×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
Joe Pluta wrote:
Anyway, first off, why (for pure business reasons) switch to Linux
desktops? Hardware costs? Software costs? What? ("Bill Gates is the
Antichrist" is not an acceptable reason.)
How about the business reason Joel mentioned: "If we wanted something
installed we just did it once, like James is saying: maintenance is a
snap." There are plenty of reasons, some which might even make sense
for your business. Another one which I think is pretty strong is that
you don't need so many computers, either on the server side or for the
users. There are many reports with specific numbers (one of them is
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=60000251 (windows costs) and
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=60000252 (unix costs). The
entire very informative article is
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=60000248). In fact, the users
don't need a computer at all, just a display. That display has all the
capabilities of the server but none of the maintenance, cost, or worry.
So for a company with 100 users you just saved buying 100 PCs and
their associated software, maintenance, and upgrade costs. You do have
to buy 100 displays, but you don't have to buy software for them, admin
them beyond the initial config, and the maintenance is extremely low
(same as a dumb terminal).
As for the server side, I understand that you need (or at least you did
back when NT was MS' main server product) a PDC and a BDC for every
30-50 users. That is a joke in unix-land. One server can handle
hundreds to thousands of users.
Many of the business reasons for linux follow those for the iSeries.
Second, IE is still functionally different from Mozilla as far as the
DOM is concerned (for example, changing events). Is it a sound business
idea to lock into a browser architecture that is different than some 94%
of the world?
Note: the differences between Mozilla and IE only show up in advanced
JSP techniques, but those are starting to creep into our applications.
Neat things like DHTML are becoming more prevalent, and without a robust
DOM implementation, there are things you can't do. So does it make
business sense to move to Linux and basically remove those capabilities
from your users and your applications?
I think the view of "IE vs. Mozilla" is the wrong way to look at things.
The correct way is "IE vs. web standards". Do you want your product
to be a Microsoft-only product? If so, why bother using a web browser?
Web browser aren't particularly good interfaces for most things (but
they are great for web browsing!).
Many people complain that they have to have MS windows to run their
iSeries. If your company's product only works in IE, wouldn't those
same complaints be directed at you?
By coding to web standards, have you removed functionality? No. But IE
may not comply with those standards. There are browsers that do and are
available for multiple platforms and are often free and free of charge.
Would it be a burden to either bundle those browsers with your product
or provide a link to them? You can even customize those browsers to
better suit the way your product works. And those browsers don't have
the security problems of IE. Do you believe your customers would find
this problematic? Mine do not.
James Rich
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.