Three Windows to Linux Migrations (and Vice Versa) 132
daria42 writes "In this extended article, ZDNet Australia goes under the hood of three enterprises that moved their back end servers from Windows to Linux and open source software. Two of the companies ended up eventually going back to Microsoft, with the third one still going strong with Linux."
There and back again... A Hobbits tale (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:There and back again... A Hobbits tale (Score:3, Insightful)
Switching, one program at a time... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:There and back again... A Hobbits tale (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:There and back again... A Hobbits tale (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't know what you don't know (Score:4, Insightful)
WRONG. The problem was that they weren't aware that Linux-based systems acutally COULD do what they wanted and a Microsoft marketroid came along and showed them how it could be dome with Windows. Both examples of the reversion to Microsoft showed all the hallmarks of "you don't knw what you don't know"--not only did their IT people not know how to make Linux work for them--they weren't even fully aware of the capabilities of open source systems.
The articles mention one comany migrated to Linux 3 years ago, the other seven years ago. Did they really keep up with the fast-moving world of open source? In the anecdote about the company that stuck with Linux there was a fairly siginificant mention of upgrading both hardware and software, but in the other cases little to nothing was said about upgrading. It is entirely possible that the latter company was still runnning on their original Mandrake 6.x (or whatever it was in 1999) platform. Were they expecting their Linux systems to be magically immortal? If they implemented a Microsoft system in 1999, do you really think they'd be happy with NT4 and the big pile of manure that passed for Exchange Server at the time? I seriously think not.
I think the final solution of migrating (back) to another platform was too drastic, and that these companies dropped the ball when it came to examining the open source alternative. Three passwords to log into a VPN? Email boxes stored on clients? Lack of collaberation tools? COME ON! You can set up a Linux server to allow a Windows client to log in without any extra passwords. It isn't hard to set up a secure IMAP server using Postfix to manage mail server-side either, and there are "Exchange replacements" that may fit the bill if you need to do mare than just manage email centrally. There are a bazillion "portal frameworks" out there, and Subversion can be used as a collaberation tool for more than just computer code. I know this can all be done because I've done all of that myself. These people are lazy and uncreative and didn't even try to find a more elegant approach to solving their problems. Instead they let a Microsoft salesman sell them a sledgehammer to drive in their 10-penny nails.
These stories also underscore a problem with the Linux community as well, however. Microsoft made themselves readily available. They have an education programme that turns out MCSEs faster than rats can breed. The Windows brand is everywhere and they make it very clear with every release "what's new". Where were the Red Hat and Novell people when these Linux shops were struggling? Why isn't red-hat more agessively marketing and expanding RCHE certification? What about LPI? And as far as marketing goes, IBM has done a bit but Linux is far from front and centre, and the marketing presence of Red Hat and Novell is next to nothing in comparison to Microsoft's mega-campaigns that contain heavy dollops of information (or mis-information in some cases). Yes, MS is the big man on campus and has the resources to pull all this off the best, but it's going to take a huge marketing and support effort by the Linux community to make sure we not only convert more people to Linux but to retain them as well.
Re:You don't know what you don't know (Score:2)
They are aggressively marketing it. It's full page ads in the industry magazines, it's right on the Red Hat website, it's the first link for "Linux Certification" if you do a Google search on the topic.
It's a simple chicken and egg dilemma. Useful certification programs are demanding and expensive. Microsoft software is prevalent, so your average IT fellow is already comfortable with the tools and has a comparatively easy
Re:There and back again... A Hobbits tale (Score:2)
But were they really? The rationale seemed fuzzy and nebulous to me, exactly the type of stuff you would come up with if there was no good reason other than "I wanted to".
What works best (Score:5, Insightful)
So we have a breakdown of 3 companies, 2 switching from Linux to Windows, 1 from Windows to Linux. Is there any great wisdom to be gleaned from this? The only bit I can come up with is that you use what works best for you with the infrastructure you need to support. It's easy to say Linux will work well for everything but that's just not realistic. It's also safe to say that Microsoft sucks universally, yet there are plenty of sites running SQL Server and IIS that seem to be doing ok.
