer' when they go through our landfill sites" - Sian Berry, the
| Green Party.
`----
Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) on sky, running kernel 2.6.20-1.2300.fc5
03:53:11 up 7 days, 2:07, 2 users, load average: 0.02, 0.12, 0.13
|
|
