On 26 May 2001 06:19:35 -0700, Ken Ambrose wrote:
>
> I dunno -- some of his points seem valid, but (for example) let's address
> the LinuxCare bit: "... Linux is so difficult to use or is so
> unpredictable that an entire industry has cropped to [sic] provide support
> for frustrated users." [Taken somewhat out-of-context.] Hoookay -- he
> thinks that there shouldn't be a market for tech support. Well, I have
> some news for him: even if you sat down, tomorrow, and wrote the uber-OS,
> that was a dream to use, had the best damn back-end ever thought of, that
> my mother could configure in 10 minutes flat, you'd *STILL* have to
> contend with difficult issues once you expand past your box:
I half agree with you. There is, and should be a market for tech
support. However, when several businesses start to spring up to support
the same OS, I can see where it would lead to the impression of the OS
being to difficult to use. Also, there is the self-competition angle as
well. If a corporation wants to use Linux, then they will most likely go
with a corporate-backed distro like RedHat. In a case like that, why
deal with a 3rd party when you can get the support from RH itself?They
offer a full range of support services, and the perception is that who
would know the distro better than the people that created it?
>the Internet
> is not new, has been in design for just about 30 years, and is not meant
> for the newbie. There will -always- be a place for someone who
> understands the underlying protocols, settings, etc., to come forward.
With this, I agree 100%. There will always be a place for *SOMEONE*. But
I don't think that means that there is really a place for an OS support
company, unless, of course, it is a 100% Linux shop from desktop to
servers. It seems to me that it would make more business sense to hire a
sysadmin or two that are good with Linux, but also have the ability to
work on the Solaris and NT servers, as well as the Windows-based
workstations. Support companies that deal with the entire range of
technology are more suited for this rather than a Linux-scentric support
company.
> This is, actually, one of my biggest beefs with Windows: Windows -is-
> easier to set up than Linux [though this may no longer be true for various
> dists; "we've come a long way, baby"]. But this is really a sham, a
> facade: when you actually have to start setting up services (DNS,
> God-help-you-WINS, FTP, etc.), point-and-click is only a facilitator, at
> best, and, at worst, can keep you from being able to automate important
> tasks.
I personally don't think that Windows is any easier to set up than Linux
is. It never was. That myth stems from the fact that most people buy a
computer with Windows already installed on it. But that is a home PC. In
the corporate server space, it's a nightmare setting up an NT server to
do anything. But on the Linux side, do support companies really help
with these things?
> Does this mean that LinuxCare will succeed? I don't know, and am afraid
> of what the future will hold for them. I honestly think they're in
> trouble for a more profound reason: the folks who implement Linux on a
> corporate basis (in other words, the customers LinuxCare is going after)
> are the ones most likely to take advantage of things like IRC, LUG
> mailing lists, BBSes, etc.
I think the this is the heart of what the author is trying to point out
over-all. It is a self-competing industry. If you need kernel-level
support, it's easier and cheaper (and in my mind, better) to hire a
programmer to do it. If you need someone to support, hire a few
sysadmins that can do more than "just Linux", since most environments
have several different platforms.
Please don't get me wrong. I wold love to see open source companies
succeed. However, I see the success rate leaning more toward the
individual than the companies. In another year or so, I think that there
will be an extremely high demand for Linux sysadmins, Linux tech support
people, etc. People who can come into a company and work with a team of
people to support the entire environment including Linux, Solaris, NT,
AIX, etc. There could also be a booming market for companies if they
expand their sight beyond Linux, and have Linux as just another service
offering. If someone wants to outsource their support, I believe that
they would want to contract a single company that will cover everything
rather than 5 companies that only cover one thing each.
C-Ya,
Kenny
--
---------------------------------------------------
Kenneth E. Lussier
Geek by nature, Linux by choice
PGP KeyID 0xD71DF198
Public key available @ http://pgp.mit.edu
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