If you're smart, you analyze your needs and then add 50% for growth and ask yourself if the infrastructure and technology you plan to use can handle it. It's simpler than getting caught up in the Microsoft vs. Liunx battle for supremacy.
Re:What works best (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's interesting to contrast the foci of the switchers.
The Linux to Windows switchers were looking for an OS that was an all-around general purpose operating system to support a wide array of day to day internal IT uses. The problem they have is scaling up their Linux support to keep all the endless bits of software they organization needs working together. The "network effect" applies here: there's lots of companies with their needs and (low level of) resources, and those companies by in large use Windows. Therefore vendors in the Windows space address their needs to do a wide variety of things good enough with limited staff expertise.
The Windows to Linux switcher was looking for the best platform to host a single application they were designing. The consumers of the platform were, in effect, the development team, which was small and a higly focused center of expertise. They are looking for maximum performance and stability to support a universe of software they define. Joe Blow in accounting having to put three passwords in to use the VPN is quite low on their priorities, compared to, for example, hitting an unanticipated wall in the performance curve.
In short, the Linux->Windows switchers viewed software as a support function -- back office stuff. The Windows->Linux switcher viewed software as a line function -- outward facing stuff.
Of course a sample of three is nothing. But anecdotally, it's intriguing.
Skill problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Lacking skill set
Under that scenario, any OS switch would fail. You can't blame Linux (or Windows or any other OS) for that problem. Linux should be viewed as Linux, not Another Windows. You need proper IT support.
Some of the problems were simply lack of knowledge. There were complaints of having to claim 3 passwords for VPN access and not utilizing a worldwide-accessible central information store. That's just laziness.
Re:Skill problems (Score:4, Insightful)
"If something breaks in Linux and you've got the knowledge, you can generally fix it and get it up fairly quickly by yourself."
"The problem was that just one or two people in the group [out of 15 IT staff] could do that."
Easy migration tips. (Score:3, Funny)
And hire the next applicant in the door who only wants to know if free Mountain Dew is a company benefit and has a beard.
No wonder they failed; they forgot the basics.
Re:Skill problems (Score:3, Informative)
I worked for a company that started with Windows 2000 and moved to Linux. Before Linux, we only had a part-time sysadmin. By part time, I mean he had other tasks to handle and if the computers did break, he'd go work on them. Everybody there was familiar with Windows so they did a lot of their own repairs. (It's worth noting that Windows actually played quite nicely with everybody. No BSODs, crashes, workstati
Re:Skill problems (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Skill problems (Score:2)
X was a great idea when all desktop machines were chronically underpowered, couldn't do any significant
Re:Skill problems (Score:3, Informative)
or...
Use NX [nomachine.com] or FreeNX [berlios.de] as your X.
the Xorg and other x server devs are aware of the problem, and they're working towards solving it.
Re:Skill problems (Score:2)
On a typical trans-Atlantic link on a typical corporate app (disclaimer: I do work for Ford, and I reckon their network setup is pretty much link everyone else's), an X app takes around 10 seconds between window shell appearing and full redraw of all widgets inside it. This simply ain't acceptable. The link is fast to transmit bulk data once the transmission is started (typical FTP speed is 30KB/s), but all the handshaking inherent in X means sending
Re:Skill problems (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Skill problems (Score:5, Informative)
In my experience I've found a striking number of highly technical, free thinking, smart IT people absolutely REFUSE to learn anything about Linux. Their world is all windows and if you try to get them to open up to new ideas they put their hands over their ears and shout "Na, na, na, I'm not listening!!!".
Of course that means that they really aren't the highly technical, free thinking, smart IT people they're making themselves out to be.
Stockholm syndrome (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words: Mac users who said that Windows sucked, generally did so from a position of knowledge, whereas Windows users who said that Macs sucked, generally did so from a position of ignorance. I expect it's still the case today, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that statistically, it's also the case with Windows vs Linux in the enterprise.
Re:Stockholm syndrome (Score:2)
Not even that new... There where some people at the VII century that started to even destroy the new machines at the great migration of the time. Of course, today people can`t really destroy Linux, but refusing to learn is quite a small protest.
