|
|
| Switching from Windows to Linux |
 |
|
Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:14 AM EDT
|
I got an email suggesting we set up yet another site, specifically for a detailed How To on switching from Windows to Linux, viewed from the standpoint of a business. We've had articles touching on this before, although more from an end user perspective, and I don't think we need a separate site, but I have created a page for the topic on Grokdoc. I have put the email there, because it's such a thorough list of what a Windows user contemplating a switch worries about. See also the Application Crossover Chart also on Grokdoc. The big issue, I think, seems to be how to run favorite applications that run on Windows. So, if you have any tips on that, or any other topic on the list, please feel free to share, here or, ideally, on Grokdoc or both. We can add a chapter to the manual on this topic in particular. Here's the email.
*******************************************
1. Which programs on Linux have the same or similar function as a given Windows programs like:
a) Office - specifically Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Publisher, Access
b) IE - bookmarks and IE specific applications
c) Outlook and Outlook express, email repositories, calendars
d) Graphics applications, formats
e) Firewalls and Anti-virus applications
f) Backup applications
g) Databases and database applications
h) Development tools
i) Communication tools and applications
j) Gui/desktop
k) System administrator and system management tools
2. What to do about windows applications that have no similar linux version or are very difficult to convert.
3. Coexistence - short term and long term, cost and problems
4. How to convert existing data from a given windows application to a linux application
a) List of conversion tools
5. How to convert users from a windows environment to a linux environment
a) How to set up "work groups" and "domain" under linux
b) How to replace Primary and Backup domain controllers
c) How to migrate users and user groups to linux
d) What to do about the active directory
e) User environment like printers, files and directories, etc.
6. A section on pros and cons of a conversion
7. A section about time:
a) How long will it take realistically
b) Suggested stages
c) Template plans for a conversion job
8. A section on costs - it will always cost something to convert and being realistic about these costs gives higher credibility.
9. High profile reference cases
10. List of where to get end-user, sysadmin and developer education for linux
11. List of Service organisations or consultants that can help or do a conversion
12. List of Linux FAQs and documentation for the different user groups
13. Some reasonable criteria for a deciding on a conversion
a) Why and why not
b) Skills
c) Costs
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:32 AM EDT |
From a business perspective, I believe that the most important key to a
successful migration from one operating system to another, is user education.
I've migrated from Mac OS to Windows OS in the past and if care is taken to
educate and train the end user on the new environment, the trepidation is
usually replaced by "Hey, that wasn't so bad". Its not the apps, its
the people.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:33 AM EDT |
Although moving freom windows to Linux cannot be an error...
Loïc[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:35 AM EDT |
| Loïc [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:36 AM EDT |
| Please reply to this message with new links
of interest to Groklaw readers.
This makes
it easy to find them. Please try to use the
HTML Formatted mode to
make it easy to click
on a link and follow it directly to the article
of
interest.
This is also the place to start discussions
unrelated to the
topic(s) of the article.
Please choose new and appropriate titles for
new
topics
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: dogsbestfriend on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:36 AM EDT |
cool!
I'm just in the process of switching my desktop at work over to Linux. I've
been using linux at home exclusively for the last 4 years or so, so knowing that
it would work was a given. The company already uses Linux for all its servers,
so there was no problem with that either. The only problem was that some
windows programs were hard to find equivalents for, and the main 'challenges'
for me were:
* ssh session saver: I'm currently playing around with xterm command line
arguments, ssh-sec and putty (yes, putty for unix works great!)
* an oracle gui toolkit. The GPL'ed TORA is awesome
* AOL/Y!/MSN messengers: GAIM all the way!
These are old favourites, but I figured I'd list them anyway since I need them
for work:
* Office documents: OpenOffice.org, AbiWord, Gnumeric and plain ol' vi work
fine
* Evolution for IMAP servers
* Mozilla / Firefox for web browsing. (gee, I hope I can get that Mozilla SVG
to work, I don't think Adobe has a linux port for their SVG viewer.. but thats
not critical)
* xm_s for all those _p3 files I listen to at work (oops!)
All of this on a PIII-750 / 512Mb / 20G computer, in case you're wondering..
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:36 AM EDT |
| Loïc [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Are trolls the new administrators on this site? - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:56 AM EDT
- Trolls, windows fans, MacOS fans here please - Authored by: kurt555gs on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 12:58 PM EDT
- Terrible Troll! - Authored by: bbaston on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 01:43 PM EDT
- Neo-Office/J - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 02:07 PM EDT
- Neo-Office/J - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 06:08 PM EDT
- Trolls, windows fans, MacOS fans here please - Authored by: surak on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 02:38 PM EDT
- When I win the lottery, I'll buy a Mac - Authored by: Tim Ransom on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 05:39 PM EDT
- Trolls, windows fans, MacOS fans here please - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 12:34 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:51 AM EDT |
| Switching desktop flavors may represent a step forward for some users, but in
our experience serving broadband customers and their respective LAN integration
and security issues, the entire dentralization model to which Windows (and
previously DOS) facilitated is a model which also needs to go.
From SOHO
(small office/home office) client to medium sized banks, school districts to
small city/county offices, none are showing an ability to maintain their
Microsoft environments. The patch of the day requirement combined with
exhaustive and excessive licensing requirements overwhelms nearly every client
we see (again, in primarily underserved markets, though in our metro markets
this is also much the case).
Solution? We've implemented Linux thin-client
in the office and have had remarkable results, though there is still much work
to do. Centralizing administration of patches, security, application offering,
data backup, etc. makes a significant difference in maintenance cost and
efficiency. Of course, we've had to spend some custom development time (using
Zope -> http://www.zope.org) to fill the gaps in various systems where
off-the-shelf solutions did not exist by creating such access through the
thin-client's web browser. Still, we've stayed F/OSS.
Linux thin-client is
subsequently my recommendation for a winner strategy of solving the desktop
issue. Don't compete head-to-head with Microsoft by attempting to out-Windows
Windows. Kill them off with the agility of moving to a better paradigm. I'd be
happy to work to support efforts such as that which has been proposed here if
there and release our own implementations and documentation to F/OSS as well if
there is any thin-client direction. Another Gnome or KDE desktop (which I am
incidentally posting this from) is unlikely to succeed for mass commercial
acceptance.
*scoove*
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: brian on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:57 AM EDT |
I got one answer to all this....
The Linux
Documentation Project
B. ---
#ifndef IANAL
#define IANAL
#endif [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:07 AM EDT |
One of the problems that faces business... is that proprietary and open source
programs don't make it easy to migrate data between programs. It almost seems
that some software folks want to lock in their customers into difficult data
structures that makes migration from their program a very cost prohibitive thing
to do. To solve this problem there should be National and world-wide standards!
We know what Microsoft might say about this. But for everyone else in
business... it's about time that something happened along the lines of
"what is good for the economy of those that use softare vs what is good for
a few big companies that make it"!
The existance of standards (nationally reconized) would allow a business to shop
for the application provider that can best serve the business's needs.
Something with data structures for business applications needs to be done!
Maybe there should be an ANSI standard for software stuctures. Then every
programmer (large and small) could compete based on these standards.
Here is a snippet from the ANSI http://www.ansi.org
web site (when reading below ask oneself "where is the equal for
software"?):
" For eighty-five years, ANSI has served as the coordinator of the U.S.
voluntary standards system, a unique and diversified federation that includes
industry, standards developing organizations, trade associations, professional
and technical societies, government, labor and consumer groups. It has provided
a forum where the private and public sectors can cooperatively work together
towards the development of voluntary national consensus standards. The Institute
provides the means for the U.S. to influence global standardization activities
and the development of international standards. It is the dues paying member and
sole U.S. representative of the two major non-treaty international standards
organizations, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), via the U.S. National Committee
(USNC).
The history of ANSI and the U.S. voluntary standards system is dynamic.
Discussions to coordinate national standards development in an effort to avoid
duplication, waste and conflict date back to 1911. In 1916 the American
Institute of Electrical Engineers (now IEEE) invited the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers (ASME), American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE),
American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers (AIMME) and the
American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) to join in establishing a national
body to coordinate standards development and to serve as a clearinghouse for the
work of standards developing agencies.
Two years later, ANSI, originally founded as the American Engineering Standards
Committee (AESC) was formed on October 19,1918 to serve as the national
coordinator in the standards development process as well as an impartial
organization to approve national consensus standards and halt user confusion on
acceptability. The five organizations invited the U.S. Departments of War, Navy
and Commerce to join them as founders.
