Just so you’d know, I believe that there is a huge difference between enterprise computing and home computing.

At home, if your computer locks up you simply do the infamous “three-finger-salute”: CTRL+ALT+DEL and, depending upon the version of Windows you have, you get either the security screen where you can open the Task Manager or you get the Task Manager. If that doesn’t work, you simply shut off your computer and turn it back on - then you have to wait for scandisk or chkdsk to do its thing and then you can get back in and recover to where you were when your system locked up (and pray it doesn’t lock up again).

In the enterprise, that is simply unacceptable. A knowledge worker will cost the company hundreds of dollars for every reboot; not only for the time that it takes to reboot but for the work lost that led up to the reboot. Enterprise computing magazines place the dollar amount at $230 or so for each reboot necessary in an enterprise environment. If your company has around 5000 people, each who need to reboot once a week that is costing your company about $57 million each year. It adds up in a hurry.

If you read my post on Operating Systems (written by Bix), you would know that I am a fan of Linux; not only because it is free from Microsoft’s methods and shortcomings, but because it has rock-solid performance. Well, Bix has kindly allowed me to publish another post of his (shorter this time) about the needs of enterprise computing:

Enterprise Ready Computing

Concerning “enterprise ready,” I believe Unix et al (including Linux) is ready for the enterprise and that Windows is not.

Somewhere we’ve lost touch with what the enterprise is.

That a Linux infrastructure requires skilled management and some customization is no barrier to its being “enterprise ready.”

The enterprise isn’t Joe consumer who buys a computer, takes it home and expects it to unpack itself, waddle over to the ‘phone line, jack itself in and dial up AOL.

Enterprise computing was built on Unix, VMS, IBM mainframe systems and their kin, not the relative ignorance of the modern consumer.

A retail store will spend thousands of dollars on custom counters and fixtures.

A larger company might spend a quarter of a million dollars per floor on buildout when they move into a building.

The enterprise needs a reliable, flexible IT infrastructure and that requires a substantial investment. Only recently has this been poorly understood.

The advantage gained by using commodity hardware and avoiding the costs of proprietary systems is lost when companies stop using commodity operating systems in favour of a broken, proprietary system.

Many pointy hairs bought the MS Party Line about “easy to install and manage” and their bald faced lies about security and reliability.

It never entered their empty little heads that inexpensive hardware breaks more often than do server grade systems and that the “network operating system” Microsoft hawks breaks more often than a Yugo. A mumbled “That’s the fault of the administrators” is the usual riff.

‘Course, when the “administrator” is untrained because “MS is easy to administer,” they really are in part to blame, but it is more the fault of marketroids, ignorant, “consumer grade” managers and the designers of the dysfunctional “NOS.”

In reality, the enterprise needs Mack trucks, IBM or comparable servers, Snap On tools, decent shelving, durable carpet et cetera.

Cheap doesn’t cut it. There are many sayings such as “the easy way out” and “the path of least resistance.” There’s a reason for that, and MS is the “easy way out.”

People expect to expend no effort, and indeed do expend very little effort up front.

Then come SQLSlammer, MSBlast et cetera. Then comes a clogged registry and “old Windows disease.” Then come weekly patches which frequently break things. Then comes Windows Hell.

The enterprise needs to get off its collective duff and remember that it gets what it pays for, and that to get things done right it needs to do them itself.

Read the above as “a real IT infrastructure and the expertise to make it work,” rather than so-called “easy to use” crapware and toweringly ignorant “engineers.”

Being a EE I can say that. Software “engineers” and MCSEs frequently operate in an environment free of accountability.

I operate in an environment of accountability. If I screw up, a building might burn down and a thousand people die.

That’s what being an engineer is.

Reliability is not optional, and those who would sacrifice security and reliability in favour of convenience deserve none of the above.

Cheers,

Bix

I have to say, I agree with the point Bix is making here. We use Linux and Unix at work for our mission critical applications and processes. We use Windows for our office users who THINK their stuff is mission critical. I continue to add my 2¢ worth at work to make a push towards Linux. I know that it is an uphill battle, but I believe it is one that needs to be “fought” and won. We are going through a number of changes at work with our networking infrastructure and all of the changes make our system more Unix-like.