6 ms·

Most enterprise PCs are Windows machines and integrate with Microsoft services easily. The only way Microsoft is going to lose the enterprise market is if enter

Most enterprise PCs are Windows machines and integrate with Microsoft services easily. The only way Microsoft is going to lose the enterprise market is if enterprise PCs move away from Windows. But, for enterprises, the only reasonable migration away from Windows is Mac. JAMF Pro for Mac can be hosted on-premise on Linux. The majority of enterprise software runs on Mac. However, Macs are expensive so it's unlikely to overtake Windows enterprise machine usage. Hardware support for Linux PCs is poor and lacks the manageable of Windows PCs with Active Directory and GPO, or JAMF for Macs. Enterprise software usually doesn't support Linux. Linux PCs are uncommon for personal use and corporations don't want to train users how to use Linux.

sherr 1y ago
"Hardware support for Linux PCs is poor and lacks the manageable of Windows PCs with Active Directory and GPO, or JAMF for Macs. Enterprise software usually doesn't support Linux. Linux PCs are uncommon for personal use and corporations don't want to train users how to use Linux." I would dispute the "hardware support" comment. Linux has pretty good hardware support nowadays. And "enterprise" software is a vague term here. For desktop Windows, of course Microsoft will have that covered every which way, but for things such as authentication, authorization and security, Linux has a place. A comment about adding "Redhat" to the mix is not talking about desktops (necessarily) but servers and security.
- rahkiin 1y ago
  There are still plenty of issues with bluetooth, batteries, microphones, gpus, touchpads etc when doing a clean install of Ubuntu on any random laptop.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - hollander 1y ago
    Enterprise and government don't use random laptops.
  - pumplekin 1y ago
    True. But larger orgs don't buy "random laptops". The trick is to just buy laptops where you know everything works, and the company making them has a commitment to Linux. Buy your linux laptop fleet from Framework, System76, Starlabs etc and you won't have any problems like that. You might have OTHER problems, but not that one.
    - richardwhiuk 1y ago
      None of those companies have a logistics chain which would at all be suitable for the US federal government. Even in corporate, there's basically two vendors - Dell, and a distant second Lenovo, with Apple having a foothold in niche usecases.
      - bee_rider 1y ago
        You used to be able to buy Dells with Linux pre-installed, quite a while ago. Did they stop?
        richardwhiuk 1y ago
        No, but it's not universal across their range.
        cguess 1y ago
        Any corporation won't care if it comes with Linux pre-installed, as they'll want to image the machines themselves (CrowdStrike for instance).
    - kuhsaft 1y ago
      Do these companies support Net 30/60/90 payment? Do they provide enterprise support? There’s a reason why corporations use HP and Dell machines. And there’s a reason why HP/Dell/etc don’t have Linux OSes on their corporate client machines. Well, they do, but companies don’t care to order them for the other reasons people have listed here.
      - 1y ago
- kuhsaft 1y ago
  > A comment about adding "Redhat" to the mix is not talking about desktops (necessarily) but servers and security. Why would you use RHEL to manage Windows client machines, when you could use Windows Server/Azure and get Microsoft support?
Hobadee 1y ago
Going Mac in an enterprise environment is a stupid move. Apple is constantly changing how MDM works. One week they'll go all-in on some method of doing things, and tell everyone they must comply or GTFO. The next week they'll completely change their minds and gaslight you, saying that old way is stupid and nobody should have ever used it ever. Then they will put in blocks to prevent it from working. This means all the work and tooling that people poured into it are just dead.
- shuckles 1y ago
  Hard to square this with every startup after ~2006 running a substantial, if not majority, Mac fleet. In addition to the major tech companies.
  - mschuster91 1y ago
    Startups rarely use MDM solutions, that's a thing when you hit >> 1000 users because you need dedicated teams to hand-hold the MDM.
    - piva00 1y ago
      I've worked in two 5k-10k companies in the past 10 years with 80+% of MacBooks in the fleet, all managed through MDM and as an end-user I never experienced issues. Unsure how the IT folks felt about it but they managed it pretty well if I didn't experience any problems for so long.
    - wpm 1y ago
      I managed 1000 computers and a few hundred iPads by myself. No team required. HIPAA covered entity.
    - shuckles 1y ago
      Neither of those claims is true in my experience. MDM is par for the course for SOC2, which is increasingly popular these days, and managing MDM seems like one of many responsibilities of ops teams.
- 1y ago
