[NTLUG:Discuss] Linux for the State of Texas?

Fri Apr 19 15:37:26 CDT 2002

Greetings to all.

I have been following this thread for a while now, and have found it quite
interesting.  I may be walking into the deep end, but here goes.

There are still a number of problems with the theory of throwing Microsoft
to the sea and ending up with an Utopia Linux world.

We must realize that the masses of users could really care less whether they
are sitting in front of a Microsoft product, Sun product, Lotus product or
IBM product.  All they care about is whether it looks the same (or similar),
runs the same, and has the same (or better) capabilities.  This has more to
do with applications that run on Linux, as opposed to Linux itself.
Consider me a traitor, and for the record I haven't downloaded Star Office
in around a year or so, but it still doesn't compare to Microsoft Office,
piece-per-piece.  Sure, it is a great piece of software, especially when you
consider it is free, but it ain't Office.  The end user could care less if
it is free or not.  How many office workers or government workers have
actually purchased the software they are using?  I follow Linux relatively
closely, but I really don't know of any other office-level product other
than Star Office.  I remember Applixware, but where are they now? 

I hate to say it, but Gimp ain't Photoshop.

Also realizing that end users are not, in general, particularly savvy in
computers and software in general, can we really blame the system
administrators that cringe when the thoughts of re-training all of those
users come to mind?  In the business I work in, we use Macintosh exclusively
for low to mid level image processing and manipulation.  (SGI for high-end.)
I can tell you I am somewhat concerned about the migration and training of
our staff to OSX from Classic.  And I just have around 30 users to contend
with.  When I consider retraining 100+ people, I think about investing in
the makers of Tums.

There is one Microsoft.  There are multiple Linux distributions.  My initial
thoughts were to rattle off the names, but I would probably forget a couple
and therefore commit a grievous act.  This causes great confusion, and is
surely a hindrance in the minds of those who are use to one monolithic
supplier.  Those like myself, who are somewhat knowledgeable about Linux,
and others who really know it are aware that the different distributions are
trying to come back together to make one standard, but we ain't there yet.
We also know that each flavor has it's own unique toolset, feel, etc...
That is both the beauty and pitfall of an open source os.  To the unknown
masses, it is probably just too confusing to deal with it.

Although I see numerous spots from Microsoft and Apple on TV, I have yet to
see one lone Linux spot.  Couldn't all the distributors of Linux get
together and make a distribution agnostic ad campaign (in multiple media
outlets) that touts the benefits and cost-effectiveness of Linux over
Microsoft?

Oh, I forgot.  There was the one IBM server spot that mentioned Linux ran on
it.  That's a start.

As another example, I just returned from NAB.  (National Association of
Broadcasters)  There was only one small booth that had anything to do about
Linux.  If you blinked, you walked right past it.  Microsoft and Apple were
there.  As was SGI, SUN, IBM, HP, etc...  This is disappointing, and
illustrative, since the NAB convention is attended by technically savvy
people.  This would have been the perfect place for Linux to stand out as
the Unix, Microsoft and Apple alternative to file sharing and data
wrangling.  Times are tight in the entertainment-broadcasting industry.
Engineers and purchasing managers would have fallen over themselves to find
a truly reliable alternative to the extremely costly boxes shown out there.

Unfortunately Linux World and other Linux-centric conventions don't count.
That is pretty much preaching to the choir.  Basically, there are no heavy
hitters "spreading the word".  I am afraid that Linux proponents, standing
in front of a bunch of glaze-eyed lawyers, talking about changing operating
systems will probably not be extremely effective without a history of
advertisement and name recognition to rely on.  This situation is somewhat
analogous to High Definition TV.  How many out there know what HDTV is?  How
many know that it is broadcast on a daily basis now?

Here is a final thought.  Often, when Linux users speak of Microsoft, they
sound, shall we say, militant.  A better tact would be to show how Linux can
fit into a Microsoft environment, instead of as a complete replacement.
Linux information has to be disseminated in a way that sheds the best light
possible on Linux, and only mentions Microsoft in a positive, or at least
neutral light.

Solid advertisement, solid and feature rich applications, seamlessly
compatible distributions.  These are a few of the ways in which Linux will
begin to seriously erode the market share of Microsoft.  I doubt attempting
to pass laws or resolutions will make a hill-of-beans of difference at this
time.

I applaud and respect all of those who are trying to inform the masses about
Linux.  I know it is hard work, and an uphill struggle.  I just think your
hard work would be made much easier and more fruitful if you got the various
Linux distributors and others to spend a couple of years laying the
groundwork with aggressive advertising, and application developers to write
software packages and/or port their software to Linux.

I certainly hope I didn't offend anyone.  If I did, I am truly sorry.

Thanks for your time,

Monty

Monty Shinn
Assistant Chief Engineer
Video Post & Transfer
Dallas, Texas
direct: 214-561-7260
main: 214-350-2676
fax: 214-352-1427
email: montys at videopost.com <mailto:montys at videopost.com> 

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Steve Baker [SMTP:sjbaker1 at airmail.net]
	Sent:	Friday, April 19, 2002 1:39 PM
	To:	discuss at ntlug.org
	Subject:	Re: [NTLUG:Discuss] Linux for the State of Texas?

	Dusty Matthews wrote:
	> 
	> I submitted a story to Slashdot too,...

	Actually, /. was where I saw the story in the first place.  :-)

	> We should really not stand for this. Open Source software is a
perfect
	> solution for government organisations. It is about time they wake
up to the
	> benifits of it.
	> 
	> As open source advocates, we cannot make the government switch
over night,
	> but we can wear on them and continue to lobby for the adoption of
this kind
	> of software, and maybe, over time, we will see a generation of
enlightened
	> public officials.

	In some cases (eg our local school), they are simply unaware that
there
	are even other OS's in existance...let alone that they might be
free.

	"Oh - we thought all computers ran Windows"...gack!

	Administrators are not computer experts and know little about the
	alternatives - and the computer experts view continued use of
Microsoft
	products as job security.  If you are a Windoze guru and know little
or
	nothing about Linux, you are hardly likely to recommend a switch
even if
	there are good reasons to do so.

	----------------------------- Steve Baker
-------------------------------
	Mail : <sjbaker1 at airmail.net>   WorkMail: <sjbaker at link.com>
	URLs : http://www.sjbaker.org
	       http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net
	       http://prettypoly.sf.net http://freeglut.sf.net
	       http://toobular.sf.net   http://lodestone.sf.net

	_______________________________________________
	http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ntlug.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20020419/17a8920e/attachment.html