I think that in today’s corporate world there needs to be a mix of OS’s that provide the best capabilities  available.  One cannot be tied into a single OS to do all the work because there are strengths and weaknesses in all of them.  When it comes to desktops I think that Linux is a good choice because pretty much any major distribution is stable enough.  When it comes to the server environment, everyone keeps talking about how the desktop distros will support Exchange, so you will probably still have some Windows servers somewhere in your environment.  Other servers may be a combination of Windows and Linux.

What I think is being overlooked is when you’re trying to manage hundreds of desktops spread across several buildings it is imperative to have a centralized management solution, whether it is for Windows or Linux.  This is where VMWare is a good choice.  Using a small number of desktop images that are built and tested to make sure they are working as a base to serve a Virtual Desktop Infrastructure would work well and need a very small desktop machine to function.  Also, you could use a PXE server to provide a similar type of solution but would need a more robust desktop machine.

I think what I am trying to say is no matter what you do and the mix of OS’s that you use, the expense in a computer environment is not is the purchase of the equipment, software or implementation, it is the cost of the ongoing support, maintenance and operations (power cost, addition of desktops, replacement/repair of desktops, etc…) of the equipment.  Implementing one solution over another on the front-end can cost huge amounts of money on the backend.  Make sure that you are not blinded about the end cost by the lower dollar amounts on the front end.

Phil

From: kclug-bounces@kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Watts
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:40 PM
To: Arthur Pemberton
Cc: KCLUG
Subject: Re: Conversion to Linux

I think we can both completely agree on that.  It would be nice if they could find a way to have a "smaller" product for small businesses that was in between.  I find myself advocating RHEL on core servers, Fedora on everything else too often.

Jeffrey.

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@gmail.com> wrote:

It's a fair opinion. And I agree with it overall, even the "taking
dollars away from Red Hat" as that is more or less a fact.

However RedHat's pricing, while fair, is beyond the reach of some. It
would be good to see them provide a cheaper version with less/lower
priority support. Doing so would probably get them a piece of Centos'
pie as well.

--

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine