3 ms·

It's fascinating to watch people totally underestimate the lock Microsoft has on the corporate computing environment. This article suggests that it would be ea

by drblast 14y ago

It's fascinating to watch people totally underestimate the lock Microsoft has on the corporate computing environment. This article suggests that it would be easier to break into the business/enterprise desktop than it would be to sell to consumers. It's probably just about the opposite. Linux is many years away from the level of plug-it-in-and-forget-it integration that Windows has. Linux is light years away from having anything resembling Active Directory in quality. And like it or not, the corporate world lives and dies by Office. I'd say if you want to make progress, the consumer space is the only possible bet, and it won't be on desktop computers but on tablets and embedded devices which, for the most part, will replace people's keyboard and monitor machines at home. But not in the office.

eckyptang 14y ago
+1 I don't think there is a proposition as powerful as the entire Microsoft ecosystem on the business desktop. There is also support, training, excellent literature and documentation, large quantities of staff, functional software at a reasonable price and as you mention: Active directory (which is awesome if you actually understand it). If you've seen some of the shit I've seen wired up to Office in the last few years, you'll get it. It's just awesome. Entire businesses hang of it. It might not be clean and squeaky but it's functional and does the job. Google Docs + iWork + LibreOffice are precisely zero competition. (I have to add this to each of these posts to avoid the shill downvotes: I am primarily a Linux user which suits me but I don't think it'd suit most people).
hollerith 14y ago
You make some valid points, but you try to push your thesis too far. >the consumer space is the only possible bet Below is a link to a discussion we had here 2 weeks ago about Ubuntu at Google. Although engineers at Google can choose a different one, Ubuntu is the desktop OS with the most support from Google's "IT department". In contrast, Windows is the only choice that requires some sort of approval from management. Also, although it is a paying customer for Canonical's Ubuntu Advantage support program, Google is not even Canonical's largest business desktop customer. As long as we do not have unrealistic aspirations of completely replacing Windows in the enterprise, why not try to expand on the presence desktop Linux already has there? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4452005 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4452005
brdrak 14y ago
> Linux is light years away from having anything resembling Active Directory in quality. I'm assuming you've setup OpenLDAP and one of open Kerberos implementations (e.g. MIT) and have found them lacking in some way compared with AD. If so, could you expand on where they were lacking in quality? I have used both and find open alternatives much easier to extend, and not any harder to setup. Here's an interesting read that argues the opposite of your point: ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/LDAP/Adam-Eval1-0.pdf

by drblast 14y ago

eckyptang 14y ago

+1 I don't think there is a proposition as powerful as the entire Microsoft ecosystem on the business desktop. There is also support, training, excellent literature and documentation, large quantities of staff, functional software at a reasonable price and as you mention: Active directory (which is awesome if you actually understand it). If you've seen some of the shit I've seen wired up to Office in the last few years, you'll get it. It's just awesome. Entire businesses hang of it. It might not be clean and squeaky but it's functional and does the job. Google Docs + iWork + LibreOffice are precisely zero competition. (I have to add this to each of these posts to avoid the shill downvotes: I am primarily a Linux user which suits me but I don't think it'd suit most people).

hollerith 14y ago

You make some valid points, but you try to push your thesis too far. >the consumer space is the only possible bet Below is a link to a discussion we had here 2 weeks ago about Ubuntu at Google. Although engineers at Google can choose a different one, Ubuntu is the desktop OS with the most support from Google's "IT department". In contrast, Windows is the only choice that requires some sort of approval from management. Also, although it is a paying customer for Canonical's Ubuntu Advantage support program, Google is not even Canonical's largest business desktop customer. As long as we do not have unrealistic aspirations of completely replacing Windows in the enterprise, why not try to expand on the presence desktop Linux already has there? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4452005 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4452005

brdrak 14y ago

> Linux is light years away from having anything resembling Active Directory in quality. I'm assuming you've setup OpenLDAP and one of open Kerberos implementations (e.g. MIT) and have found them lacking in some way compared with AD. If so, could you expand on where they were lacking in quality? I have used both and find open alternatives much easier to extend, and not any harder to setup. Here's an interesting read that argues the opposite of your point: ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/LDAP/Adam-Eval1-0.pdf