I'm going to try to break this down: - people don't care what they run, they just want to do their stuff - people can't do their stuff, because LO still sucks and hardware support would be lacking unless tons of money is thrown at backporting - we have created many new jobs with salaries to backport everything so it can run on new hardware - we saved 11 million dollars -- presumably after all the extra work and new hardware was paid for? (sounds more like it was 11 million by not paying Microsoft, but then they got in over their heads and paid out for backporting) - the indication that the next roll-out will go faster is based on a non-descript "hope" - in the end the money may even out, but we will have the jobs instead of Microsoft. not that we intended that.
Yes there are pitfalls using Linux and what was stated "we saved $11 million" but i think that it is what the bean counters say to make the local government happy but what they don't say is that we have technical problems and that will cost us $20 million to fix. I've been down this track before with the military mentality of it was supplied by the lowest bidder. Say that to the grunt that has to deal with a sopping chest wound that was wearing a flack jacket supplied by the lowest bidder, sure it was cheaper but did it work in the field? The bean counters would say "we saved money" sure but at what cost. after spending millions of dollars on training the grunt you supply him/her with cheap equipment. I sympathise for the IT support personnel, a small team that would be under trained under staffed having to deal with so many issues leading to staffing problems. They would quit saying something like "i don't have a life" as they would be working long hours and on call 24/7 perhaps the lack of IT support would generate more jobs but would they be adequatetly trained, leading to training courses and more jobs. To me saving money on the OS was a start to only use the saved money on other aspects of IT, training, employment, education, opening up development. Maybe it was a good thing to have so many people change over to linux all they want to do is their job. When you break it down what do most business people do with their computers, communicate, how do they do that? create a document, (e)mail or do a presentation. What tools do they use? Pen and paper, snail mail, overhead projector with hand drawn diagrams on acetate sheets but with computers they can use a word processor to generate documents, send email to ask questions and get responses quickly, create an electronic slide show using some sort of presentation software. Then the accountants aka bean counters want to add numbers, in the past they used pen and paper with a calculator taking many hours, days or even weeks to do the accounting stuff. Now they use spreadsheets which take days, weeks or even months to do their accounting stuff, why so long you may ask it is because the data that they have to pour over is so vast, in come databases to assist in all aspects of business. With to-do lists, email addresses, phone numbers, what you had for breakfast, what flight you took, what hotel you stayed at, how many drinks you had at that hotel, what you ate at that fancy resturant, who's your friend, whats in your bank account, and how much money you spent on that business deal and lots more. That makes a lot of things in your life a lot easier or complicated just to keep the bean counters happy. In the end what operating system do they use? The users don't care as long as they can do their job and get money so that they can mix with their friends and play games with their computers but that is another topic
You have one point, but have both missed the other point of Linux, which is - Linux is about giving choice - it was never intended to replace windows, except by a few people like myself who attempted to make a distribution that did (via WINE and SetupS/ssWPI). Now having a almost free choice to use with older hardware (the people aiming to save money on their OS's generally are not running hardware that isn't a year or two old if not older) - without Linux to fill in the hole there would just be more pirated copies of Windows getting used. really it's NO different to use it is only different to install and repair as most Software that is open sourced on windows was originally developed on Linux by it's users, due to how much power, customization and debugging it offers. If you use Linux correctly it is even easier than Windows as it will grab what it needs off the online repositories unlike windows which can require you to go hunting for runtimes .dll files etc. * Note: I did not read the article you've linked too only the responses you both offered - so if my response is irrelevant at least it's only a paragraph to read over Linux is only a Kernel (which handles Inputs and Outputs to various memory/storage locations) The kernel on Linux requires you to re-compile it to access any new hardware, but Windows has their Kernel able to use external Drivers/Services to give the same results with only a minor speed decrease. In the end Windows way is the better way, but Linus is stubborn.
