Read two new articles on Desktop Linux:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/06/li...ktop_resellers/

http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reports/5381/1/?

IMHO, if Linux will suceed as a popular desktop OS, it needs to move into the office spaces first. It is harder to convince a home user to use it, because of software compatibility, dirver support and a more difficult install process.

In an office environment, with a limited software suit being needed by the user and techs available to install and upgrade these should be less of a drawback.

swings and roundabouts...
Ms is popular becuase its what people know.

companies use it cos its familiar and FREE training as it were.

and its not that hard to install .... is it ?? my MDK 10CE was simple (except I had to write a CD 2..... from a DVD and ... OK)
but most Winblows users get it installed too.

perhaps what we need is more preinstalled (aRTee is a big proponent) and also people to install and support (like MUB)

Then perhaps when many people complain that the machine at work is unstable and BSOD's etc and their linux macihne at home doesnt ?????

Heh. My machine at work (NT 4.0) crashed at startup this morning. Sort of like a BSOD. 'Missing dll, could not find winsrv' or something like that. It has been in reparation for the entire day already.

Sure wish I had a Linux box, since firstly it wouldn't crash and secondly I wouldn't have to miss it all day long.

I work in the UK for a major international mining/quarrying company - they are offering 'rewards' (cold hard cash) for people submitting ideas to improve business/safety/corporate image/save money. I had pondered the idea of suggesting a change to Linux.
Corporate hardware varies : my work pc: Deskpro p3 700/128/10Gb/internal video/HP printer ... running Win2000/Office 2000/Apollo/Gradlab (database system)...basic e-mail - few machines require much more, though sales folks use laptops (not sure of make/spec)

I made a basic list of Linux advantages: stability/virus resistance/COST££££/ reasonable compatability with existing historic documentation etc, though that is obviously offset against training of staff, maybe some hardware replacements?

Anything anyone can throw in my direction to throw in their direction would be helpful - reasoned arguments/examples of successful business changes... i have read myself of the changes occuring in Asia and such.. but all information is helpful

obviously should i make my fortune from this then i'll e-mail all contributors a picture of my money. Or invite you round for a beer.

Is it an Austrailian co. ??
Seriously you can list all you like but also turn it on the head.
Expect a lot of opposition from the IT people...

for instance you probably have a TEAM just doing virus updates and they wont be required ... the trick isd often to suggest what else thwey might be able to do.

What doc do you swap and with who ? etc. DSO you need to sunmit official docs in certain formats (like to DTI)

IS the DTI supporting more open formats (answer is yes but they are too stupid to do it properly) etc,

Id keep the direct justification stuff fairly short since its 'obvious' linux is more stable, virus free etc. and instead say what advantages this has.

I read a really good article by some American guitar string manufacturer on why the CEO switched the whole company.

We mentioned it on this thread.... anyone else remember.

Earnie Ball?

Yep thats the guy.

Good strings.

I think the "Linux on desktop" issue is not an economic or technical issue for "users". As long as Linux misses plain, regular, everyday mission critical apps like accounting, payroll, and the zillions vertical apps needed by enterprises (from soho to Fortune 500), Linux will stay on the server/backbone/hidden (but essential) services side.

I may have "convinced" many Windows users that Linux is better for all the reasons WE know. But what can you answer to the SoHo boss asking "Well, find me an accounting/payroll package for my business branch, for less then 300 €, service contract included, and I'll switch my desktop(s) to Linux on the spot" ? That's actually what he has, and he's happy with it. Why should he change ? Users don't think about an OS when choosing a platform (well, sometimes they even don't realize there's an alternative to Windows). The most important thing is THE application solving THEIR problem.

Software houses delivering such apps and services have a much more strategic role to play in this desktop switch than we really want to admit. I'm talking about shrink-wrapped, off-the-shelve apps, representing 90% of the vertical apps market (at least for soho & mid-size enterprises).

This Linux professionnal applications catalog is ridiculous compared with Windows. And when there are some vertical apps available, the quality (ergonomy, stability, service) is far below what is acceptable for "regular users" who don't give a damn about technology & ethics.

It's not Linux and the free software community fault. Actually, its' nobody's fault. The problem is in the "desktop market structuration", still in its infancy. In a sense, Bill G. was right with his "the desktop is the center of IT" strategy.

I guess the challenge is not to transform the free software developers community in a giant vertical apps software house, but to convince software houses to approach a new market with new solutions and a new economic model. But it's pretty hard for a software house used to deliver Windows vertical apps to approach the Linux market. Earning money in the Linux desktop business is not as easy as it is with Windows...

My 2 cents....

I agree with Pierre Baco. Sorry, my text is quite long, but I think these things are worth mentioning. Okay, my contribution...3 cents...

