On Sat, 2002-10-05 at 15:44, Christopher A. Williams wrote: > > 1) Even though we are officially not a Microsoft shop, we will now run > only Microsoft software on company systems that customers *might* see > because we are apparently trying to cozy up to the Redmonians. If a MS > rep sees Red Hat on one of our systems, there would be problems. He > actually said there would be "consequences". He noted that MS has done > this to others. Moreover, if a customer sees Red Hat, they might tell > Microsoft on us and then...
I believe this is when the world runs into problems, when a supplier of products is allowed to dictate what is and isn't allowed. In the real world in should work such that, providing you have licensed all software then that's it.... reality differs. > 2) Our company's future is apparently tied to MS and the enterprise > project management software they are marketing. My boss sees no future > at all in this area for non-MS products and/or platforms. Apparently, > only if MS somehow falters in the enterprise PM software market will we > consider alternatives. I'm sure here in the UK some laws exist about not been able to refuse to sell products to some customers and not others... Not sure if equivalent laws exist in the US along the anti-trust line of thought. Although you probably won't get anyone keen on fighting Microsoft. > Anybody know of equivalent companies deploying enterprise-class project > management server platforms that can compete with Project Server 2002 > (uses Project 2002, SQL Server, IIS, SharePoint Team Services and > technology from the old Enterprise Project product, which MS bought from > E-labor.com)? I don't think there's anything else out there and it's > probably a moot point anyway. Mr. Project only hopes to be this good > someday. My company switched to Niku 6[1] as a project management system. It was almost too good to be true, a web-centric project management system... In reality it only run on a few Microsoft O/S's, with a very specific Java runtime and only with Internet Explorer.. Quite a few people ended up buying second machines just for project management. (although it would have probably worked within Crossover/VMWare). A decision not really though out by the people higher up. The decision to switch to Niku- without radical changes leaves us pretty much committed to Microsoft as a desktop. [Linux bias aside, I'd try to leave my options open- especially with tales of companies/governments saving money] You'll probably find a switch will only be considered on substantial benefits/cost savings rather than you using RedHat 8.0. > Felt like I was forced to bend over yesterday... > ... I wanted to switch to RedHat on my desktop, but the closest I got was to getting a "toy" development server in (which due to a self-important security department got took into the line of fire). Happier to stick with Solaris on expensive hardware than recycle old desktops. Unfortunately the people that made decisions were always too busy to take time out to look at alternatives. [1]http://www.niku.com/02-eBusiness_Applications/01-Products/01-Niku_Enterprise/index.html -- NAME : Adam Allen. EMAIL : [EMAIL PROTECTED] COMMENT : ~~~~ insert your favourite signature comment here ~~~~ PGP : :http://search.keyserver.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=adam%40dynamicinteraction.co.uk
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
