[GRLUG] Perceptions: Is Linux a suitable desktop platform?

[Michael Mol]

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 9:13 PM, Adam Tauno Williams
<awilliam at whitemice.org> wrote:
>> > * "Also, it seems obvious to me that with Win4Lin and VMWare one has to
>> > pay for this software as well as pay for the MS Windows license – so why
>> > not just run MS Windows on the users' PC? Why does this fact escape the
>> > Pro-Linux opinions?"
>> > So true, this is the most bogus card in the LINUX advocacy playbook.
>> VMWare Server and VMWare Player are free for commercial use.  While I
>> haven't looked into it recently, I hear that qemu has virtualization
>> support now, too. (As opposed to strictly emulation.)
>
> But you still have to have a licensed copy of Windows;  so the arguement
> of "Why not just run Windows?" remains.  There certainly is no cost
> advantage if you have to resort to this;  and it is certainly more
> complex than just running one OS.

Then you need to look at why you need Windows on every workstation.
Is there a particular program that everyone needs to run? Maybe
there's a Linux version (unlikely) or a web-based version (more
likely).  If it's a low-use application, and the license terms allows
it, then perhaps you can install it on a single Windows server running
Terminal Services.

I will by no means argue that you should have Linux on every
workstation, but most medium-sized and large companies don't really
need to pay for a copy of Windows on every station.

>
>> > * "One can use VNC to support BOTH Linux and MS Windows network clients
>> > Linux software is easier to keep up to date"
>> > Has anyone managed to get VNC to run as a service in Vista?  The
>> > performance of a VNC vs. RDP over a WAN is also beyond any comparison;
>> > RDP runs circles around VNC.
>> You *can't* run VNC as a service on Vista; Vista's security model
>> disallows services that interact with the desktop.  The solution is to
>> run the VNC server as part of the user's session.
>
> That isn't a solution.  It means you can't manage a workstation unless a
> user is logged in,  it becomes merely a help-desk tool.  With VNC and
> NT/2000/XP I can log into a remote machine with my account, or
> Administrator, and manage/fix/update/troubleshoot the box.  With VNC +
> Vista that isn't possible.   I don't have any problems using RDP, but
> the point is that it does invalidate the bullet point from the article:
> "use VNC to support BOTH Linux and MS Windows network clients".

I think we interpreted the bullet point differently; I was thinking in
terms of supporting the end user's session, while you were thinking in
terms of machine maintenance.  Microsoft has taken pains to break
access via non-RDP protocols for Vista, so RDP is indeed your only
option for now.

It's probably something that will be worked around at the driver level
at some point, via a virtual video card device or some such.

>
>> > As for updates;  Win32 is much easier to manager.  Install the [free]
>> > WSUS service on a server.  It automatically downloads updates and lets
>> > you approve or decline specific updates,  report on machines that
>> > haven't updated, etc...  There is no equivalent AFAIK for LINUX for any
>> > distribution.
>> That surprises me.  It's conceptually trivial to design something like
>> that around Apt, perhaps a bit more difficult around dpkg.  I would be
>> surprised if nobody's done it already.
>
> Someone might have done it, but [AFAIK] it isn't packaged/available.  It
> does seem like it would be pretty straight forward;  but getting
> something that works and getting something that works *well* is a
> different set of distances.

> In general I think that management of LINUX
> is pretty lacking,  until you can manage and configure services via an
> API all the tools are basically hacks,  [ You can manage recent versions
> of Samba from MMC, but then you need a Windows box to run the MMC client
> - but that is a server not a desktop issue . ]   If the Microsoft crowd
> can be blamed of thinking "mail" = "Exchange" the LINUX crowd can just
> as fairly be blamed of thinking "LINUX" = "Web Server";  at least that
> has been true until recently.  Things are getting better. But doing
> things like password policies, data retention, certificate distribution
> (PKI), etc... on LINUX workstations/desktops [or on LINUX networks] is
> still very hackish.

I just remembered something...Novell has what [I think] you're looking for:
http://www.novell.com/products/zenworks/linuxmanagement/

> One of the most frustrating bits of that is that
> if you bring up those questions (seeking advice) on many forums you'll
> quite possibly be either (a) attacked as a corporate stooge and be
> treated to long libertarian diatribes about how such things are "evil"

Stay away from Slashdot and comp.os.linux.misc.  And it probably
doesn't hurt to ignore people who attack you for asking questions.


> or (b)  you'll just be told that, no, you don't really need those
> features.

The first solution to a problem is to work around the problem. Happens
in all circles.

>  After a decade of using LINUX, and advocating and supporting
> LINUX, and developing on LINUX,  I have to say I'm not surprised a
> solution like the aforementioned doesn't exist;

See the ZENWorks link I pasted above.

> I believe the use of
> LINUX / Open Source in "the enterprise" is quite seriously exaggerated.
> Maybe lots of people are using as a file server for some department, or
> a web server for their Intranet,  but it sure doesn't seem like very
> many shops of significant size are using it as their general-purpose
> platform.

I can't speak to why; More and more, the average work cycle is
shifting back to thin clients, with organizations like Google and
Amazon behind the trend, pushing with all their might.  And I can't
tell you how many PCs I've seen at call centers, banks and POS
terminals that were little more than glorified thin clients running
either a web browser or terminal emulators connected to a big central
computer.  Systems like that could be run off of 512MB of RAM space
and a copy of DSL on a 1GB USB stick.

-- 
:wq