On 5/26/06, Kevin Toppenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think it is all about control. Windows has known ways to lock the
OS down that the IT managers are comfortable with. If they put my
server on their network, how can they be sure it is not infected with
some virus that won't extend through their network (spanning states)
and infect other hospitals? How can they know that I haven't put in
some back door or been foolish with passwords? If they were to do it,
they would need to do their own install of a fresh, known, linux
image, and then build up from there. And that would require dual
expertice in both Linux and Windows. They have chosen to simplify
their lives and to work with just one OS.
So while I agree that Linux can be much more secure, it's like asking
someone to change from Windows to Linux. It's not always an easy
sell.
The difference being, that an artificial entity, like an IT group, can
always hire on the needed expertiese, IF the cost/benefit analysis
justifies it.
By out of hand, discarding the arguably superior solution for some
middle management "Comfort Zone" is Just Plain Stupid. At least fake
the cost/benefit analysis to support the bonehead decision, first! ;)
-------------------------------------------------------
All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk!
Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in
the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