Now, there are a few people that like Windows and complain about Linux from a position of knowledge. Up to now, I have met very few of them (in fact, I can only remember one), but Windows doesn`t suck universaly. Only almost all the time.
Re:Stockholm syndrome (Score:2)
In reality, both sucked. Windows 3.1 sucked harder than Mac OS, and Windows 95 sucked a little bit less than Mac OS.
Thankfully Mac OS is dead and buried and we now have OS X to admire, and Windows improved with Windows 2000 but hasn't changed much since then.
This sums up the "improvements" since Windows 2000: Wi
Re:Stockholm syndrome (Score:2)
Kind of like how Linux users get modded up for making BSOD jokes. Position of ignorance and all.
Of course, I don't expect this comment to last very long here.
Re:Stockholm syndrome (Score:2)
In contrast, I've had exactly 1 Linux crash ever on the same hardware.
Re:Stockholm syndrome (Score:2)
Mm hmm. Meanwhile, I have personal experience across a wide variety of machines that XP and 2K does NOT BSOD. (I'm talking 20+ machines, not exaggerating.) Lots of people would back me up on this.
NT != 95.
Re:Stockholm syndrome (Score:2)
Now you blame device drivers and anti-virus software, go on.
Re:Stockholm syndrome (Score:2)
Actually, I was just going to say I don't believe you. A stable Win2K/XP box isn't that hard to come by. You're either telling a tall tale or you've put the same piece of shit hardware in every single one of those machines. I'm going to laugh if you say they were all from Compaq.
Re:Stockholm syndrome (Score:2)
Have a good night.
Shame on me. (Score:2)
No real point to make here, but considering the time frame, I figured you'd enjoy a good laugh at my expense. I certainly deserve it.
G'nite, man.
Re:Skill problems (Score:1)
This is exactly what I have here. I have an absolutely incredible boss, who's realistic, smart and in the thick of things. And yet he absolutely refuses to put even a single Linux box anywhere on the network.
Go figure.
Re:Skill problems (Score:2)
Depends, doesn't it, on how you present "learn somethign about Linux"?
If by "learn something about Linux" you mean, "Learn how you can replace all your existing infrastructure and retrain all your sysadmins and users", then of course they want you to go away. Their time is too valuable.
Most IT guys I know are intrigued by Linux, are interested in learning more, but they know
Re:Skill problems (Score:3, Insightful)
If you replace Windows and Linux in the previous sentence with any other competing ideas (or swap them), you will pretty much still have a valid point.
People who have time, energy and money invested in Windows aren't going to want to switch to Linux. People committed to Linux aren't going to want to switch to Windows. Or Mac. Or Amiga for that
Re:Skill problems (Score:2)
What I was basically talking about was the refusal to learn anything new so that they can make informed decisions. I guess I always lean towards trying to learn as much as I can about a lot of things instead of learning as much as I can about one thing.
Also, the knowledge of different systems and the differences between t
Re:Skill problems (Score:1)
Re:Skill problems (Score:2)
That's pretty much the root of the problem right there. You can get a 100 Linux Nerds to point you in a certain direction, but in reality, how many know how to set up LDAP/Kerberos/VPN so that it works?
Re:Skill problems (Score:2)
Acutally, I thought it was pretty clear that the "Open Source Guys" came back with the 3 password VPN thing and thought it was hunky-dory.
Re:Skill problems (Score:2)
If you can do with Windows the same things you can do with Linux, but it requires less specialized knowledge, doesn't that make Windows better?
Of course the Linux community will say no, because the vast majority of the Linux community doesn't believe in software usability. God forbid you suggest that admining a server should be easy. Why, if it was easy, ANYONE could do it! Then how would we charge insane consulting fees? The High Priesthood of Technology must stand!
Ok, sorry
Re:Skill problems (Score:2)
It may be easy to get it "barely working"... but is that really the ideal situation? Without competent staff running them, windows machines deteriorate and collapse pretty quickly, as they become bogged down in crap and infected with malware.