According to Paul G. Agnew, the first permanent secretary and head of staff in
1919, AESC started as an ambitious program and little else. Staff for the first
year consisted of one executive, on loan from a founder. He was Clifford B.
LePage of ASME. An annual budget of $7,500 was provided by the founding bodies.
A year after AESC was founded it approved its first standard on pipe threads.
The organization undertook its first major project in 1920 when it began
coordination of national safety codes to replace the many laws and recommended
practices that were hampering accident prevention. The first American Standard
Safety Code was approved in 1921 and covered the protection of heads and eyes of
industrial workers. Today there are over 1,200 ANSI-approved safety standards
designed to protect the workforce, consumers and the general public. Overall,
there are approximately 10,500 ANSI-approved American National Standards. In its
first ten years, AESC also approved national standards in the fields of mining,
electrical and mechanical engineering, construction and highway traffic".
read more of the history of ANSI here:
http://www.ansi.org/about_ansi/introduction/history.aspx?menuid=1[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: JScarry on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:17 AM EDT |
This site lists linux compatible software for just about every need.
Linuxshop[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:20 AM EDT |
There are a few applications that still have no exact
replacement in the free world.
In my case those are Adobe Photoshop and Borland Delphi,
and both seem to run well on i386 Linux using Codeweavers'
Crossover.
(I'm aware of The Gimp and Kylix, they still aren't up to
the task *for me*, but may be useful for others)
Crossover Office enables you to run 32 bit Windows
applications with little effort.
Crossover is a product of Codeweavers
( http://www.codeweavers.com ), and it's based on Wine, an
OSS 32-bit Windows API layer for Linux
(Wine stands for Wine Is NOT an Emulator, it already comes
with many Linux distributions, but you have to tune it for
your applications yourself and that can be hard, Crossover
does this for you)
If you don't know what an API is, let's just say (rough
explanation) it's a big set of commands the underlaying
system understands, all application software communicates
with the operating system through an API, so having a
Windows API set in Linux allows us to have Windows
applications running on Linux unmodified.
Internet Explorer 6.0 was slightly trickier to install,
but it worked fine after all, I'm not using it anyway, I
did that just as a stress test, I couldn't come up with
worst scenario.
Also, having some Windows truetype fonts installed makes
text read better, Internet Explorer downloads fonts as
needed, you can later install them in your KDE Control
Centre. (I think Gnome has an equivalent function for this
too)
Crossover Office is not free, it costs about $ 40 for its
standard version, and about $ 80 the professional version.
Each enables for a different set of applications, if the
applications you need are in the standard supported set,
you will spend less.
Borland Delphi was not in the supported application set
but it worked fine, so you may even get more than what
they advertise for.
In my case it was really worth it, I can keep using my
favourite (and costly!) applications in a safer, nicer and
free environment.
I get the best of both worlds, maybe it also works for
you.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PolR on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:28 AM EDT |
This topic is targeted to entreprises isn't it? How could they use this material
in internal documents if commercial uses are disallowed?
Don't we want consultants and consulting companies to spread the word? How are
they going to do that if commercial use is disallowed?
I think the Creative Commom License is the correct one. It is just that the
non-commercial option that should be removed.
On the other hand, the Share-Alike option is missing. Perhaps it should be
enabled to make the Creative Common license operate like the GPL.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Because... - Authored by: Nick on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:42 AM EDT
- FYI only - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 01:14 AM EDT
- This Argument is SPOT ON... - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 10:44 AM EDT
- plagiarism - Authored by: pyrite on Monday, July 19 2004 @ 05:02 AM EDT
- plagiarism - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 20 2004 @ 09:01 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:29 AM EDT |
| A few links that are worth adding, it would be useful to have them all together
anyway
1 The Official European Commission guide - Written in English,
translated to many other EU languages already here
2 The German government guide here
3 The
French government guide here<
/a>[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:38 AM EDT |
| It seems a bit like preaching to the choir to post a story about converting to
Linux on a site that's primarily about Linux lawsuits which would mostly be of
interest to people who already use Linux.
Sorry, had to get that off my
chest.
See The table of
equivalents / replacements / analogs of Windows software in Linux. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: pscottdv on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:43 AM EDT |
In my experience, the biggest obstacle to switching clients to away from
Microsoft software is in the psychology of the end user. End users seem ready
to forgive Microsoft any headache or catastrophe no matter how destructive, but
any minor glitch in the way they are used to doing things on other software and
they get angry with me.
Me: A worm slipped past your
antivirus software. I'll have to spend the day cleaning it off of all your
Windows machines. Luckily, your Linux servers and the two Linux desktops in the
engineering office are immune.
Business Type: Well, that's just the
cost of doing business, eh?
Me: The cost of doing business with
Microsoft, yes.
Business Type: Hey, that's not fair! It's not their
fault people write viruses! By the way, I can't get to my attachments, there
must be something wrong with that Linux-based email server you
installed.
Me: No, it's Outlook Express, you have to click here, here,
here, here and here and the problem goes away. You will have to do this each
time you get a new security patch from Microsoft, because they always turn it
back on.
Business Type: OK. But, hey, I'm getting hundreds of spam
every day, can I do something about that?
Migrate him to
Mozilla Mail
Business Type: Hey, look at that it just sweeps
all my spam away into the junk mail directory. Cool! But wait, I can't get at
this attachment
Me: Oh, that's just a setting. Click here, here and
here and it is fixed.
Business Type: What! That's too complicated!
I'll never learn to use all this--I just want software that works! I'm having
an asthma attack! Put me back on Microsoft quick!
Me:
[sigh]
Whoever it is around here with the sig quoting Bill
Gates about getting people "addicted" to Microsoft software sure has it
right. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: freeio on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:53 AM EDT |
As an electronics and software design consultant, I am running Linux
for almost
all of the business operations. I finally have the
tools to do what must
be done for daily
operations. What has made it possible
has been:
1. SuSE
Linux (I am currently
running version 9.0) - The installation
worked on all of my diverse hardware,
even the IBM ThinkPad
laptop. Everything was set up properly and
everything worked,
including sound, printers, the scanner, networking.
The
installation found it all and made it all work, without ever having to
add a
driver from anywhere. That is amazing to me. It also
came with a
full set of manuals to help me figure out what
wasn't
obvious.
2. OpenOffice.org
(I am currently using
version 1.1.1) - For all of the things I used to
do with Microsoft Office, this
is my tool of choice. It is
absolutely stable, and has every feature I
need, and then some.
The one thing to do is to go to the bookstore and get
a book on it, as
the features are not always where you would find them on a
Microsoft
product. But this is not unusual - I always had to keep a
manual
for Word or Excel handy, as they have just as many hidden
features.
3. Eagle
(I am currently
running version 4.11r2e) - This is an excellent
cross-platform
electronic CAD system, which handles all of my schematic,
printed
circuit board, and autorouting duties. It is available for
linux
and windows, and the data files work on both. It is based
on
Qt, and so it truly is native on both platforms. This is a
five star
application.
4. Crossover Office
(I am currently running
version 3.0.0) - This nifty tool allows me to
run the few Windows tools I cannot
do without, such as Adobe Photoshop
7.0, and Bible Works, on my Linux
system. It uses the wine
API which is already in Linux, and handles the
installation and
setup. The programs run as native applications (wine is
not an
emulator) just as fast as on Windows. This fills in the gaps
for
what I simply must have.
5. Scribus (I am
currently runnign version
1.1.6) - This is a page layout program to do
all of the fancy page layout that I
need to do.
6. gftp
(I am currently
running version 2.0.16) - This wonderful utility handles all of
the
file transfer functions which are required for the business. I
run
several web sites, and have to deliver electronic copies of
documents, and gftp
handles this perfectly.
7. Mozilla (I am
currnetly running version 1.7)
- For web browsing and web page
composition, this is a great way to
go.
Is this the perfect setup? Goodness no! But I will say
that
I do not have to run any sort of Windows on a regular basis, because
all of
this is excellent, and there is no need to go elsewhere.
It is also
affordable. I started my experience with Linux five
years ago with Red Hat
6.0, and I must say that the progress since then
has been spectacular.
What we have today is truly excellent.
You can see the what the
facility looks like, with all that Linux
hardware running here.