zeta0134 1y ago
This suggests that the main thing Linux needs, for broader enterprise adoption, is a much improved "log into something that quacks like Active Directory" solution. Not actual Active Directory, obviously that just contributes to the lock-in, but what else is even remotely as polished and well integrated? I suspect this is the true moat actually. Nearly every actual business has "log into our company managed authentication system and have our communication and basic productivity apps just work" woven throughout the core of onboarding. Microsoft sure has a lot of warts, but even as a Linux enthusiast, I cannot deny that Outlook "Just Works" with a frankly shocking set of basic stuff. Login for the first time, check your email, hey there's your meeting with your manager on your calendar, and now we can add new events just by putting you in this group, etc etc. There's dozens of little integrations baked in here that a tech enthusiast could feasibly replace in isolation, all of which vanish the moment you turn off the Exchange server or whatever it is. It's way more complex under the hood than most people realize, which is why "ditching Microsoft" so often turns into "Adopting Google Apps", as they have a similar turnkey solution to most of the same problems. Not meaning to be a big ball of negativity, but as I haven't really explored here... in the FOSS space, what is the equivalent? Which tools are the most polished, and what server backends could be hosted on-prem to gain the same basic integrations with login, email, calendar, chat, and video conferencing?
- pjc50 1y ago
  Amen .. and this has been the case for a very long time. I remember transitioning my startup employer to "small business server" (Active Directory+Exchange) over 20 years ago. Why? Email and calendaring, especially - remember this? - Blackberry integration. Everyone above middle-manager level lives in meetings, which means that the calendar is a critical piece of productivity software for them, and they want the comforting familiarity of Outlook. Which means they get to impose that on a whole organization. The company that should be doing this kind of integration is Red Hat, but they've never quite managed it. The open source solution space is probably LDAP and CalDAV, but as you say, nowhere near as conveniently integrated. AD integration and desktop management solutions rule the Windows desktop. But not Macs in an organization, which are an absolute pain to manage, and yet somehow persist. Perhaps it's not enough for there to be a "push" to Open Source because you've been failed by a proprietary solution, there needs to be a "pull".
PeterStuer 1y ago
Apple focussed on consumer and even shunned the enterprise. MS for all its flaws, welcomed, targetted and tried to support scale operations in larger business environments (Imaging, AD, GP, SuS, bitlocker, ...). Also, if your only fix a hardware problem option was to "visit the 'genious bar'" and wait 6 weeks for a machine to come back, vs the Dell/HP/... service of "same day onsite repair", what is IT going to prefer for client computers?
- wpm 1y ago
  Apple has changed their tune, in so far as they probably need some level of identity management on the Mac, crypto-key escrow, restrictions, and so on. Their Device Management framework is quite capable. For large enough businesses Apple will let you do your own self-service repairs too. On-site. Order the part and you're still in warranty.
mr_toad 1y ago
> corporations don't want to train users how to use Linux This is a huge factor. There are a lot of people who’ll curl up into a ball if you try and get them to use something new.
- 0xEF 1y ago
  I'm in the manufacturing sector, on the integration side of things now, but yes, change is always a battle. The way I see it, the problem is two-fold: Side 1: the workers, especially the labor portion, are extremely resistant to learning new ways to do things unless you can prove, beyond the shadow of doubt, that the new way will be easier than the old way (aka, less to remember/think about) but also does not diminish the quality of their work or increase the perception that their coworkers might see them as having it easier than them. Side 2: the people responsible for purchasing and resource allocation often do not know what they are buying. In any shop, if you say "we need new PC's for the office" the first thing the purchaser will do is ask a supplier for a deal on a fleet of Dells because that's just what they've always done. If the company is larger and has an actual IT department, they will just provide Windows PCs because that's what they were trained to support. The alternative, Linux, is never considered because they simply don't know anything about it and it's not being offered by their suppliers anyway, so why learn?
bee_rider 1y ago
> Linux PCs are uncommon for personal use and corporations don't want to train users how to use Linux. I wonder how quickly that’ll change with the generations. The kids these days use Android and iOS, right?