Unix machines if setup competently to start with, will just remain running but they too might benefit from occasional maintenence.
Until systems are easily useable in a safe secure and stable manner, neither situation is suitable for unskilled staff.
Re:Skill problems - blame the custommer (Score:2)
If anyone, you should be blaming the sysadmins for THIER ignorance. Despite that I work and live in a Windows environment, doesn't mean I don't/can't learn about another OS.
I bought an iPod recently and had a great deal of dificulty opperating iTunes. This showed me how used to Windows and/or Linux apps I was. I'm not used to the streamlined interface that App
Using Linux correctly? (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps it's just me, but it seems like these companies weren't applying Linux quite the intended way. Linux isn't a magic plaster you can throw over your IT problems, and frankly, I'm sure it does need a little more maintenance than Windows, but it seems like the people that set these systems up didn't put any thought into their infrastructure.
Storing emails on the desktop isn't a problem that Linux creates. Windows seems more akin to something that says "This is the best way to store emails", whereas Linux is more like "Where do you want to store emails? It's up to you. I can't give you any advice." I'm sure these company's Linux-based experiences would have been much better if they did a bit more planning into the structure of the services in the first place.
Re:Using Linux correctly? (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux should need less maintnence, but it may well need more setup time.
Re:Using Linux correctly? (Score:2)
On servers, both are true from my experience too. But there is a problem with this argument, Microsoft redefined the meaning of "maintence" and "set up". With Windows, "set up" is something you'll surely do every few years, and may do some times between when there is an "emergency". With Linux, all that are "maintance". Some Linux admins count even changing the functions of the servers as "maintance".
Re:Using Linux correctly? (Score:2)
With Linux apps you don't need to resort to an insecure hack like having to in
If you... (Score:5, Insightful)
A simple example would be deciding on your e-mail system. Sounds easy, right? And it is. If you know - in advance - what sort of e-mail system it is you actually want. Just saying "e-mail" doesn't tell you very much. If you need a great deal of power in the mail processing engine, you're probably going to want Sendmail. If you need to blast through vast quantities of e-mail very quickly, Postfix is a better bet. If your company is relying on Exchange services, then you're looking at something like Open Groupware. If you aren't using Exchange clients, but do need similar services, then OpenXchange might do what you want.
That's just for e-mail! Then you have to think about all other intranet services, which have a similar level of flexibility. Internal web services with static web pages will be better off driven by Tux. Java servlets, these days, really mean Apache, as they're the ones mostly working on that capability. Basic scripting with reasonable power and reasonably dynamic content would probably mean Roxen.
If you want virtualization, you've three entire tiers - total machine simulation (vmware), heavyweight containers (xen) and lightweight encapsulation (vservers). If you want to admin the box, do you edit the config files, use Red Hat's scripts, use Linuxconf, or use webmin? And the list of options goes on and on and on.
On the one hand, the choices give an aware user a fantastic level of power and almost superhuman control over their system. On the other hand, it means that you cannot approach this with a turnkey attitude. This should be no great surprise. You can drive a roadcar with a turnkey attitude and expect to get from A to B in one piece. This isn't going to work in a Formula 1 racing car or an X-15 experimental aircraft. Why should it? If you act as though these are all one and the same, your efforts to transfer over WILL fail. This is not a limitation of these vehicles, it is a failure to recognize that simplifications that are true in one case won't hold for the general case.
Let's look at one of the big complaints I've heard for Linux - a lack of wireless card drivers. How many of those who are complaining have actually looked for additional drivers? My guess is that half the complainers have not, and that the majority of those would find that a project just as madwifi would provide the drivers they want. There are a few others listed on the Linux WPA Supplicant [epitest.fi] page. "But we don't want to install 3rd party drivers!" That wasn't the complaint - the complaint was that the drivers didn't exist. If I can find the drivers, and they DO exist, I will have zero sympathy for those who then come up with further excuses - because if the complaint has to change each time it's proven wrong, then all it is IS an excuse.