Marty
---
Tux et bona et fortuna est. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:55 AM EDT |
| I am sorry, PJ. You have just completely confused me.
[Don't feel too bad, that
is easy to do.]
According to the
GrokDoc Main
Page,
GrokDoc "isn't an attempt to duplicate" others work.
If I click
on the
link to "Discuss this page"
it tells me:
GrokDoc is
meant to be a Linux usability study,
not a general Linux repository for HOWTO's
and
tutorials.
Yet, the questions seem to be unrelated to
"a
Linux usability study" and most of them are
covered in other locations, so
attempting to
answer them is duplication.
For example, question #1,
"Which
programs on Linux have the same or
similar function as a given Windows
programs"
has an answer.
Although it has not been updated recently,
the
The table of
equivalents
is an attempt to answer exactly that question.
Why duplicate the
effort?
For example, question #10,
"List of where to get end-user,
sysadmin
and developer education
for linux".
An answer to this is fairly to easy to
get
by just doing a Google search for
linux training
or
linux
certification
.
This will quickly find a number of
people willing to offer
training.
In fact, it will help locate a
"Database of Linux Training
Centers"
.
Why duplicate the effort?
For example, question #11,
"List
of Service organisations or
consultants that can help or do
a conversion".
An
answer to this is fairly to easy to
get by just doing a Google search for
linux
consultants
.
This will quickly find a number of
lists of Linux
consultants.
For example, the
Linux
Consultants Guide
,
and the
Debian Consultants list
.
It
would seem prudent to try to support
and improve the existing lists rather
than
try to create a new specific list.
For example, question #12,
"List of
Linux FAQs and documentation
for the different user groups", is
the purpose of
the
Linux Documentation Proeject
and
similar projects, which
are specifically listed in the
GrokDoc Resources
page
.
If the author of the letter hasn't even taken
the time to find
the resources that are on the
GrokDoc resources page, how are we supposed
to
help them?
My basic confusion arises because although the
questions
raised are certainly important ones,
and they are interesting ones, how do they
fit
into GrokDoc?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Confused - Authored by: PJ on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 12:40 PM EDT
- Confused - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 01:01 PM EDT
- Confused - Authored by: PJ on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 03:47 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: OldNerdGuy on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:55 AM EDT |
Novell is in the process of converting all their regular Desktop users to Linux
(wonder which one... doh!). In the past, they have always published white
papers on how they use their own technology. When I worked for them, it was
called Eating your Own Dog Food... I would expect them to continue to publish
on this, most important, topic.
The first step is to work on the Apps. Those are what the user knows. Convert
from Office to Open Office. Runs great on Windows. Once you have the users used
to the different apps, moving a new OS underneath is much easier.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: AntiFUD on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 11:04 AM EDT |
This is a truly excellent idea. Thank you PJ and whomever.
A couple of additional topics, which wouldn't go astray, from my perspective at
least:
Server Requirements:
Since many of the Groklaw readers appear to be 'experts' and 'gurus' with a
truly vast combined amount of knowledge and expertise, I would suggest that,
since this is a 'business perspective' exercise, a comparison of the server
requirements for each of a Soho, medium (up to 100 users) and enterprise (over
100 users) change-over, could be most beneficial. While I may be wrong, I have
been under the impression that one of the 'most significant' differences between
Linux and Windows relates to the fact that usually Windows requires a separate
'box' for each server while with Linux a number of servers can run concurrently
on a Linux box without a significant degradation of speed and efficiency. I
realize that I am generalizing here a bit, because form a security perspective,
especially in the larger, high volume, or ecommerce businesses, the need for
load balancers or software, DMZs, firewalls or software, are not only necessary
but are prudent, desirable and in some cases obligatory. Finally, because, as
we all know, a tuned Linux system runs at an equivalently similar level of speed
using far less RAM, CPU speed etc., the potential for 'old' Windows boxes to be
reused in the new Linux architecture can have a significant effect on the
overall cost of a change-over. Please note that I have struggled to avoid the
use of the phrases: 'bloatware' and 'embedded IE' and 'patches and updates' in
this suggestion, as I don't think I need to preach to the converted.
Equipment Requirements:
Possibly in conjunction with the foregoing discussion of system server
requirements, it would IMHO, be extremely helpful if this project gave the
potential 'advocates' and or 'suits' an idea, based on the combined real world
experience of Groklaw and Grokdoc readers, of the computing 'resources' that are
required, or have been found necessary, to run a Windows system and then a
similar or replacement Linux system, again from a Soho, medium and enterprise
business perspective. Since I am by no means an expert in the field of
'resources' I can only suggest that number and speed of CPU's (+/- on board
cache, bus speeds, etc.), the RAM requirements, the Storage and Backup
requirements, the Hardware support and optimal SLA uptime requirements, the
Bandwidth requirements, and the SysAdmin human resource requirements. From
experience in a 250 person/user business, that used Outlook, there was an
inordinate amount of SysAdmin time wasted every time someone changed a telephone
extension or department and the HR department or Senior Management changed the
Organization chart - each PC or Mac had to have its address book downloaded,
usually to a spreadsheet to amalgamate the user's personal address book with the
changed company address book - this could often take up to an hour a machine.
It wasn't helped by the fact that some users such as the CFO never connected to
the company's email server or LAN for security reasons (he had the salary list
and financial projections thus insulated from the ret of the world). Finally a
cost comparison and an equipment manufacturer satisfaction index would be
great.
I would appreciate feedback from Groklaw readers on these suggestions before I
submit them to the Grokdoc project.
Finally, and that's the third 'finally' in this post, I would suggest that once
the 'project' reaches completion that each and everyone of us 'promote' it to
our local LUGs as ammo for dispelling FUD and encouraging local businesses to at
least look at 'converting' to the true faith.
---
IANAL - But IAAAMotFSF - Free to Fight FUD
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DannyB on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 11:27 AM EDT |
For many people, especially businesses, switching everything at once may simply
be too much.
It is a much safer and less disruptive approach to only
disrupt a few things at a time, rather than all at once.
Switch your OS
last, not first. First switch your applications. One at a
time.
Concentrate on the biggest money savers first. This probably
means something like OpenOffice.org.
Another easy switch to make is
Mozilla.org.
A great evangelism tool to give to Windows users is The Open CD. This CD makes a very good
first impression of Open Source for a Windows user who is unfamiliar with Open
Source. It has a good sample of high quality open source software for a Windows
user.
Just switching Mozilla and OpenOffice.org give a business plenty
of issues to deal with, without someone telling them to just switch everything
at once.
In OpenOffice.org, you have document conversion issues to deal
with. (I wrote a Document
Converter which you can find at OOoMacros.org.
For OpenOffice.org, you
can get a lot of questions answered over at OOoForum.org. For clipart, check out the stick
Clipart topic in the Draw forum at OOoForum.
You can get templates and artwork OOExtras.
Once both Mozilla
and OpenOffice.org are comfortably in use, you should focus on replacing other
cross platform applications. The GIMP. Inkscape.
Last of all, try
selectively switching the OS for some users. Even though a number of your now
familiar Windows applications are the same, you still have to learn a lot of the
Linux conventions. Where files go. Linux pathname conventions "/home/danny".
New file management tools, like Konqueror, even though they look familiar, have
a definite learning curve.
I personally believe that all of the
cross-over applications are the real threat to Microsoft. Microsoft seems to be
focused on Linux, while the cross over apps are the real short term
threat.---
The price of freedom is eternal litigation. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: braverock on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 11:33 AM EDT |
PJ says:
The big issue, I think, seems to be how to run favorite
applications that run on Windows.
I've posted to the Grokdoc article on
this, but I'll post here too for completeness.
It always amazes me that
almost all the articles written by linux entusiasts and members of the more
commercial press that attempt to talk about switching to Linux skip discussion
of this very important topic. My opinion is that the linux enthusiasts would
rather that you use linux native applications, and the mainstream press probably
just isn't aware of the very viable solutions out there.
WINE Project
Allows many/most Windows
binary applications to run without modification under linux, but can be
difficult to set up and configure.
Crossover Office
CodeWeaver's
Crossover Office product sits on top of Wine, and gives you a host of easy to
use installation oand configuration options for installing Windows applications.
They also provide support. The staff at CodeWeavers are the largest
contributors to the Wine project, so supporting Codeweavers is support for open
source in a very tangible way.
