Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 23:54:47 +1000 From: "Aaron Benson" <ab72@optushome.com.au> To: <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org> Subject: RE: Are you truly a M$ desktop alternative? Message-ID: <001901c474aa$71ee4700$6500a8c0@giga7nnxp>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Centralised admin is my primary concern. User perspective is obviously functionality. Anyway.... I've decided the best course of action to save money for the company is to run a kickarse Microsft 2K3 server Terminal Server, then use "SOME SORT" of ULinux OS to run on the client machine with a compatible TS client like rdesktop, PXES etc. possibly including a combo with LTSP, Rdesktop and Wilisystem if I want an EPROM diskless total boot from ULinux workstation desktop to W2K3 Terminal Server without user interaction. The question is, out of all the ULinux flavours, which one should I run which costs nothing or very little and will last for 4-6years in that time period? "Very little" equates to somewhat less than running Windows XP for a similar period. Cost savings include at least virus scanners and significant patch updates from Microsoft. Of course I'd rather update a single server than around 500 workstations both LAN and VPN remote machines. Virus signatures, multiple Microsoft patches etc. can be avoided. Reminder is I'm used to using XP. Our users range from Windows NT 4.0,Windows 2000 Pro and Windows XP. Based on a decent TS client, this shouldn't matter anyway. Your advice appreciated. Regards Aaron Benson -----Original Message----- From: Aaron Benson [mailto:ab72@optushome.com.au] Sent: Saturday, 24 July 2004 10:19 PM To: 'freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org' Subject: Are you truly a M$ desktop alternative? Hi, This email is going to any Linux house whom has pitched themselves via their websites and reviews, from my research as being possible alternatives to XP at this stage. Depends on your Google hit and thereafter (if found within 2 pages) site FAQ's I suppose. As a currently dedicated M$ house (apart from Oracle Databases), we question the move to a XP desktop amid the Linux hype in recent times. Any IT department trying to save company money is only doing the right thing and ask the question, what can Linux do for us? I've flipped through your FAQ's and over forums but result in no answer for Active Directory 2K3 and Exchange 2K3 server client connectivity, integration and functionality? Note that we have not moved to these product versions yet. Hence this email. I ask because I cannot see a server based centralised authentication and administrative option in Linux. If there were, say a "centralised server option" for Linux, this would be seriously considered. Is there a User Manager equivalent (NT4 domain for example) or Exchange Administrator equivalent (Exchange 5.5) "functional" alternative? More importantly, 2K3 Server and Exchange integration? Failing that, connecting clients as above to M$ servers would be sufficient. Stay with M$ in servers, go with Linux in desktops. I've seen enough "glossy brochures" and want to know the facts. The cost difference is obvious. The functional difference is not. I've still no reason to choose your Linux over Windows XP Pro at this stage. Cost is not enough. Any sane IT department doesn't need screaming users due to lack of pure functionality. Experience suggests most find it difficult enough getting around the OS to even perform basic functions, let alone usability. Assuming aforementioned functionality, where does your Linux stand with converting between M$ Office 97/2K/2K3? Will our accounts department be able to work with their previous 40Mb Excel files full of VLookups and Formulas straightup, or is it going to be bigger than a Lotus 4.1 to Excel 5 conversion debacle? Of course Word,PowerPoint,Publisher and Access are questioned also. I'm talking up to 500 user desktops to be upgraded. Upgraded need not be a literal word. Installing Linux from scratch would be expected. Anything "upgrade wise" extra would be a bonus. Outside of M$ Office, current application functionality would have to be trialed. This is expected. A list of currently supported M$ applications would be helpful. Your detailed reply appreciated regards, Aaron Benson Network, Security, Server Administrator Strathfield Group Ltd Sydney Australia ph: +61 2 9747 7677 PS. To blindly accept the Microsoft standards without researching alternatives would be irresponsible. Total cost of ownership, flexibility, and reliability should all be considered when making infrastructure decisions. Multiple platforms including Microsoft, Linux, and commercial Unix should all be considered when setting the direction of an organizational IT strategy.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?001901c474aa$71ee4700$6500a8c0>