It's sad to say, but when a company is looking for a IT solutions, they will find out that there are much more companies offering Windows-based solutions than Linux-solutions. And solution - I mean a complete package, everyday business tools and support for them and so on. There aren't many companies willing to be "on edge" just for a fun. They want to be sure that there's enough comptetition and solutions repertuare between solution makers. If you hang yourself with a certain solution maker, and it collapses - shit happens. Companies want to be sure that their systems are working and somebody's supporting them - or at least there's a guy answering their phone calls, who is tossing dart to board while guessing what's wrong with a mouse...

No miracle, that Windows is still a market leader. We should remember, that during these years IT solutions have been somewhat buggy. Ironically, Windows was/is buggy, but now some improvement is made lately. In bigger firms, there are legacy systems, ERPs, EAIs and so on. Bubble gum is still a bit wet, but if it isn't broken, why fix it? If they would change their systems, firms should also re-educate their staff, and also IT experts should acquire Linux knowledge. But nope, as long they are not forced to make a change, they'll stick with Windows. And I understand them: they are afraid of their workplaces and also they lose their expert position in company. And IT hurts!

Linux would need some major solution makers to back it. I guess IBM is on a way to do this, and in Finland some Finnish solution makers are now offering Linux solutions. But who would push a snowball down the slope? One bigger company willing to take a risk (change is always a risk) and reporting for example lower IT expenses: then we are talking a real probability, that Linux would really go forward. Money makes companies move, not ideologies.

But if western companies aren't willing to choose Linux, new companies in China and India, for example, have no "legacy burdens", so they are free to make choices. And I'm pretty sure that they will choose Linux. And maybe those future nokias will be the driving force when wearing Tux in black suit. Somebody Finnish researcher said, that "open source will be the greatest gift ever from western world to developing nations". I agree with him.

Well.. I think we just need to be more creative on how to introduce Linux to desktop computer users.. For example...

I was browsing through my local library's online catalog the other day and I thought to myself:

"There are plenty of books on Linux available to checkout and one or two even come with very old versions of RedHat CD-ROMs, well why don't they have Linux distro CDs to check out?"

What if people were to donate to their local libraries Linux distros on CDrs (the distros that are given freely from the authors of said distros and give you permission freely distribute them) so there would be a source of Linux distros freely available for checkout at local libraries? True people can get the free Linux distros via the net, but some people don't know enough about Linux or how to burn ISOs, etc. and this would be an easy way to spread the word about Linux, bringing it into more homes at local levels.

I know I thought it was cool when I checked out one book about Linux at a library and it had a RedHat CD inside (only one cd and it was a VERY old version) but I can only imagine what some people would think of Linux if they checked such a thing out, decided to install an ancient version, become frustrated, and think that's the way all Linux versions/distros are!

If this is possible, what do people think about this idea?

To add to this idea on getting Linux on the desktop, there are many more ideas that are possible. If you work directly with the public, how about talking the idea over with your boss about you giving away free copies of a Linux distro to the customers? Offering some on a desk or end of a checkout or if you work somewhere where you bag items customers buy, dropping one CD into each person's bag?

What about organizing a free Linux distro CD giveaway 1 per person in front of a popular local building? Get permissionf from the owners first and then setup a cool looking display and pass the CDs out!

There are TONS of ideas. The problem is that when ideas such as this are posted, many people reply with their reasons why idea X,Y,Z, WON'T work instead of trying it or mentioning it to others who WOULD try such an idea. The glass is half full people, let's discuss it that way, with a positive vibe!

Popular commercial operating system(s) have money to back their product and promote it. While not an operating system, look how AOL got so well known with the mailing of CDs tactic. While that's crossing the line IMO to spam-by-mail territory, think of the ways people at a grassroots level could do things. You don't HAVE to go as far as to arrange an install fest (though that's cool to do) simply giving the CDs away, being PRESENT IN PUBLIC with LINUX related information, pictures, and freebies is what is going to work to get the word out. If every Linux user dedicated a small portion of their time to any number of the above ideas or similar, think of how even more well known Linux would be.

If you reply to this, please be positive. No negative replies on "why idea X,Y,Z, wouldn't or won't work" I like positive posts!

Just skipping .... unfortunately Pierre and Heurzo have it right.

Over the years company culture has been moulded No longer can we jst switch OS becuase it impacts not only the OS and office apps but payroll programmes etc.

Ive seen companies so deep in excel macro's and linked sheets theyre waiting to fall apart and these macros etc are linked to databases which go to report writing software and ultimatly print the labels on ythe pay packets.

Although 90% of the work of the company ca go with linux the remaining 10% can't. And still we get to formats. There are standards for accounting packages etc.

someone in the company will find a reason to object becuase like Heurzo says their personal job is on the line.