Hey,
Just some random thoughts.
Almost all of the Linux distros are set up to install on a single user
machine by default. This works fine for a single user, but in large
organizations, this is a bad deployment scheme and a vast under-utilization
of Linux's capabilities.
I have read accounts of other people's experiences in converting an
organization to Linux and getting them off the M$ train, and it seems that
to really make Linux more easily maintainable, you have to have some sort
of centralized software deployment/file repository solution(i.e. NFS or
Samba).
At my company, and many others, the apps may be M$, but the network
deployment/file repository is Novell. The IT people never touch my desktop
computer, all their time is spent managing the network resources. This, I
think, is the key to saving time and $$ in maintenance costs.
What Linux distro is structured to be
networked-apps/many-simple-workstations? I know you can add this on by
yourself later, but then....
Why not roll your own? I know this may be a lot of work, but it would be
nice to have a "standard" which is specific to your clients. (Actually,
with distros like RH, you can do an installation, chose your packages, and
in the end, build an auto-install floppy which can be used to configure new
machines the same way). Having a standard distro broken into two parts:
network file/apps server and client desktop workstation, would help
maintainability. If you use a distro which is 1 piece only, 1 size fits
all, then maintaining a large number(>100) machines could consist of lots
of remote scripting, or full re-installs.
Fred
Jack Ungerleider
<jack at jacku.com> To: tclug-list at mn-linux.org
Sent by: cc:
tclug-list-admin at mn Subject: Re: [TCLUG] Municipal Linux [Long]
-linux.org
01/21/02 09:54 PM
Please respond to
tclug-list
On Monday 21 January 2002 01:04, Joshua b. Jore wrote:
> I'm working with one of the Minneapolis city council members (and his
> office manager) to demo free software. My argument is that that free
> software can save on the IT budget and any money involved would be more
> likely to stay local. (staff/consulting/support instead of licensing)
>
My personal take on this is that unless they were going to make a change,
for
example upgrade Win2K to XP (or better NT4 or 9X to XP) then there would be
a
savings for the IT budget. If all you're going to do is replace the
existing
environment it'll cost money. (Downtime for conversion and training, cost
of
a commercial distribution if you go that way.) So think about your
arguements
very carefully when playing the "cost card".
> I would like some suggestions for how best to present this stuff. I
figure
> there is a different case for free software in the server room and on the
> workstation. Since this will be on his personal computer I'd like to show
> off something functional that will compare nicely to his pre-existing
> Windows 2000 installation.
>
<flamebait type=opinion>
I spent sometime last year with the support team in a government
organization
that dealt directly with elected officials. Since they ultimately "write
the
checks" and because they are elected officials they can do what ever they
want. In this situation one influential elected official chose to use a
"non-standard" software configuration. (No, it wasn't Linux.) While the
support crew had to provide service for this "lone wolf" it was for a
one-off
configuration that was difficult for them to replicate. As a result they
spent a lot of time dealing with this individuals issues.
In your case while the lack of license costs might be a savings. Doing it
in
one office in the entire city (which is heavily invested in a M$
infrastructure) will most likely cost more due to the support issues than
was
ever saved in license costs. Converting the whole city systems to being
Linux
based might accomplish the goal, one individual won't.
</flamebait>
<alternate opinion>
That said, removing the dependency of governmental organizations on a
single
supplier of "critical" equipment is a good thing. If the councilmember and
staff want to "blaze a trail" and prove it can be done and from their try
to
get movement away from M$ that's a good thing.
</alternate opinion>
> I assumed I would use some variety of Linux with a GUI desktop. Which
> variety and GUI is probably where I could use the advice. If anyone has
> any specific experience advocating for free software in government I'd
> like to hear about it.
>
Personal favorite is SuSE, (I know its not a US distro. but hey, its a
global
economy, right?) and for this situation (user workstation) 7.3 personal
would
probably do the trick. It loads KDE, StarOffice and Netscape 6.1(?). Its on
the shelf locally for $39.95 with a nice box and 3 manuals. ;-)
> Joshua b. Jore
> Minneapolis Ward 3, precinct 10
> http://www.greentechnologist.org
>
--
Jack Ungerleider
jack at jacku.com
_______________________________________________
Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul,
Minnesota
http://www.mn-linux.org
tclug-list at mn-linux.org
https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list