My guess is that almost every single case of a company "needing" to switch from Linux to Windows will - on closer examination - prove to be a case of nobody bothering to figure out what the company actually wanted, OR nobody bothering to figure out how to get Linux to provide it. There will be VERY few cases - although such cases will happen - where Linux really isn't a good fit, which is a limitation of Linux, but I seriously doubt that more than one in a thousand migrations from Linux to Windows fits into that category.
Re:If you... (Score:2)
In situations where this has been done, it has worked well, and typically unix based systems have been chosen because there is little need fo
Re:Using Linux correctly? (Score:2)
David Braue (Score:5, Insightful)
Forgione's version: The IT staff didn't know how to use Linux. For some reason we didn't think hiring competent staff would be a good idea.
What do you think?
Re:David Braue (Score:3, Informative)
Re:David Braue (Score:2)
You see this attitude on Slashdot frequently where second-rate software is pushed just because it conforms to someone's ideological agenda.
Re:David Braue (Score:3, Informative)
I think a real practical problem for Linux is that competent staff for it is really hard to find in sufficient numbers.
Re:David Braue (Score:3, Informative)
Re:David Braue (Score:3, Insightful)
Additionally, they probably had unrealistic expectations of expertise. Most Linux admins would be willing to lea
Re:David Braue (Score:2)
Exactly. They want someone who will get the job done, which more often than not (6 years of experience here), is
Re:David Braue (Score:2)
Re:David Braue (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a significant part of the 'solution', they seem to say that they didn't have the knowledge inhouse to design an infrastructure that met their increasing demands, and they had 'MS consultants' to turn to for a solution.
I think there might just be to few 'Linux Consultants' that are capable of providing this kind of service, even if the tools might be out there. Pitching them to management in the right way is a skill in itself.
Re:David Braue (Score:1)
Re:David Braue (Score:2)
Some things you simply can't train. The people have to decide to learn for themsemves.
Re:David Braue (Score:2)
Schilling thinly veiled as news from ZDnet?
I am shocked... SHOCKED I tell you!
It was about the applications not the OS (Score:5, Interesting)
Thunderbird is a great email client as is KMail. I use Thunderbird as my email client. What it lacks is the intergration of calendering that Outlook plus exchange offers.
You can talk all you want about how a Calendar should be a stand alone program but Outlook as made the intergration of of the two very useful and in some cases mandatory.
I have looked and looked for a good open source alternative and couldn't find one that was currently complete and worked for both Windows and Linux.
Sharepoint also doesn't have a good open source alternative.
Not every company needs these programs but it seems like a good number do.
Now the other company that complained about needing three passwords for it's vpn? Well they sound like they needed someone that knew how to setup LDAP.
Here would be a great project of an Ubuntu like disto. A small business server that included LDAP for a single sign on, Samba, a Sharepoint like portal, a CRM like Sugar or Tiger, optional VPN, and mail server with calendaring integrated right from the start.
I want one.
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
Have you looked at Evolution (Novell)? I haven't used it myself in many years, and when I did I was at a place (academia) that didn't use (or had much need for) calendaring, but by the look o
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
the rest of your comment is somewhat coherent, but with this bit your true colors are shining through. Mail servers handle mail, period. Exchange may handle/maul mail (relaying for the world + his dog) but it's addition of a calendering feature does not mean that proper mailserver should have one.
That does not fit the unix way: one program does one thing, and makes sure it is very good at it.
Oh, and outlook does not fid your criter
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
My office has dropped outlook except for some of the clerical staff and the owners
I could have said must run under Windows as a requirement. For the most part running under Linux is a given for OSS programs.
As far as the actual structure of the calendaring system I really don't care if it is structurally one program or two. What I do care about
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
Depends on whether you class Exchange as a "mail server", or whether it's a "workflow server". Whether or not you agree with it, having the calendar and mail client integrated brings a lot of benefit, not least of which is the fact that the transport for sending calendar invites (mail) and the method for processing
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/lightnin g /index.html [mozilla.org]
FTS: Lightning is a calendar extension for Mozilla Thunderbird. It offers calendaring features directly in the Thunderbird User Interface. Further integration features, such as e-mail invites or addressbook integration are planned for future releases.
