4 ms·

I think the challenge in all this is the office suite and stable/native device drivers. Firstly, the "Deciders" in the medium and large enterprises most often

I think the challenge in all this is the office suite and stable/native device drivers. Firstly, the "Deciders" in the medium and large enterprises most often simply go with Microsoft's Office products. Regardless if libreoffice (and similar open source office suite offerings) provide the same functionality, these Deciders are already won over; so they simply "go with the flow". In order for there to be some sort of universal linux, there has to be an easy way to run Microsoft's Office products. That takes care of a huge number of typical office worker use-cases. (I'm leaving out surfing on the web, because that is already proven on any linux machine.) Secondly, there is a need for native device drivers. If the Deciders can choose computers for their office workers that "just work", then their choice is easier. For this, computer manufacturers have to really help in crafting native device drivers that support linux. I firmly believe that once the above 2 conditions are attended to, linux will then become something the Deciders can consider for the enterprise...then - with that many large numbers of users around the world - linux will have its day on the desktop.

awucs 8y ago
I know this is sort of the commonly held belief, but I disagree. The problem is that the things you mention are primarily things that makes Linux useful for people who are already using it. For everyone else they would just use Windows if that is what they need. That said most businesses don't care about those things either. They will happily use some old version of Internet Explore (in some weird mode no less) and force as many as possible to use Office 365. On top of that a lot of companies have all sort of esoteric solutions for machines sharing, authentication and storage. There have been plenty of efforts to "streamline" Linux for different platforms, with different applications and modern user interface. There just that most things, including the ecosystem, beyond that are lacking.
jwilcoxson 8y ago
The first Decider to switch a medium+ business to Linux is going to get his/her ass fired.
bunderbunder 8y ago
I think you've got a critical detail wrong here: You're attributing way too much deciding power to the "decider". The head of IT (or whoever) is not someone who gets to just make decisions by fiat. It's someone whose job is fundamentally to respond to the needs and demands of others. Until a significant number of the staff start demanding a Linux desktop environment, a Linux desktop environment is not realistically an option for the "decider". Not if they want to keep their job, anyway. And, when it comes to the non-techie business members, I just don't see Linux having anything to attract them. What can it do better than Windows, from the perspective of Bob from accounting? Not abstract political stuff, mind -- he's just interested in being able to get his job done more easily so he can go home at 5 and kick a ball around with his kid before dinner.

awucs 8y ago

I know this is sort of the commonly held belief, but I disagree. The problem is that the things you mention are primarily things that makes Linux useful for people who are already using it. For everyone else they would just use Windows if that is what they need. That said most businesses don't care about those things either. They will happily use some old version of Internet Explore (in some weird mode no less) and force as many as possible to use Office 365. On top of that a lot of companies have all sort of esoteric solutions for machines sharing, authentication and storage. There have been plenty of efforts to "streamline" Linux for different platforms, with different applications and modern user interface. There just that most things, including the ecosystem, beyond that are lacking.

jwilcoxson 8y ago

The first Decider to switch a medium+ business to Linux is going to get his/her ass fired.

bunderbunder 8y ago

I think you've got a critical detail wrong here: You're attributing way too much deciding power to the "decider". The head of IT (or whoever) is not someone who gets to just make decisions by fiat. It's someone whose job is fundamentally to respond to the needs and demands of others. Until a significant number of the staff start demanding a Linux desktop environment, a Linux desktop environment is not realistically an option for the "decider". Not if they want to keep their job, anyway. And, when it comes to the non-techie business members, I just don't see Linux having anything to attract them. What can it do better than Windows, from the perspective of Bob from accounting? Not abstract political stuff, mind -- he's just interested in being able to get his job done more easily so he can go home at 5 and kick a ball around with his kid before dinner.