Winelib
For converting your existing internal, proprietary Windows code
to better run under linux, winelib exists so that you can recompile. Obviously
only for shops with in-house programmers, but the fastest route to moving your
internal applications to linux with the minimum ammount of
pain.
Regards,
- Brian [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 11:42 AM EDT |
You don't have to throw Max Payne nor Half Life.
http://www.transgaming.com/products_linux.php
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 11:44 AM EDT |
Great idea. How about adding a list of companies
that have moved to Linux?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: liderbug on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 11:56 AM EDT |
My 2 bits. I run 2 boxes (chill.. I'll explain), 1 Linux, 1 XP. I live on the
Linux box and use the XP box for 2 (count'm, 2) 3d party apps that only run
under ms. I don't use XP for mail, I don't use XP for my browser, I don't use
XP ..... I do use Linux for: mail, browser, office, connections to other Unix
boxes, etc. etc. etc. When I must run one of the 3d party apps I run: rdesktop
ms-mach -u mylogin -d mydomain -g 1280x1204. Up pops a console window, I login
and run the app. I don't worry about virus because I *never* do email or IE on
the XP box. And co-workers have access to the box to do the same thing making it
a group box.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jpetts on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 12:26 PM EDT |
You can find a great list of application equivalents, including hotlinks, here. The
list is regularly updated.
James
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: eggplant37 on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 01:13 PM EDT |
1. Which programs on Linux have the same or similar function as a given
Windows programs like:
a) Office - specifically Word, Excel,
PowerPoint, Publisher,
Access
StarOffice
OpenOffice.org
KWord/KOffice
suite
Abiword
b) IE - bookmarks and IE specific
applications
Mozilla/Firefox
Opera
Camino
Galeon
Ko
nqueror
Beonex
Communicator
Safari
GZilla
Dilla
Lynx
More
information here
c) Outlook and Outlook express, email
repositories,
calendars
Thunderbird
Evolution
KMail
Pine
Mutt
eMailman
Gmail
d) Graphics applications,
formats
Gimp
Kuickshow
xsane
kpaint
e)
Firewalls and Anti-virus applications
iptables (kernel 2.4 &
above)
ipchains (kernel 2.2 & below)
netfilter (BSD &
others)
ClamAV
OpenAntivirus
f) Backup
applications
Amanda
RSync
Taper
Arkeia
rdist
DA
R
Storix
NetworkBK
g) Databases and database
applications
MySQL
PostgreSQL
h) Development
tools
Every Linux system comes with a full barrage of compilers and
related utilities, so many of which it would be futile to list them all here
when a google search would do.
i) Communication tools and
applications
So many more it's hard to list them all
Better to
break down into subcategories
j)
Gui/desktop
KDE
Gnome
Windowmaker
IceWM
blackbox
k) System administrator and system management
tools
So many available, it's hard to list
Again, subcategories
would be good
Most of this I found easily using google or simply by
looking at the installed software on my own system here at home running Mandrake
10.0 Official. I've been using Mandrake since version 5.3, which translates
back to 1999. Before that, it was Slackware from about 1994, and I learned
Linux from my knowledge based on some OJT on Xenix 286 back in 1988. In my own
estimation, Mandrake has been desktop, Microsoft-replacement ready since version
7.2, which is at about the point when I abandoned Windows altogether. If there
was an app only available on Windows, I either found something that did half the
job and faked the rest, or made do without. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 01:57 PM EDT |
I believe that it is much easier to find the "right" Software for a
given Task for Windows than it is for FOSS. In an windows-environment the
available software more or less competes on a feature/price base and easy usage
while under GNU/Linux the focus is on getting the job done in the most efficient
way. Therefor feature-rich software for Unix-style operating systems tends to be
more complicated and sometimes doesn't come with a nice GUI and requires the use
of multiple little helpers. PJ asked a difficult question.
It cannot just be about switching the underlying operating system and simply
migrating to replacement applications that offer the same functionality.
I solely use GNU/Linux both at work and at home for at least the last five
years. When I sometimes watch other people trying to archieve similar results
using Windows I wonder what keeps them sticking to that operating system
(however other tasks are easier done in a Windows environment if not impossible
under Linux due to the lack of commercial tools).
For example:
I had a huge amount of simulation data last week and wanted to extract a nice
graphic. The 3MByte ASCII-output of the program had to be reformatted first.
I used the command line tool "sed" to remove some lines and disturbing
brackets and got a beautiful graphic with ploticus. This required a little bit
of thinking, but the next output on different data is just a keystroke away.
My coworker tried the same using Excel for Data-Import (and failed miserably, so
I helped him out using awk). He clicked his way through the applications to get
a similar graphic using Microcal/Origin. The total time required was about the
same (excluding the time he needed to reboot his computer once), but he has to
go through the same procedure every time he needs a new graphic.
A software comparision like the one suggested in the above Email would of course
rule out the command-line tools, although they where the better solution for
this task. (Note that these tools are also available for Windows - but it's a
lot of trouble getting them to work there - they are barely used).
The same problem arises in different areas. If you want a tool to write letters
you might want to try Openoffice or Koffice. If you like to write a huge
document and if you're not afraid of learning, Lyx might be the superior way to
go.
A another poster suggested that a paradigm change is needed. The company willing
to change should first re-thing what they really need and get their questions
straight. A simple comparision table of available applications only helps to
figure out what you cannot do using GNU/Linux. This is only a small part of the
problem.
Most of the typical buisiness applications (with the exception of financial
software) are available for GNU/Linux. Difficult tasks are easier employed most
of the time but there is indeed a lack of certain specialized software.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 02:58 PM EDT |
I just installed SuSE9.1... Apart from it getting upset about my bluetooth / usb
keyboard and mouse during install it went ok.
Right I thought, I'll get the latest ATI linux drivers, which duly did.
Followed the HOWTO and installed it, then it told me to run a config progam.
It then started asking me all sorts of lovely questions like specify your mouse
port which defaulted to /dev/mouse. Nice easy question that. I don't think.
Anyway eventally found it on /dev/input/mice. Asked a few questions about
keyboard. Fine, can handle that. Then the best one. Specify Horizontal refresh
rate and gave me a load of options. Huh? I mean, a new user is going to
understand that? Hello?
I then killed this in digust and tried to configure it using YaST 2. Deleted
old card, selected the Radeon 9700 (for that is what I had). Configured it all.
Tested.. Looked ok... Rebooted.. keyboard and mouse doesn't work... No amount of
fiddling would cajole them to return, so rebooted back to windows again....
Linux for the masses? Not quite there yet, is it???
Timbo....[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 03:21 PM EDT |
I found this interesting article, Microsoft
applauds open-source procurement memo in which MS praises a new memo from
the Office of Management and Budget.
Opponents of open-source software
applauded a recent memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget that they
claim puts proprietary software on competitive footing with open-source software
in federal procurements.
“We think it’s a great memo,” said Bill Guidera,
policy counsel for Microsoft Corp. of Redmond, Wash., referring to a letter
issued to agency CIOs and senior procurement officials by OMB IT and
e-government administrator Karen Evans (Click for GCN story).
Seems the
shoe is on the other foot now, and MS is fighting to even be considered for a
growing number of governement contracts. Breaks my heart to so them whine so
much.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 05:44 PM EDT |
Bassically, the only thing you'll gain is flamewars and off-topic discussions.
I'm reading the byline of your site, and it says that paralegals do research.
Since when do paralegals do software advocacy?
Theres nothing to add to this whole 'how can we switch to Linux' - Businesses
can switch to Linux when they find a distribution that does everything they
need.
There is no shortage of information on doing pretty much everything with Linux
out there already - The problem with 'Bringing it all together in one place' is
that there is too much, and conflicting information. Different distros do things
differently, TIMTOWTDI (There Is More Than One Way To Do It), and a lot of the
things you need to do don't involve simply clicking a couple of checkboxes which
immediately puts them way outside the comfort zone of most 'average users'
If businesses were prepared to be part of the community, invest in fixing the
problems they find, and working together to provide clear user-driven
requirements for developers, well, they would have already switched to Linux
long ago. And many (such as, lets say, Autozone) have.
For the rest, Linux isn't there yet - and for a big percentage of them, Linux
won't be there until it looks, feels and behaves exactly like Windows. So let
those people wait (they could be waiting for some time) and let the others get
on with it.