It is easily on its wa
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
I doubt that Outlook will return in force to my company or exchange. I would like some of the functions that they do offer right
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
There are several CalDAV servers available, I don't know how which ones are good and which are bad however. See this article [newsforge.com] for some pointers to server software.
The other
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
as far as i know, kolab server + kmail supposedly provides pretty decent calendaring solution.
then you can go in different direction and functionality with openxchange, evolution etcetc.
somebody suggested lightning - and i am eagerly looking forward to what will become of it, but it really is in very early alpha stage right now (i have tried a couple of recen
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
Re:It was about the applications not the OS (Score:2)
indeed, because even though gradual migration will take longer time and resources, it allows sloppier planning, fsckups are less serious and human factor (resistance mostly) is smaller.
Kolab and kmail are as far as I know Linux only solutions. We are currently stuck using Windows for at least some desktops.
kmail might run on windows with qt/kde 4, but that's a weak consolation
there are connectors for outlook-to-kolab (http://www.kolab.org/kolab [kolab.org]
Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:4, Interesting)
Linux has its advantages. I was able to scale an old Windows 2000 server, Windows NT Server, and a useless company proxy server into a single, consolidated Gentoo System. Does that mean I want to switch everything else, including our accounting databases over to Linux? I couldn't handle the headache. Microsoft's AD is easy to use, we have 2 2003 DC's, including one Terminal server. There is no way I would use something line Wine to get Great Plains working with any sort of consistency. They work reliably as they are now, upgrading to service pack 1 was easy, and managing user accounts is simple (not saying account management in linux isn't).
To the company's that switched from one OS to another, mixed environments are easier, at least for me. Each OS plays an important role, and has advantages/disadvantages. Sure, you had to pay $1,000's to buy Windows software, but you would probably spend that much hiring Linux guys to come in and support your system because there isn't enough expertise to handle these systems. It's a two way street I have found.
Any sort of penetration into
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
Gentoo is great in a production environment: it's stable (unless you ask for non-stable branches) and very, very easy to maintain as well as very fast with security patches.
The downside is that it can be conservative in what it judges to be the "stable release" of packages, so you can trail behind the cutting edge sometimes if you absolutely refuse to have "testing" versions of some packages. But that's a reasonably good thing in a production environment.
TWW
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
What was the software?
TWW
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
That's really strange; sysstat took a grand total of 22 seconds to install for me, including the download, on a 2.26GHz Celeron. Perhaps your portage directory had been damaged in some way?
TWW
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
Debian is a better choice in situations like you describe.
I use a large number of gentoo machines for production purposes (the flexibility of use flags is great) i don't just go installing new apps on a whim, indeed doing so has no place in an enterprise environment. If i want to install any new apps on a server, they have to be thoroughly tested on test systems fir
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
By who and what, if anything, does that buzzword mean?
It is not in any sense. Gentoo has no security patches AT ALL.
I don't know which distro you are thinking of, but it isn't Gentoo.
No system whose behaviour can change from day to day is easy to maintain.
Gentoo changes when you ask it to; if it's changing every day it's because you are changing it every day. Normally, I chanage it after previewing what is new and loo
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
When I have an app the size of Apache installed and the downloads required to fix a security hole total 10K, THAT is a patch. I don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about or why you think there are no patches in Gentoo. Almost all the large apps regularly patch under Gentoo, particularly GNU ones like Emacs.
You have some sort of emotional problem that I'm not qualified to treat so perhap
Re:Why does it have to be either/or? (Score:2)
You are a rare and valuable IT manager. Most IT managers seem to argue the opposite -- they want a monoculture so they only have to learn and manage one thing.
I'd rather work with an IT manager like you any day.
Enterprises? bah (Score:2)
My conclusion: it's all about services (Score:4, Insightful)
The other interesting bit is that a key part of decisions made in all three cases was the available software. The first two companies went with Microsoft because of Sharepoint. The last one stayed with Linux on Sun hardware because of 64bit J2EE.
Sounds like a shill (Score:1)
A revealing number (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:A revealing number (Score:3, Insightful)
Whilst ISPs have been using free software solutions for user management for years, and love it because they can easily integrate any old third party software without coughing up money. You could probably group all the people who deployed such in a small stadium.