sherr 1y ago

"Hardware support for Linux PCs is poor and lacks the manageable of Windows PCs with Active Directory and GPO, or JAMF for Macs. Enterprise software usually doesn't support Linux. Linux PCs are uncommon for personal use and corporations don't want to train users how to use Linux." I would dispute the "hardware support" comment. Linux has pretty good hardware support nowadays. And "enterprise" software is a vague term here. For desktop Windows, of course Microsoft will have that covered every which way, but for things such as authentication, authorization and security, Linux has a place. A comment about adding "Redhat" to the mix is not talking about desktops (necessarily) but servers and security.

rahkiin 1y ago
There are still plenty of issues with bluetooth, batteries, microphones, gpus, touchpads etc when doing a clean install of Ubuntu on any random laptop.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- hollander 1y ago
  Enterprise and government don't use random laptops.
- pumplekin 1y ago
  True. But larger orgs don't buy "random laptops". The trick is to just buy laptops where you know everything works, and the company making them has a commitment to Linux. Buy your linux laptop fleet from Framework, System76, Starlabs etc and you won't have any problems like that. You might have OTHER problems, but not that one.
  - richardwhiuk 1y ago
    None of those companies have a logistics chain which would at all be suitable for the US federal government. Even in corporate, there's basically two vendors - Dell, and a distant second Lenovo, with Apple having a foothold in niche usecases.
    - bee_rider 1y ago
      You used to be able to buy Dells with Linux pre-installed, quite a while ago. Did they stop?
      - richardwhiuk 1y ago
        No, but it's not universal across their range.
      - cguess 1y ago
        Any corporation won't care if it comes with Linux pre-installed, as they'll want to image the machines themselves (CrowdStrike for instance).
  - kuhsaft 1y ago
    Do these companies support Net 30/60/90 payment? Do they provide enterprise support? There’s a reason why corporations use HP and Dell machines. And there’s a reason why HP/Dell/etc don’t have Linux OSes on their corporate client machines. Well, they do, but companies don’t care to order them for the other reasons people have listed here.
    - 1y ago
kuhsaft 1y ago
> A comment about adding "Redhat" to the mix is not talking about desktops (necessarily) but servers and security. Why would you use RHEL to manage Windows client machines, when you could use Windows Server/Azure and get Microsoft support?

Hobadee 1y ago

Going Mac in an enterprise environment is a stupid move. Apple is constantly changing how MDM works. One week they'll go all-in on some method of doing things, and tell everyone they must comply or GTFO. The next week they'll completely change their minds and gaslight you, saying that old way is stupid and nobody should have ever used it ever. Then they will put in blocks to prevent it from working. This means all the work and tooling that people poured into it are just dead.

shuckles 1y ago
Hard to square this with every startup after ~2006 running a substantial, if not majority, Mac fleet. In addition to the major tech companies.
- mschuster91 1y ago
  Startups rarely use MDM solutions, that's a thing when you hit >> 1000 users because you need dedicated teams to hand-hold the MDM.
  - piva00 1y ago
    I've worked in two 5k-10k companies in the past 10 years with 80+% of MacBooks in the fleet, all managed through MDM and as an end-user I never experienced issues. Unsure how the IT folks felt about it but they managed it pretty well if I didn't experience any problems for so long.
  - wpm 1y ago
    I managed 1000 computers and a few hundred iPads by myself. No team required. HIPAA covered entity.
  - shuckles 1y ago
    Neither of those claims is true in my experience. MDM is par for the course for SOC2, which is increasingly popular these days, and managing MDM seems like one of many responsibilities of ops teams.
1y ago