I find the legal-centric content on this site a breath of fresh air - keep the
focus of Groklaw, and do what you do well.
It's a waste of time pandering to people who won't ever be prepared to move
unless they are pushed, Linux is not simply a 'Free Windows Replacement', and
there is no benefit to Linux by simply gaining a bunch of users who expect
everything in return for nothing - They don't contribute time or effort to
improve Linux - and as such they are completely irrelevant to it's development.
The other problem is once you start running a Linux advocacy page, that starts
to raise some fairly big 'bias' issues, does it not?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 05:44 PM EDT |
http://www.novell.com/training/linux/maketheswitch.html
Get Suse Pro download too.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: eamacnaghten on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 07:05 PM EDT |
A chief reason why I cannot switch a lot of users over to Linux is Macromedia's
Shockwave.
I know Crossover supports it, but I need a free solution to this before I can
convert people in earnest.
I have tried experimenting with wine a bit but I am having difficulty getting it
altogether there. Does anyone know how I can get shockwave to work (through
wine) preferably using the native Linux Mozilla or Firefox?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: senectus on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 07:26 PM EDT |
My local LUG (Linux User Group) Had a seminar about making Hibernate (Suspend to
disk) work well under linux.
Seeing as Laptops are a big feature in business I thought I'd post a link.
http://www.plug.org.au/events/seminar/2004-07[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 08:59 PM EDT |
Avoid all of the above issues quickly and easily...
...hire me.
RF[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Prototrm on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:27 PM EDT |
OK, my 2 cents, FWIW.
Converting from Windows to Linux is a long-term process for most people. For
myself, I have to make a living writing software for Windows, but I prefer to
live in the Linux environment. I won't be giving up Windows completely any time
soon.
I *am* using Suse 9.0 with a copy of Windows 98 running in a virtual machine,
using the Linux program Win4Lin. This is a better solution for me than Crossover
Office, since I can run my Windows development tools in Linux, tools such as
Delphi, C++ Builder, Visual Studio, Visio, and even SQL Server. No special
effort to install or run them, and even the debuggers work normally.
Suse supplies a solid, easily configurable Linux system that doesn't require
command-line expertise to use, while Win4Lin seems to able to run any Windows
program that doesn't require hardware video acceleration (e.g., games).
I firmly believe that you should be able to use 50 percent of a program or
operating system's features (except for a programming language) without reading
the documentation. By that measure, Linux still falls short, but is gradually
getting better. Until it reaches what I consider a proper level of ease-of-use,
using Windows in a VM is the ideal compromise.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Prototrm on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:48 PM EDT |
PJ,
What you do best involves legal matters, not tutoring the unwashed masses on how
to ditch Windows. There are a lot of legal disputes these days involving
computers and technology. Since discovering Groklaw, I have a new appreciation
of the Legal and Paralegal profession. You have made the SCO matter
entertaining, if sometimes a bit scary.
Since the media will always follow the money, it will never give us all the
facts, just the ones that fit into their bottom line. Sites such as Groklaw, and
people such as you, can fill-in the missing pieces of the puzzle that Big Money
doesn't want anyone to know about. That's a huge responsibility, and an equally
huge subject matter to cover.
You do a great job. Stay focused on what you do best. Please.
Have a Great Weekend!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: m_si_M on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 09:56 PM EDT |
I'm well aware that Sun isn't quite popular amongst
some of Groklaw's
readers. But they donated the
OpenOffice.org/StarOffice file format
specifications to the OASIS
consortium. If
governments were serious about interoperability and
open standards, they could
declare OASIS file formats as a
fundamental requirement for governmental
contracts. At least from
that point of view Sun's emphasis on open standards
makes
sense. Imagine Microsoft being forced to offer OOo filters to
fulfill
public criteria! Of course they will find hundreds of excuses and
almost
certainly try to create new incompatiblities (embrace and
extend), but if
governments worldwide were to accept OASIS file
formats, it would be harder for
Microsoft to take customers hostage.
And there would be real competition between
FOSS and proprietary
software.
From my knowledge of public
administration this sounds like utopia, but I recently saw elephants running
quite fast ... ---
C.S. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Open standards - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 19 2004 @ 02:34 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 10:46 PM EDT |
A lot of the discussion in the article here relates to specific applications -
Outlook/Outlook Express and IE are specifically mentioned, along with
Word/Excel/etc.
While there are data conversion issues that need to be addressed, I think it's
very important to focus less on the <i>tools</i> used, and focus on
the <i>tasks</i> being performed by the users who are undergoing the
conversion.
So rather than say "User uses Word, how do I give them Word on Linux",
focus on "User writes reports, what tools can they be trained to use to
continue generating these reports?"
If you can start them using the tools before you change OSes,, that makes it a
lot easier. I work for Novell, and that's what our migration plan is - to
convert applications first, then convert OS. Myself, I've been a Linux desktop
user for 7 years, using Windows through VMware only when absolutely necessary
(for example, Novell's expense management system requires IE and Microsoft's
JVM).
Right now, the first phase of the migration is well underway, most of the
company is using OpenOffice under Windows in order to remove our dependency on
Microsoft Office. Phase 2 involves the replacement of desktops with Linux
desktops running the Novell Linux Desktop that's in the works.
Similarly, looking at "how do we replace workgroups/domains" is not
the question you want to ask. How do we share file storage and printer
resources on our network - that's the question you want to ask.
Duplicating a Windows infrastructure without Windows/Microsoft technologies
isn't the nirvana of networked computing. Providing the services to run the
business is.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Lord Bitman on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 11:54 PM EDT |
shouldnt we be talking about legal issues, the kinds of things about open source
which closed-source vendors try to use to convince businesses not to use linux?
You can have linux running in your office by next week and have everyone be okay
with it by next month, but you need to get somebody to make the decision to do
so first.
Things like where to get warantees and support on this software which comes with
a license explicitely saying there are no warantees and support.
Legal issues about using open-source code, or using open-source products.
I dont know any of them, but this is grokLAW, let's talk about LAW-related
things :)
---
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Einhverfr on Saturday, July 17 2004 @ 11:55 PM EDT |
| My business (online at http://www.metatrontech.com) helps people do this. Here
is my answer to these points and some additional tips:
1. Which programs on
Linux have the same or similar function as a given Windows programs like:
a) Office - specifically Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Publisher, Access
Access
is the biggie. The others can be reasonably substituted with OpenOffice, and
for intensive spreadsheet needs, run Gnumeric (not as pretty but extremely
capable).
As for Publisher, there is LyX which is different and yet similar.
Also there are a number of advancements in this area in the open source
world.
b) IE - bookmarks and IE specific applications
c) Outlook and
Outlook express, email repositories, calendars
Migrate to Mozilla first,
then back up your profile before you move. Alternatively you can export these
and then import them into Mozilla and/or evolution after you move
d)
Graphics applications, formats
Gimp supports most every graphics format.
ImageMagick is also common. Not as powerful as photoshop but coming a long way
really fast.
e) Firewalls and Anti-virus applications
Netfilter is
part of the Linux kernel and is extremely powerful in this regard. As for
anti-virus, eTrust works for Linux. For the most part, though Linux is less
susceptible to viruses than Windows.
f) Backup applications
Tar,
etc. can be automated. Fileroller can be used via a gui. Enterprise backup
tools exist as well.
g) Databases and database applications
Oracle
or DB2 for proprietary db's. PostgreSQL of Firebird for open source ones. Stay
away from MySQL for mission-critical or precision critical uses as it is know to
truncate numbers....
h) Development tools
Hmmm.... Komodo,
Kdevelop, etc for IDE's. OTherwise you have Glade, GCC, Emacs, VIM, etc. You
pick. Supports the following languages:
Java, C, C++, ForTran 77, Perl,
Python, PHP, BASIC, ADA, Objective C, BASH, CSH, KSH, etc. This is one area
where there is no shortage of apps.
i) Communication tools and
applications
You will have to be more specific. You do have groupware
servers and clients, PBX and softphones, instant messenge servers and clients,
even programs like Talk... These are all communications programs and can
generally generally be dropped in instead of their Windows versions.
j)
Gui/desktop
Not any harder to use than Windows
k) System
administrator and system management tools
Easier to use than Windows. More
scriptable. More powerful, more secure. Not quite like GPO's though.
2.
What to do about windows applications that have no similar linux version or are
very difficult to convert.
See below under other general tips. You should
consider migrating little by little in order to solve these problems
gradually.
