|
***Warning***
This is a reply to a thread that is many months
old. I found it accidentally on a rarely used desktop, and completed
writing it. Since I think it's important, I'm clicking send even if the
thread is old. The preceeding message is at the bottom for
reference.
***End Warning***
Some do think like that.
/. had a link to an Internal MS report on the
Hotmail conversion from *nix to Windows. It was interesting. I
wonder how this report affected the author's career, but the report
was brutally honest. One of the suggestions was to "eat their own dog
food", a quote I remember Novell using when Netware 5 first came out. 4.0
was a disaster, and they promised that 5 wouldn't go gold until it was running
on something like 85% of their internal servers at Novell.
Needless to say, when 5 came out, it worked very
well.
Linux needs to be sold like that. For now,
there should be no failures. Linux isn't sold so much on the product it
is, largely because a suit has never heard much about Linux. Linux is sold
because the suit has faith that the decisions I make work immediately, work
well, and are cost effective. Since Mr. Suit cannot really evaluate the
technology, he will evaluate me.
That affects how I work with Microsoft. I'll
throw in my digs all over the place, so that he knows that this is not my
preferred choice. However, I'll still make it work for him. Because
my bitching about a product sucking are not nearly as effective as me saying
"this isn't my recommendation, but I can still make it work with you. It
takes much more time, it's far more expensive, and it'll require a fair amount
of babysitting, but I'll make your job easier." Then do it. Refer to
MS as Legacy. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I hate that
word. But Microsoft cannot leave my mouth without being preceded by
Legacy. My manager does it now too, occasionally. It'll become habit
for him soon, and once Windows in cemented into his mind as a legacy product,
there will be no changing it. Particularly if at the same time, I'm
dropping Linux into his lap wherever possible, and pointing out that "Tidal's
Linux network works so well, I haven't had them call me for support in a month
now, I wish we could upgrade to that here. Imagine where we'd be if we
could focus on building the network proactively." or "This is the 3rd time this
year that this box is down. $50000 should build a server that sees the
same level of reliability as the 10 year old 486 we built into a server for
you at home. (and then the final dig) How is that thing holding up
anyway, I never hear you ask about it?"
And whatever the reason, whatever the time, make
your boss look like a genius when you're with him in a meeting.
Particularly in front of his boss.
"daBoss suggested we try Linux here, and it worked
fantastic. I think daBosses decision to run Linux here saved the Company
$100 000 upfront, and because it required so little ongoing maintenance, it
allowed us to focus on X, which should provide even further payoffs. It
was a fantastic decision."
That does several other things. Firstly, it
sets up Linux as a successful solution. Second, it makes your boss look
like a hero. Third, it more or less guarantees that you'll be invited to
more meetings, which allow you to evangelize to more people. On a personal
note, you boss will also want you to work for him. That's a good thing
too. If he gets promoted, he'll want you to follow him so that he can
continue to look so good. Be invaluable to your boss.
On a related topic, if someone asks a question, do
not let the boss flounder. Quickly step in deal with tech
questions.
"Actually, we talked to several people running
Windows 2000 server, and Windows 2000 Pro. Although the it initially
sounds like it will cut maintenance costs to run the same product on both the
desktop and the server, it's not really true. Desktops will not run Active
Directory, or Proxy servers, or IIS, or DHCP, or DNS, or Mail Server
Packages. Likewise, Servers will not run applications such as Office 2000,
X. Our research actually showed that opposite. By using Linux on the
Servers, we avoid the need to patch the server, which will mean downtime
for a reboot, when something that doesn't belong on a server, such as media
player (which is for watching movies, or listening to MP3s) shows another
flaw. This happened 4 times this summer for media player alone. A
best of breed solution with Linux on the servers mean that we run only the
services we need, saving us from security vulnerabilities in applications we do
not use or need. By running Windows 2000 on the desktop, the clients will
see no change." for the really dense, maybe throw in "I have a Honda lawnmower,
and a Honda automobile. The purpose of each is completely different, as
they are with a server and a desktop. Though they have the same Honda
decal on them, and they are both propelled by a gas powered engine, they
are totally different. The same is true with Desktop Products and Server
Products. Microsoft realizes this, and prices the different products
accordingly. Even the feature sets are different. For example, even
Microsoft's own products, SQL server for example, will only install on one of
the two products. Tweaking a desktop for use by one person at a time is
completely different than tweaking a server for simultaneous use by 100
people."
When possible, lead people to conclude Linux is the
best solution for themselves. Then reassure them that they've came up with
a FANTASTIC idea. Two or three days later, send them a link from some
MAJOR organization, talking about how Linux was rolled out for company X and it
worked awesome, and life was grand, everyone won the lottery, etc.
Don't push, cause you won't win. If people
ask, help them in any way possible. But if they are dead set against
Linux, or they're asking for something that Linux can't do well yet, then the
legacy solution is the way to go. Saying "you know. I think in this
circumstance, you're better off sticking with the current solution." Even
there, give them credit. "This was a wise decision when it was made many
years ago, and you're seeing dividends paid now on that choice." (win
their favor for next time).
Linux isn't the right answer always.
Personally, I wouldn't advise a Linux desktop yet. Not because it can't
work. It can. One of mine runs Linux. But I still need stuff
from Windows often enough that it isn't my most common choice. I'm asked
Windows questions more often than Linux ones. I need to KNOW what I'm
doing on both OSes or even if I'm good with Linux I'll appear an idiot because I
don't know basic stuff that Windows users take for granted. There are
places where Windows is a better choice. Remote sites where support is
limited is a good example. Talking someone through point and click is FAR
easier than talking them through using VI to edit a .conf file. Granted,
CLI support is FAR easier across a 9600 baud dialup than GUI Remote
Control. But... If the dialup connection dies due to new settings by
the ISP, Most people could fumble through Windows's GUI tools. With no GUI
on a server, that's FAR more difficult on Linux, especially when different
flavors store files in different places. If Linux isn't ready or
isn't right, then don't push it. Upgrades will come. This is chess,
not Xs and Os. Wait for a more appropriate time. It will come.
And sometimes that means just setting the stage for your replacement a few years
down the road to impliment it. That's fine too.
Also nate that another common time for Linux to be the WRONG choice is when
it's politically unwise to impliment it. Don't burn brownie points forcing
something onto people that they don't want. Give them Windows.
Document the flaws, and be reasonably vocal about the alternative.
Comments like "I've fixed this on all the Linux servers, but with Windows, we
need to wait for Microsoft to create a fix, and provide it for us. Until
then, we're vulnerable/unable to work/etc." Eventually, someone else much
higher on the food chain will push for a Linux solution. Then step in (as
above) and make them look like a genius. "Hmmm, running Linux should allow
us to save $10000 per server, plus run longer on identical hardware.
Uptime has been unbelieveable since we switched over to Linux on the webservers,
Bob's right, we SHOULD carry those benefits to this service too. Linux is
a great idea." NEVER let a superior who suggests Linux look bad. If
possible, make them look 'in the know'. This reenforces for them that
Linux is the right choice, and it makes everyone else want to be as up to date
as the Linux person. Remember when Palm Pilots first came out, then Black
Berries? Make Linux into the same sort of "Must Have" type of
technology.
Kev.
|
- (clug-talk) Linux advocates. Roy Souther
- Re: (clug-talk) Linux advocates. Kevin Anderson
- Re: (clug-talk) Linux advocates. Roy Souther
- Re: (clug-talk) Linux advocates. Johnny Stork
- Kevin Anderson
