<anti-rant> I am not a Linux administrator (only). I run what I want to run on my desktop. I like to keep relatively current on a range of operating systems, not only Linux. If nothing else, it keeps me abreast of what is going on with large part of the IT consumers in the world. I was responsible for getting Linux added to the list of acceptable desktop systems for my company (no small feat for our size). Some of the people on this list have enough real work to do that they don't have the time to go fight bureaucracy. Some of them don't work for the company that sets the policy. I am signed into enough Linux systems throughout the day that I don't need the practice. Others might need the practice, but can't afford to have their desktop out of order for an extended period if they make a major mistake. Don't make unsupportable assumptions about what other people can or should do. </anti-rant>
Mark Post -----Original Message----- From: John Summerfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 4:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Changing runlevels etc On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Post, Mark K wrote: > As has often been mentioned here, Cygwin offers a lot of benefits. For > example, it has an OpenSSH implementation that includes scp. I use it > frequently to copy stuff to my various Linux and Linux/390 systems. I also > use it to ssh into my Windows 2K system from home, if I want to be able to > do data-intensive things remotely. I also use rsync running on my Windows > 2K box to copy stuff to my home system. Cygwin is a great tool. If people > aren't running it already, I highly recommend getting a copy of what you > think you might need and install it. You won't be sorry. Time for a rant;-) You people are supposed to be Linux administrators. Therefore, you should be capable of looking after Linux on your desktop. If you are capable of looking after Linux on your desktop, then you should be running Linux on your desktop. If you are not capable of looking after Linux on your desktop, then you should be running Linux on your desktop so as to become more familiar with it. If "corporate standards" require a "standard desktop" argue for an alternative "corporate standard." Propose it as a pilor study. Point out the deficiencies in W* - it's prone to viruses and the like and so needs bandaids such as AV software, it requires add-on after add-on, all of which strain the "corporate standard," licencing issues with commercial software are an ongoing nightmare etc, W* requires everyone to have an expensive, fairly new PC of their own. In contrast, Linux doesn't fall to viruses, doesn't need those bandaids, a bog-standard Linux installation actually has lots of useful application software on it, licencing issues with commercial software are next to non-existant (hardly anyone will need commercial software), and everyone will get along just fine with a (whatever you've got that's old and cheap - say a Pentium with 32 Mbytes of RAM) running as an X-terminal. If you really really must use Windows for something, then I guess you will have to have your own expensive PC - but point out the hardware and software costs - but you can still run Windows under vmware or use win4lin. The peecees running Linux will integrate much more nicely with your mainframes running Linux;-) -- Cheers John. Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb
