Subject: RE: Getting Linux into schools
From: stephen king (sking@chartercollege.edu)
Date: Wed May 08 2002 - 10:02:24 AKDT
<snip>
If someone came into your place of business and offered to replace the
OS on your computers with a system you knew nothing about would you go
for it :)
</snip>
That, actually, is a pretty major point. To get Linux into any major
Microsoft-based network requires going head-to-head with the Microsoft sales
pitches, which are incredibly effective and are also present throughout the
Microsoft Official Curriculum that many networkers have had. There are
basically two major arguments you've gotta get over:
1. Microsoft's new buzzword is "Total Cost of Ownership". Yes, you can
save significant money in licensing fees by switching to Linux, but those
fees are a rapidly-diminishing part of an IT Manager's budget as the
supported network grows larger. Basically...if you can save me 25% of 10%
of my budget...that's only 2.5% overall. What costs IT departments far more
money is recruiting, training, and retaining quality people, and there's
where arguments could be made either direction. What a Microsoft shop
manager is gonna be thinking, though, is that if you replace his Network OS
that he and his people understand reasonably well with one that has a 6 to
12-month learning curve, where's the benefit? How much
fishing/golfing/other-weekend-activities time does he/she lose out on in the
transition? Are his/her kids gonna forget his/her name once and for all?
Once he/she gets a new Network OS...are all the apps they have running on
the Microsoft platform still going to work? Since the answer is 'probably
not', is there comparable stuff with the new OS? Linux has a solution
there, but you've just added a new learning curve for EACH app.
2. Once you convince the manager that he/she needs to move over to a Linux
platform of some type, you get to deal with migration issues. Do you just
shut down all the Microsoft servers and restart them with a Red Hat CD in
them one weekend? No Sysadmin in his right mind is going to do that.
Phase-in with parallel platforms? Now you're talking a significant amount
more money up front, plus the fact that you've just doubled the total number
of apps his/her technicians have to support. Keep in mind, here, that apps
on large networks typically number not in the singles or the tens, but in
the hundreds, and a large majority of our time is spent with "How do I get
the Paperclip to come back to my Word?" types of questions.
Now, I'm not saying it's a not a good idea to run a Linux network. I am
saying, however, that there are some pretty complex issues when you look at
an existing network and suggest a move to something else. Typically, the
only reason to migrate a large network to something new is that what you
have is too painful to continue maintaining. Licensing fees, frankly, just
aren't that painful.
As always, IMHO--
Stephen
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Wed May 08 2002 - 10:01:41 AKDT