Skill in big directory services type skill on Unix/Linux is pretty sparse on the ground. Probably a lot more people like me around who've done integration with relational datab
What I get out of this.. (Score:2)
They have nice weather in Australia right. http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDE00902.loop.shtml [bom.gov.au]
Oh still not too different then FL. Excuse me while I check Monster.com, G'Day
Linux still stuck as a server (Score:2)
Re:Linux still stuck as a server (Score:2, Interesting)
Bad planning and lack of skilled people (Score:2, Insightful)
Interesting notes (Score:4, Interesting)
Having said that, and not begrudging the first two companies for switching in the least, let me point out a few problems I see (based ONLY on the article body) that stood out:
Austereo:
"For example, remote users struggled to grapple with a virtual private network (VPN) login system that required three different passwords to establish a connection"
- I'm curious what VPN solution they were using. I would think that from a pure cost perspective, going with a hardware VPN solution that provided hooks for existing authentication integration would have been a wiser choice.
""We were assured that there were procedures and processes you could follow to recover down to the individual message, but when it came to reality, it was a lengthy process and an absolute nightmare.""
- This is most definately a problem with most entirely opensource solutions. Zimbra has integrated message level restore into its product but having dealt with most open-source imap solutions, I have a feeling the solution had to be developed in house. I know how to read maildir filenames but YOU tell me what the hell email this is:
1145900957.V804I55c4037.mail.servername.com:2,
""Importing our network environment and applications onto a new platform required some fairly specific skills," he adds, "and those skills were not abundant within the group."
- This is the crux of the problem as mentioned earlier. I don't think they had the skillset on hand to manage the infrastructure.
The other problem I see near the end of that page is that they did a full desktop migration to Linux. This was probably the biggest mistake they made.
Coffey:
"The way they set up their Linux-based infrastructure had promoted the silo mentality; information wasn't stored in any sort of intuitive manner, and it wasn't easy to access information across the various geographical areas. If you weren't in the Brisbane office, for example, you couldn't access that information. There was just nothing from the information point of view that was encouraging collaboration."
- Poor design can happen in Windows just as Linux. This isn't a Linux-only problem. Sounds like a lack of planning or initiative to do things right from the start. I understand that business moves fast but you end up shooting yourself in the foot and having to redo things if you don't think about these things up front.
"After four months, Microsoft Active Directory and Exchange Server 2003 had replaced now-discontinued Linux servers to provide a consistently managed, centralised messaging infrastructure across 20 Coffey offices. "Previously, all the e-mails were effectively stored on the desktops and there was no central location of the data," Parsons explains. "That's a nightmare both because of litigation, and because of duplication across the company and all the problems that duplication brings."
- Sounds like someone needs IMAP and not pop3. There are also plenty of turnkey email solutions for litigation archiving as well. Most of these implement a SMTP gateway to your existing system.
""They initially thought Linux was going to be a cheaper platform," he says, "but as soon as they started to expand they became aware that the hidden costs of Linux were all over the place -- not only in real dollar terms, but because they weren't using the environment intelligently because of the [limited] skill sets.""
- Again it looks like another case of lack of skillset available.
Wotif.com:
Nothing specific jumped out at me. One thing I thought was interesting was the amount of planning(!) that went into the switch. I also notice mention of actual vendor support contracts.
"Wotif's strong adherence to plain-vanilla J2EE development"
"Oracle10g Standard Edition"
"We did a very critical pilot for th
There is no this or that (Score:2)
Re:OffTopic (Score:1)
Re:Feeling homesick? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Feeling homesick? (Score:2)
dn,cn, etc...
Uh, I bet it was designed by commity, I have yet to find one clear explanation of this thing.
OTOH, Active Directory is easy to understand and use..
Re:Who owns CNet / ZDNet? (Score:2)
So, who owns CNet? A number of people--it's publically traded--but Shelby Bonnie is probably the main leader, being the cofounder, chairman, and CEO of the company.
Where did you get your information, I wonder?