Novell spiffs up its desktop Linux software

TalkBack 14 of 42:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

couple of drawbacks with open source

If novell thinks that they can use this to replace windows in the corporate environment, they really have to think things through a little more. They need to focus more on the back end work on managing the desktops that they want to push out before they can even consider challenging microsoft in that arena. One of opensource's biggest advantages on the technical level is also one if its biggest disadvantages on enterprise front. It has too short of a lifecycle. I really love the strides that opensource makes as far as stability and inovation, but I really think that it can be it's achilles heel as far as making an inroads in the corporate environment. I evaluate software and solutions where I work, and one of the biggest drawbacks is the fact that opensource software seems to change too quickly raising the total cost of ownership in maintenence on most installations. It seems to be a great solution for small shops or for server deployment and the home user for that matter, but imagine having to manage patches and test software on a platform that isn't completely accepted by a majority of software vendors for 10000+ workstations. I don't even think that there are any tools up to date to manage linux desktops on the enterprise level in that way. (I may be wrong, so someone please correct me). Red Hat seems to be addressing that by stabalizing the lifecycle of their products by adopting the distrobution model that they currently have by having fedora as their testbed for the technological enthusiest, and having their enterprise products for corporate deployment, but their support agreement costs are quickly spiraling way out of proportion. You can opt for their basic products which are good for 90 days of support, but to get true support for the typical life cycle of a product you have to pay thousands of dollars per server. It actually costs more per installation of Redhat ES or AS than it does for an installation of win2k or win2k3(not counting client licensing for microsoft, even though it is usually done on a per seat basis in most large corporations). On a technical level Linux/and opensource seems to be the better model, but when you bring up terms like Total Cost of Ownership, application and platform lifecycle, corporate standards, application compatability, and enterprise management, it seems to me that opensources biggest merit may actually hurt it in the longrun. I really hope that's not the case because i really love the stability and security that opensource and particularly linux brings, but to really make a leap into the corporate world on the desktop, vendors need to focus on the infrastructure and management pieces. Hopefully Novell, or other vendors can bring that to the table in the near future...

Just my 2Cents...

Posted by: virland   Posted on: 10/06/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• The Impact of Virtualization Software on Operating Environments VMware Today's use of virtualization technology allows IT professionals to ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now
• SOA for Dummies 2nd IBM Limited Edition Mini eBook IBM Learn the basics of SOA by following 7 real-life companies as they experience the truly game-changing effects of this important technology initiative. Download Now