3. Coexistence - short term and long term, cost and
problems
This is very hard to quantify due to the different options
available to you with open source and the power of the UNIX paradigm (small
pieces loosely woven) which permeates Linux (No this is not to say that there
are any copyright issues with Linux, just that the idea of small pieces loosely
woven is the powerful one).
4. How to convert existing data from a given
windows application to a linux application
a) List of conversion
tools
This must be evaluated program by program. Again this is why you
impliment it slowly.
5. How to convert users from a windows environment to a
linux environment
a) How to set up "work groups" and "domain" under
linux
You could use replicate /etc/passwd, etc. among the systems for a
workgroup-like setup, Seems more pain than it is worth especially since the
software is Free.
Better to go with the "domain" and use NIS or OpenLDAP backed
by MIT Kerberos. These programs have good documentation associated with
them.
b) How to replace Primary and Backup domain controllers
All
covered in the Kerberos and OpenLDAP documentation :-)
c) How to migrate
users and user groups to linux
You could use the net vampire utility to
convert the users and groups using Samba. Or you could use other utilities to
extract this info.
d) What to do about the active directory
What
about it? You could use it if the value justifies the money you are paying
Microsoft. But you would have to extend it somewhat. Pay me to do this ;-)
Or
you could get rid of it and just use OpenLDAP and Kerberos instead.
e)
User environment like printers, files and directories, etc.
You can move
these over, using Samba for the files. Some preferences will be lost and the
user will need to set them up again.
BUT with Linux you could push out much of
this info using DHCP (print servers, XDM servers, etc) as well.
6. A
section on pros and cons of a conversion
Take a look at
http://www.metatrontech.com/wpapers/oss-guide.pdf
7. A section about
time:
a) How long will it take realistically
b) Suggested stages
c)
Template plans for a conversion job
Depends on the number of workstations
and the complexity. For most businesses, I would not suggest moving in less
than a month. Try to spread it out over at least three to avoid burning
bridges. Complex environments such as larger businesses may take many years to
convert.
8. A section on costs - it will always cost something to convert
and being realistic about these costs gives higher credibility.
We provide
quotes. In some cases, it was less expensive to install Linux than replace a
bad Windows CD (small businesses) and the migration cost $100. For larger
businesses, the costs could be in the tens of millions of dollars.
9. High
profile reference cases
10. List of where to get end-user, sysadmin and
developer education for linux
The email lists and project web pages are a
good place to start. Also check out your local Linux Users Group if
applicable.
11. List of Service organisations or consultants that can help
or do a conversion
Again, we do. See our page at
http://www.metatrontech.com.
Or call me at 509-630-7794 :-)
12. List of
Linux FAQs and documentation for the different user groups
I would want to
know exactly what you want to do before sending out hundreds of faqs. But the
best place to start is http://www.tldp.org.
13. Some reasonable criteria for
a deciding on a conversion
a) Why and why not
b) Skills
c)
Costs
You can find our whitepapers which cover many of these issues
at:
http://www.metatrontech.com/wpapers/
Costs are extremely difficult to
discuss and the best way to look at this is to ask the lowest possible cost. I
would need to know more about your environment. Also if you want better return
on investment, you will want to budget 150% of this number so that you can adapt
your network to your business better. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 01:35 AM EDT |
Why not from Windows to ... anything else?
I don't see why Linux should be an exclusive choice. There are lots of
operating systems/environments out there ... Linux is not the only open-source
choice.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 08:41 AM EDT |
The real issue with switching from Windows to
Linux are DRIVERS. A lot of hardware lacks
support in linux.
The manufacturers can't, or simply don't
want to provide specs for their hardware
to the OSS programmers.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: bobstevens on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 08:46 AM EDT |
| 1st: Put Linux in the server room.
The IT people will get
accustomed to Linux (if they are not already) and be better able to support the
workstation roll-out.
Decide on a distro that is capable and well
supported. My suggestion is SUSE Enterprise 9. The 2.6 kernel is fast and
capable and Novell supports it well.
Use SAMBA sever to provide
storage to traditional Windows workstations. The Windows users can map drives to
it and won't see a difference.
2nd: Workstations can be switched
to SUSE Pro 9 with the Ximian XD2 desktop.
Ximian can make it look just like
Windows and their version of OpenOffice has great fonts and saves documents as
Windows Office file version by default. Very easy transistion for your users so
there is less political problems.
Many of our clients transition users
over by first getting them set up on OpenOffice running on Windows first. It's
free and makes the transition to Linux and Open source easier since they make
the transition in two steps instead of 1.
OpenOffice can handle the
majority of your users' needs as an office suite. Documents created in
OpenOffice are interchangable with Microsoft 200x Office. For those Microsoft
programs you cannot do without, use CrossOver Office. It allows the installation
of the entire Microsoft Office suite, IE, MS Project, Visio, as well as
Dreamweaver MX and Quicken (since 90+% of all small to medium businesses use a
version of Quicken or Quickbooks this will be critical.) A side benefit is that
the MS Office suite runs faster in Cross-Over Office than it does in
XP.
A workstation alternative is to go to the new Novell desktop. It
combines Ximian (Gnome) with KDE features and comes with Cross-Over Office. It
has that Windows look and feel and great fonts. Again, great support from
Novell.
3rd: email. In the back room, you can either keep using
Exchange or GroupWise and use Evolution as the workstation front end. It looks
and operates like Outlook and has connectors to both Exchange and GroupWise
servers.
If you want to change email programs, go with SUSE Open
Exchange Server. Full email collaboration with calendar, fax, etc. The Evolution
client can talk to it with no problem.
4th: Look at the great
services available from open source. For example, if you need a SQL database,
MySQL will do a great job even for large DBs. Apache is already handling 64% of
all web pages seen on the Internet now.
5th: Updates. The reason I
have stressed SUSE in this post is that you can use YaST Online Update (YOU) to
update servers and workstations like MS Automatic Update.
An alternative to
YOU is Ximian's Red Carpet. You subscribe to Red Carpet channels for both your
OS and your software and get updates for them all. You can then push them
directly to machines or aggregate them and push them out at your schedule. Red
Carpet handles n-level dependancies (program A needs B which needs
C....n).
I hope this helps. As they say, been there, done that and continue
to assist clients to do so. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 11:55 AM EDT |
| Most of the comments above have been tidbits of *perceived* traps and pitfalls
of switching.
I thought I'd alert everyone to a real life example of one
company that has made this migration. These actualities may indeed open some
eyes to the possibilities. And some of the estimated costs as described by the
Munich study did not materialize.
Ernie
Ball
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 12:27 PM EDT |
I currently don't use Linux, but I read Linux magazines from
to time and I
did once use Unix as my work environment for a
couple of years. I write this
note in the spirit of trying to
help people who would like to see Linux used
more widely. My list
of the kinds of things that keep me from pursuing Linux
has
remarkably little overlap with the list in the email to PJ that
forms the
basis for this page. Here are some of the items on my
list, not necessarily all
that well thought out:
- 1. Distributions. These are really a pretty
serious
concern.
With Windows, I pretty much know the score, which has
been stable
for some time. There is W95, 98, 98SE, ME, NT, 2K, and XP. W95,
98
(as opposed to 98SE) and NT are dead. ME is essentially a
crippled version of
98SE, and is thus a dog. XP is copy protected
with a mechanism that adds
significant risk to the user (it can
and will intentionally break itself when
Microsoft thinks that
is in Microsoft's best interest, and that is not in
the
user's best interest if the user has any serious dependencies on
the
system), and is hence a dog. That leaves 98 and 2K as
sensible versions to have.
98SE is a bit of a kludge built on
DOS, which is good (because it isn't really a
secure environment,
and that allows a level of hacking that enables some things,
like
better game performance) and bad (because it isn't secure and it
crashes
more). 2K is more or less a real, multitasking, secure
(in principle - I'm not
interested in debating MS's code quality
shortcomings here) operating system
with a competent underlying
design that is not all that much unlike Unix or
Linux. Microsoft
has things called Service Packs, which can basically
be
downloaded or obtained on CD free (or at near
manufacturing/handling cost)
for anyone, so for the most part I
need only think about the most up-to-date
sub-version of each of
these windows versions. For the most part, updating
Windows
versions is maybe a once in seven years event (I'm not talking
about
apply fixes, but changing versions.)