zeta0134 1y ago

This suggests that the main thing Linux needs, for broader enterprise adoption, is a much improved "log into something that quacks like Active Directory" solution. Not actual Active Directory, obviously that just contributes to the lock-in, but what else is even remotely as polished and well integrated? I suspect this is the true moat actually. Nearly every actual business has "log into our company managed authentication system and have our communication and basic productivity apps just work" woven throughout the core of onboarding. Microsoft sure has a lot of warts, but even as a Linux enthusiast, I cannot deny that Outlook "Just Works" with a frankly shocking set of basic stuff. Login for the first time, check your email, hey there's your meeting with your manager on your calendar, and now we can add new events just by putting you in this group, etc etc. There's dozens of little integrations baked in here that a tech enthusiast could feasibly replace in isolation, all of which vanish the moment you turn off the Exchange server or whatever it is. It's way more complex under the hood than most people realize, which is why "ditching Microsoft" so often turns into "Adopting Google Apps", as they have a similar turnkey solution to most of the same problems. Not meaning to be a big ball of negativity, but as I haven't really explored here... in the FOSS space, what is the equivalent? Which tools are the most polished, and what server backends could be hosted on-prem to gain the same basic integrations with login, email, calendar, chat, and video conferencing?

pjc50 1y ago
Amen .. and this has been the case for a very long time. I remember transitioning my startup employer to "small business server" (Active Directory+Exchange) over 20 years ago. Why? Email and calendaring, especially - remember this? - Blackberry integration. Everyone above middle-manager level lives in meetings, which means that the calendar is a critical piece of productivity software for them, and they want the comforting familiarity of Outlook. Which means they get to impose that on a whole organization. The company that should be doing this kind of integration is Red Hat, but they've never quite managed it. The open source solution space is probably LDAP and CalDAV, but as you say, nowhere near as conveniently integrated. AD integration and desktop management solutions rule the Windows desktop. But not Macs in an organization, which are an absolute pain to manage, and yet somehow persist. Perhaps it's not enough for there to be a "push" to Open Source because you've been failed by a proprietary solution, there needs to be a "pull".

PeterStuer 1y ago

Apple focussed on consumer and even shunned the enterprise. MS for all its flaws, welcomed, targetted and tried to support scale operations in larger business environments (Imaging, AD, GP, SuS, bitlocker, ...). Also, if your only fix a hardware problem option was to "visit the 'genious bar'" and wait 6 weeks for a machine to come back, vs the Dell/HP/... service of "same day onsite repair", what is IT going to prefer for client computers?

wpm 1y ago
Apple has changed their tune, in so far as they probably need some level of identity management on the Mac, crypto-key escrow, restrictions, and so on. Their Device Management framework is quite capable. For large enough businesses Apple will let you do your own self-service repairs too. On-site. Order the part and you're still in warranty.

mr_toad 1y ago

> corporations don't want to train users how to use Linux This is a huge factor. There are a lot of people who’ll curl up into a ball if you try and get them to use something new.

0xEF 1y ago
I'm in the manufacturing sector, on the integration side of things now, but yes, change is always a battle. The way I see it, the problem is two-fold: Side 1: the workers, especially the labor portion, are extremely resistant to learning new ways to do things unless you can prove, beyond the shadow of doubt, that the new way will be easier than the old way (aka, less to remember/think about) but also does not diminish the quality of their work or increase the perception that their coworkers might see them as having it easier than them. Side 2: the people responsible for purchasing and resource allocation often do not know what they are buying. In any shop, if you say "we need new PC's for the office" the first thing the purchaser will do is ask a supplier for a deal on a fleet of Dells because that's just what they've always done. If the company is larger and has an actual IT department, they will just provide Windows PCs because that's what they were trained to support. The alternative, Linux, is never considered because they simply don't know anything about it and it's not being offered by their suppliers anyway, so why learn?

bee_rider 1y ago

> Linux PCs are uncommon for personal use and corporations don't want to train users how to use Linux. I wonder how quickly that’ll change with the generations. The kids these days use Android and iOS, right?