On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, at 4:37pm, Martha Jo McCarthy wrote: > There is no sales dept at Union which makes things easier. We need AS/400 > connectivity which looks like we are able to tweak out with tn5250. We > have several Access databases that we will convert to PostgreSQL. A Samba > file server will replace the NT server.
That sounds like a very workable solution. PostgreSQL with a web-based interface is more work than an MS-Access database, but it is *much* more reliable and scalable, and the ability to access the web-based UI from any browser quickly becomes a "I can't believe I ever lived without this" feature. > The biggest concern of the descision makers is making the switch on the > desktops. We have customer service, billing, and techs. Do you have software products you have committed yourself to, either in existing/legacy usage, or as a future destination? That is the big factor. If you have an application that only runs on MS-Windows (or NetWare, or OS/400, or Solaris, or whatever), then the platform will likely follow the solution, and not the other way around. Otherwise, if you are open to solutions to your requirements, you will likely find Linux does the job well. > Remote access is important too. Linux does well at remote access. In a pure Linux environment, OpenSSH and FreeS/WAN (IPsec) fit like a glove. In a mixed-OS environment, the fit isn't quite as smooth, but it still works well. > What the execs want are concrete examples of what is and isnt working with > other companies. We have deployed Linux extensively in server roles. Applications have included file and printer sharing, firewall/router, email, remote access/VPN, web proxy/cache, web server, backups, and heavy computation work. The cost savings are fantastic -- no license fees, problems are few (lowers administration costs), and when you do have problems, they are easier to find and fix than with commercial software. It is easier to secure than most commercial software, and update management and verification is a dream compared to MS-Windows or NetWare. We use Linux internally on the desktop, interoperating well with MS-Windows desktops. StarOffice provides similar features, bloat, and bugs compared to MS-Office, but without the huge price tag. Win4Lin and Wine solve our legacy application requirements. The only thing we haven't found is an MS-Access work-a-like. (I am open to suggestions.) On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, at 9:45am, Martha Jo McCarthy wrote: > It's clear to me that converting to linux does not need to be (and > probably shouldn't be) an all or nothing thing. *ding ding ding ding* Give the lady a prize! ;-) A lot of people approach new software with an "all or nothing" mindset (probably because so many commercial software vendors force things to be that way). But that is not the correct approach to take. One of the most refreshing things about Linux is that Linux gives you *choice*. Free Software is about *Freedom*. You do not have to upgrade every time your software vendor obsoletes the version you are running. You do not have to buy into your OS vendor's complete product line. You can mix and match, compare alternatives, and pick the right tools for the job. Prefer MS-Windows for application servers, NetWare for directory services, Macintosh for desktop publishing, and AIX for legacy application hosting? Not a problem. Linux can speak the native tongue of every one. Interoperability is outstanding. Linux plays nice with others. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ***************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *****************************************************************