But with Linux, there is Debian
versions a,b,c,d,e, SUSE versions
a,b,c,d,e,f, RedHat versions a,b,c,d,e,f,
Slackware ..., Mandrake
..., SCO ... (oops), Corel ..., and what not. I'll be
darned if I
have any real concept of how they all differ, if it matters, or
how
much it matters. I would guess there is some new version from
someone about once
a month. How are they maintained? Can I get
fix packs or other updates? On CD's?
For how much? From who? How
often, and for how long, for a given numbered Linux
version? Am I
screwed if I only have a modem internet connection? Is bug
fixing
a constant process of upgrading to a new version (e.g., RedHat 8
to
RedHat 9), or is it more equivalent to the Microsoft fix pack
scenario? How much
trauma does such a version number upgrade
typically entail? When and why should
I do it? After I get/have
whatever version of Linux that I end up with, how much
do I need
to worry about the fact that my friend has a different version? I
keep
hearing about apps (WordPerfect 8, for example) which have
dependencies on old
libraries which are no longer distributed
(but will still work if you can find a
copy of the old lib) --
what kind of nonsense is this and how should I think
about it? Is
there an equivalent to "DLL hell" that exists in the
Microsoft
world? I hear about applications being distributed in "RPM"
format,
and also in some other format whose name escapes me for
the moment -- what are
the consequences of these multiple formats
other than the obvious nuisance
value? Is installation and
uninstallation of apps the same kind of mess on Linux
as it is on
Windows? If not, what kind of mess is it? If I install 50 apps,
then
uninstall them, will I have a system as "clean" as when I
started? Is there any
long term plan by anyone to fix this
mess?
Linux still really suffers
from what made Unix non-competitive
with Windows for years (and probably what
really killed Unix),
namely, a zillion hardware box makers each shouting that
they had
the real version of Unix (although it's no longer box
makers who
create the chaos). The Linux magazines are terrible -
just the usual nonsense
that each of the latest versions is the
one that you just really need to have,
and virtually nothing that
gives you a picture about what each of these version
is likely to
mean in terms of allowing users to make OS upgrades a
once-in-
seven-or-so-years event.
Is it possible to summarize the Linux
version situation in a
few paragraphs, not unlike the Windows paragraph that I
wrote
above?
- File system semantics 1.
"32bit" Windows
systems do something quite significant to help
out legacy DOS/Windows users -
they generate an 8.3 "alias" name
for every file, and they have a case
insensitive, case preserving
filename semantics (e.g., if I have a file called
abc.efg and
touch it with an old DOS app (which will actually "use" the
name
ABC.EFG, since old DOS apps "know" only about upper case 8.3
names), the
lower case name will be preserved).
Does Linux have similar
functionality? Under what circumstances
(e.g., VFAT disks only,
perhaps)?
- File system semantics 2.
Windows systems
allow one to have a separate "current directory"
setting for each separate
partition/disk. This is very useful
when one manages partitions to take
advantage of it. Does Linux
have similar functionality?
Anyone
care to take a shot at these questions?
There are a lot more questions
like these, but I don't have
time now and I suspect that this note will never be
noticed or
responded to if it doesn't make it onto Groklaw in the first day
or
two of the conversion-from-windows-page's existence.
(Which, by the way,
is probably a reason why a conversion-
from-windows page on Groklaw is a bad
idea -- Groklaw pages
represent wonderful reference material for a lawsuit, but
each
page on Groklaw typically degenerates to a stagnant, no longer
updated page
after about two or three days.)
Wally Bass
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 01:40 PM EDT |
I've encountered quite a few problems since I put linux on one of my machines to
run some expensive engineering software.
While it seemed easy to get the box programmed to talk to my router, I've never
been able to get it to talk to my lan and other (win2k) machines. Since I have
no lan, I use a usb memory stick to move files back and forth.
Now this is really dumb. To get the memory stick to work, I was told to create
a dummy directory and use a cryptic "mount" command to get the
computer to "see" it. Good grief. Both xp and win2k do this
automatically when you plug the stick in. (I'm no Microsoft fan, but ...)
I took the box over to another shop to show them a design and the thing took
about a half hour to boot. It didn't like the fact that the network wasn't the
same, so it kept hitting these time-outs. I tried to fix it (their dhcp rather
than my fixed ip) and ended up killing the license server for my expensive
software. Apparently it's tied to the host name and when I dinked with it, I
messed everything up. I got it back, but was sweating bullets while I fixed it.
Who on Earth would design an operating system that hangs when the network is
changed?
When I first loaded Fedora and the engineering software, I made the mistake of
trying to increase the display resolution. The software is, after all, for
laying out integrated circuits. After that, the machine wouldn't boot. Since I
am new to linux and have never been a unix administrator (user yes), what could
I do? I reloaded linux and started from scratch.
Gnome still complains with an error message every time I boot the machine. I
have no idea why, or how to even start to find out why it's complaining. It's
probably from one of my excursions into trying to network with Samba, but
that's just a guess.
I tried doing a dual boot with win2k once and that didn't seem to work.
Instead, I bought a portable drive setup and just swap out hard disks to change
from win2k to linux.
I did get my lan printer working with the linux box. I count this as a major
success :-) (hp2200dn)
I did a web search before I started all this, and found a minimal support
claimed for new hardware in linux. I opted to use an old machine to avoid these
issues. This works for layout since it's not that demanding, but my spice
simulator uses 100% of the cpu when it runs. I have to have the fastest
computer I can buy to avoid week long run times on some jobs. I can pay someone
to build a bleeding edge machine for me, but then I'd be petrified to make even
the slightest change once it was running.
The point is that it's not only possible to get yourself into problems you can't
get out of with linux, it's highly likely this will happen.
I've designed IC's for 27 years, but am not a programmer. I managed to figure
out how win2k works well enough where I don't have problems like this. I like
what I've seen of linux and feel perfectly comfortable as a user. I just wish
there were a way to get simple things working without putting my installation
at risk.
Regards,
Larry[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 03:44 PM EDT |
Did they receive a memo from corporate HQ?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 06:34 PM EDT |
Switching your OS isn't what's difficult. The applications a business needs to
run are *the* barrier to adoption of alternative operating systems. Forget about
Office for a moment because that's both obvious and not the issue for many
companies.
Many businesses rely upon industry specific applications to do their work. The
insurance industry is a very good example of this, along with say the banking
industry, medical professionals, the list goes on. But lets talk about
insurance.
Insurance companies frequently employ commercial insurance rating applications
to rate commercial lines of business. The data they use is usually provided by a
3rd party company which also provides an application to use the data. Virtually
NONE of these type of applications have a Linux version, and many of them are
DOS based. Pile on top of that that most insurance companies run an application
called Series III. This system is widespread, nearly every insurance company
uses it, and right now the only stable version of it runs on OS/2. There's a
Windows version out now but translating the applications built on Series III v6
and v7 is time consuming and expensive. It took over 10 years of the insurance
industry complaining about supporting OS/2 for this to get the application's
manufacturer to actually write a windows version, which is very buggy so not
many are switching to it.
Since a considerable number of workstations must run Windows and/or OS/2 in this
environment, it simply isn't an option to convert "some" of them to
Linux. That would in fact cost the company more money than just supporting
Windows and OS/2 alone, due mainly to the increase in support staff or support
staff abilities required to support the additional OS.
And it is this supportability that is *the* issue for CIOs in large
corporations. They worry about document compatibility with Office, whether their
old and somewhat unsupportable DOS and Windows apps can be run on or converted
to Linux, etc. No CIO is going to run Linux on a PC that has a requirement to
run a DOS only application when the manufacturer of the application says they
won't support an install on Linux with an emulator. And frequently there is NO
alternative application option.
If you want people switching from Windows to Linux en masse anytime in the near
future, someone needs to kick development tools in the butt so applications
written in Visual C++ can easily be ported to Linux and compiled. Without that,
software companies don't see a need to redevelop and maintain a separate code
tree for an OS that isn't widely adopted, and without key applications available
on Linux, most companies won't adopt it for large scale use on desktops. It's a
vicious circle.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 07:25 PM EDT |
| The complete lack of any ease of use is a problem. All Linux is, from my
experience working with it, is that it is a GUI for a Comand Line. I DO NOT want
to go back to the days of DOS and have to use a command line to do simple things
such as extracting a zipped file, especially not having to unTar it then using
gzip to extract it. This is something that irritates me.
