[Linux-aus] Why Linux is not ready for business

[Steve Walsh]

>>   
> I reckon this is actually a fallacy.  Sure, you can pick up a Windows
> tech on any street corner, and you can probably find them with an MCSE
> to boot.  But do they have any actual experience?  Are they going to
> know about good security paradigms such as privilege separation and good
> firewalling?  What about getting software and computers on a network
> talking to eachother?  Do they have any experience with your other
> business software?  I'd say chances of a lot of those things being true
> of most of your 'street corner techs' is pretty low.  I reckon "I can
> pick up a windows tech on any street corner" probably means "My
> brother's oldest knows a bit about Windows, and e sounded really
> enthusiastic when I offered em the job..." more often than is good for
> the industry.

Let's face it, networking and share-based security in windows is hardly 
difficult, look at the number of 12 and 13 yo's at School Holiday LAN comps who 
can get their machines running on the network and sharing MP3's with their 
mates, videos with others, and keep their pr0n stash secure in less time that it 
take to compile a kernel on a P2/350. Linux users aren't the only people who 
tinker with the OS when they want to do something different. It's just a little 
harder to add extras into that particular kernel. Yes, we have to worry about 
the 25-30 yo's who came in with win95 networking, and take the "shotgun" 
approach to networking, but the generations coming up now have a lot more nonce 
than the people do now.

Don't discount the kids coming out of College's with MCSE's, CCNA's and the 
like. For a lot of them, getting the letters is only part of it, making the 
qualification part of their year 12 certificate means they have to know more 
than the theory, and a lot of them are seeking outside work to get that knowledge.

> 
> In my experience, good Windows techs cost just as much as good Unix
> techs.  But often Windows techs, like their software, come bundled with
> a lot of established opinions and special deals on what software you
> should buy - i.e. Microsoft.  Often they don't evaluate software well
> because they're (perhaps unconsciously) siding toward what they know. 

Ever built a SOE for a windows environment? Did you get to pick what was in it, 
or was it dictated by the business need and knowledge within the department? 
More often than not (and I know this, my current contract is all about building 
a windows SOE when I'm not playing with their linux infrastructure) the Managers 
dictate the SOE components and the tech makes it work together.

> This is not a problem in most cases, except with Microsoft we know that
> the software costs a lot more than equivalent FOS Software; so by
> getting a Windows-only tech you're more likely to be spending more money
> on Microsoft software in the future.  While I see one of the faults that
> the FOSS mindset brings is 'Freedom or death' bigotry - i.e. they would
> refuse to use for-money software (e.g. SAP) even where no real
> equivalent free software exists - I think most of us are pragmatists and
> heterogeneous free and non-free software environments are the business
> reality that most of us would accept.

It comes (yet again) to the managers. Management know windows, so they dictate. 
They don't know linux, so they leave it to those that do. Top down changes are a 
metric crapload easier than a bottom-up change.

> 
> Funnily enough, I hear today that the Commonwealth Government is hiring
> senior IT techs from the UK because they can't get them here.  So the
> 'one on every street corner' idea doesn't really hold much water.

That's a bit like saying "I can't find a decent doctor in this list of 
shepherds, we're going to have to close this clinic". Of course you won't find 
decent senior IT People in windows techs, you need someone with management skill 
(Business not System). The big reason they're snarfing people from the UK is 
because the ITIL certification is near mandatory over there (mainly cause the 
BCS fully endorses it, whereas the ACS chooses to ignore it), and from my own 
experiences (I've got both foundation and practitioner certs) you can easily 
renegotiate another $5-$10k onto your salary if you've got that.
steve