Desktop Linux

[James Philipson]

Ben,

You make very good points about end-user issues, specifically in regards to the learning curve for people moving from Win9x to XP.  I just want to point out that the same is true for the IT folks.  

Going from NT to 2K or 2K3 is quite a jump that requires a steep learning curve if they are to really be experts (Professionals).  This is even more true for the "do it yourself" types.  In my experience, they don't have a firm grasp of the current OS and asking them to migrate to the latest and greatest is placing a terrible burden on them and a serious risk to the company's IT assets.  They should call in a consultant, at least for guidance.

JP


>> Today, my company doesn't run Linux on any of its client hardware and I
>> understand the main reason is that the learning curve is too steep for
>> Windows users.
>  
>

  This is a surprisingly complicated question.

  First, define "users".  I have found that, for your average "user", the
learning curve for Windows is too steep for Windows users.  I'm not just
talking about computer novices, either.  I make my living as a professional
computer geek, and a lot of that is just knowing all the ins and outs of plain
old Windows workstation software.

  So, since your average "user" doesn't really *know* Windows all that well,
why do they have to know Linux all that well?  Just about anybody can follow
the prompts provided by Red Hat, Mandrake, or SuSE during their install, and
use the GUI tools to configure the basics.

  Once the system is configured, the differences between Windows and a modern
Linux distribution are minimal.  You've still got windows (lower case), icons,
menus, and a mouse pointer.  You've got a web browser, email programs, word
processor, spreadsheet, and so on.  There really isn't all that much you can
do differently in such things.  Once you realize that Option 'A' is now under
menu 'C' instead of menu 'B', your learning curve is over.

  Of course, the fact that some things work slightly differently, appear
slightly different, or are in different places *does* cause some confusion and
require some retraining.  However, I've seen the same thing happen going from
Office 97 to Office 2000, or Windows 98 to Windows XP, so I honestly don't
feel that just by "sticking with Microsoft" you'll solve that problem.

  Once you get beyond the basics, you need an expert, of course.  But that is
true whether it's editing files in /etc/ or entries in the Windows Registry.

  Now, maybe you mean your resident computer expert or IT staff knows Windows
but doesn't know Linux.  *That's* a bigger problem.  You've got a couple
options.

  If you outsource your IT, tell your IT services company you are interested
in what Linux can do.  If they "don't do Linux", then look at IT providers
that do.  Maybe you'll be pleasantly surprised, and decide it is worth
switching.  Most any IT services company (such as the one I work for) will be
more then happy to show you what they can do, for free.  Even if you end up
staying with your current provider, the fact that you're willing to look
around should motivate them to improve their offerings.

  If your resident IT expert is really one of those people who has a "real"  
job title, and just handles IT because "they know computers", consider that
you might be better off with outsourcing your IT, and letting that person get
back to doing their "real" job full-time.  (Note that, being an IT
professional, I'm biased in favor of this, but I honestly do believe you're
better off in the hands of a professional then "doing it yourself".)

  It is when you have an in-house IT person or staff that things are hardest.  
You've got an investment in those people, and presumably you're happy with
them, or you'd be looking for new ones.  To an IT pro, learning and supporting
an entirely new system (like Linux) can be a fairly major undertaking.  
Whether or not your organization can support that is largely a question of
resources -- especially time and money.  While I think there are significant
long-term cost savings to be had with Linux, the short-term costs involved in
migrating to a new platform might be something you cannot afford.  That,
ultimately, is a business decision, not a technology decision.

  Hope this helps,

Ben <dragonhawk at iname.com>