Also, the lack of
anything resembling a simple executable is ridiculous. I had a hard enough time
getting Firefox .8 to run on Redhat 7, Firefox .9's executing code file won't
even run, for no reason given. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 18 2004 @ 10:36 PM EDT |
I tried switching a record store I work at over to linux recently. Their
stock-system and point-of-sale is all a clarion based app and I spent several
weekends getting it to run under wine. It seemed to work great. Unfortunately as
soon as we tried a live machine that accessed the real data files on a samba
server we got data corruption errors and their entire POS system went down.
(fortunately it wasn't during opening hours). I don't think I'll be trying it
again, far too frustrating.
So many businesses use specialized apps like this, I think they would always be
a serious sticking point for migrating to linux.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Bill R on Monday, July 19 2004 @ 08:36 AM EDT |
As mentioned in the article, data is a factor that needs to be addressed. More
to the point, the method of transition and sharing of data is of equal or
greater importance.
In our organization, we have a fee added to the purchase of each new system to
transition data from the old to the new box - network storage is not popular
here. Many of our users also do peer to peer file sharing as well. Since it is
likely that any transition will require access to Windows and Linux for quite
some time, users and support staff will need to be trained in how to share files
using sharing protocols under Windows and Linux. As well as how to access this
data through one of the Linux utilities to browse a Windows network
neighborhood. Likely, Linux users will need to set up sharing using Samba for
Windows and NFS for Linux. If there are OS X users, this will need to be
considered as well but OS X can handle multiple file sharing protocols. In a
Windows environment, Samba can be set up to access a Windows or Samba domain
controller for accounts but user security will still need to be considered.
We setup default sharing folders in our default installations for Windows users
to allow them to easily setup file shares on their systems. We also have a
server setup for the temporary storage of data during the system transition.
Most of our transitions are Windows only but this capability could still be used
to transition from Windows to Linux. If an organization requires central storage
for user data, this will need to be considered as well to allow Linux and
Windows users to coexist.
I would recommend your site include detailed information about not only what
FOSS applications will read your existing data but also what services are
required to share this data and how to install and configure these services.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: David Gerard on Monday, July 19 2004 @ 08:58 AM EDT |
| Preconceived Usage Patterns
Hamper the Wider Adoptation of Linux from OSnews.com. Basically, the
biggest problem is that people will deal with every hiccup by rebooting.
(Meaning consumer Linux better use ext3 or ReiserFS by default!) Or by
reinstalling. The problem is not using it - it's learning how not to think in
Windows terms about a very stable operating system. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 19 2004 @ 09:31 AM EDT |
http://www.reallylinux.com/docs/desktop.shtml
There are a couple of very interesting articles. Somebody get this guy in here!
;)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 19 2004 @ 09:57 AM EDT |
I can understand the clients or desktops. What I can't understand is how to set
up the clients so that the username on one client/desktop is the same when
logging on to the server. When I tried an older version of Suse, it had
something called NIS. From what I've been able to read, OpenLDAP has replaced
NIS. But how do I use this? If I set up a server, creating user names, then
set up a desktop, am I creating the same user names, and then editing files to
make sure the user names all have the same user id numbers as on the server? Or
how else is this handled? I'm assuming OpenLDAP, but I'm still having trouble
understanding it. Do I create a different user name on the desktop, that doesn't
exist on the server, and then once logged on as that different user, then log on
as the correct user onto the server? Using this method would avoid different
user ids between the desktop and server, and would also avoid extra work when
setting up the desktops, but it doesn't seem efficient.
I'm aware
this can be avoided by floppy booting or pxe booting from the desktop across the
network to boot off the server, but by doing so, you are losing the processing
power of running X locally instead of streaming X across the network from the
server, aren't you?
Is there a guide somewhere to read that explains
something as simple and fundamental as to how the server/desktop user
name/id/signon works?
Thanks! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rev_matt_y on Monday, July 19 2004 @ 12:07 PM EDT |
| There are many forums online where you can get great info about switching as
well. One I frequent is Desktop
Linux. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: BitOBear on Monday, July 19 2004 @ 05:11 PM EDT |
The one thing I do like to point out to users swtiching away from any platform
really is what I like to call The Soya-Milk Effect.
If, when you first try Soya Milk on your cerial, you are expecting it to taste
like Dairy Milk, you will be sorely disapointed.
It's not that soya-milk acually tastes bad, its just that it doesn't taste at
all of milk. If fulfills all the requirements of milk, vis a vi Cerial, but it
is usually sweeter and more tart. Alos, lacking the animal origins of the milk
you are used to, it will lack a gaminess that you are expecting. (It therefore
tastes "clearer" or "more bluish" or something.) This
latter is the pehnominia that new adopters find most disturbing.
This is a direct analouge of the experience of switching from systems or
products one is familiar with to something new and different.
So when switching between *any* two platforms, you *must* do so with the
expectation that it will not taste the same. Some things will be smoother, some
sweeter, and some ineffibly absent. If this is something you *expect*, then it
can be interesting and exotic and pleasureable.
If, however, you don't expect the change before you taste it, the differences
will be disturbing at a deep and profound level.
It's like when someone just hands you the giant dirnk-box of soya milk, tells
you "it's just like milk" and "its what we have, so you have to
like it." That scenerio is doomed to fail.
The most important part of doing the switch-over is to prepare your audience to
appreciate the differences. DON'T minimize them, and DON'T try the "you'll
never notice the difference" ploy. If there weren't a difference, they
will ask, then why are we switching?
If you fail to plan for and appreciate your audience and all their expectations,
every surprise will be seen by them as a bad one; "lots faster" will
feel "slippery and insubstantial"; "different cut-and-paste
semnatics" will feel like "missing functionality"; and
"distinct and complete apps" will feel like "lack of
integration".
Prep your user base with a "why this will feel different" or
"thins you will love and hate" presentation, preferably with as little
advocacy as you can manage. "This new system is not stupid like the old
one" will be heard as "everything you know is wrong and stupid"
which will not win you adopters.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: vruz on Tuesday, July 20 2004 @ 12:29 AM EDT |
Installing Knoppix 3.4
----------------------
Knoppix is, from my experience, the easiest and
quickest path to get a decent desktop GNU/Linux
installation up and running.
Quick as in about 30 minutes in a Pentium III 700 Mhz, 256 Mb RAM machine, this
may vary of course, depending on your hardware.
Please note this is a guide for PC Computers, but I know there's a Knoppix for
Mac available too.
A fellow groklawer pointed us to some HOWTO, but it looks like that
documentation is outdated and it refers to an old Knoppix version.
First of all you should get a Knoppix 3.4 CD-ROM
Depending on your internet bandwidth, geographical location,
and change in your pocket there are at least three ways to
do this:
1) download an ISO image of the Knoppix 3.4 CD-ROM
http://www.knopper.net/knoppix-mirrors/index-en.html
2) get a CD-ROM copy delivered to you for a few bucks
(and support the project efforts)
http://www.knopper.net/knoppix-vendors/index-en.php
3) If you happen to be in Germany, you will be able to
get a preview of the upcoming Knoppix 3.5 DVD for
about EUR 10 at the LinuxTAG fair.
http://www.linuxtag.org/2004/index.html
The Knoppix homepage in english:
http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html
In order to have Knoppix 3.4 installed in your hard-disk you
have to:
1) boot from the Knoppix CD
You may have to configure your computer BIOS Setup to
boot from CD if you haven't already. Computers handle
this in many different ways, if your computer doesn't
seem to boot from the CD, please have a look at your
computer BIOS configuration manual
2) Press Enter
wait for KDE to start
3) Using the "Run" option of the KDE menu execute:
knoppix-installer
After dismissing an "about" dialog, a menu should appear, giving the
following options:
1) Configure Installation
2) Start Installation
3) Partition
4) Load config
5) Save config
6) Quit
The configuration options are pretty straightforward from
this point, except for the hard-disk partitioning process
which can be troublesome if you have to share it with
other operating systems, there's still no quick fix for that, but Knoppix will
gladly make a clean Linux-only partition for you automatically if your hard-disk
is blank.
If you need further assistance, you can contact me:
vruz (AT) digipromo (DOT) com
or if you are patient enough, on irc at:
irc.freenode.net
channels: #ruby-es #knoppix
my nickname there, is also "vruz"
cheers
---
--- the vruz[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
