Technology for Mortals

Sounds like a referential constraint to me.

TFS is proprietary (Windows only). Why not subversion or git or hg J. Ja?

Because we are developing with Visual Studio in a 100% Windows shop, with software (Word extensions) that are 100% Windows as well. Plus, as certified Microsoft partners, we get all of the software for free.

In other words, TFS works great for us.

J.Ja

A great combo is subversion and NautilusSVN, if you have the stomach for Ubuntu 9.04 Linux:

http://code.google.com/p/nautilussvn/wiki/Installation

Dietrich T. Schmitz

Linux isn’t coming into our work environment, because one of the requirements is, is that if I am not available, other people need to be able to troubleshoot. In other words, I need to be able to say, "check the IP address settings please" and not walk someone through ifconfig or the KDE (or GNOME) UI. I personally have no problem navigating *Nix, but others do, and that makes it a non-starter for us.

J.Ja

Have you heard of NetworkManager? That’s for both GNOME and KDE. So, there’s no need to drop to the command line J.Ja.

For remote support with Linux, you’ve got xrdp (terminal server), rdesktop (rdp client), vnc, ssh, nx to do remote support, of course you know that, right?

There are no more arguments for Linux being more difficult than Windows to support, because it doesn’t get any easier than it is with Ubuntu

You’re really missing the point here. It’s doesn’t matter if it is "just as easy." When I am 500 miles away from site, and a mission-critical server is down, I need the people on-site to be right-at-home. No "just as easy". Unless the UI is a perfect clone of Windows (and I know it will never be, for better or for worse), it’s not going to happen. My on-site people are familiar with the Windows commmand line stuff just fine, so it isn’t a fear of the command line. It’s an issue of difference, bottom line.

And, in this case, I would be getting precisely nothing out of it, other than not having to deal with the problems of SQL Server Reporting Services.

You have to userstand, for a Certified Partner organization like we are, the vast majority of the Microsoft enterprise stack is free for us, from desktop OS to firewalls to email to SQL server to version control to accounting to you name it. That takes away one of *Nix’s two legs of usefulness (the other being… potentially… security/quality/reliability, which I have never been convinced of; it took me 3 years of trying to get a FreeBSD server to not be a total train wreck with qmail).

J.Ja

I would equate Linux with FreeBSD. You may have had difficulties specific to BSD, but certainly that doesn’t generalize to Linux.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I maintain Linux at this stage of the game is just as easy if not easier to support than Windows. The arguments to the contrary are unsupported.

I would recommend you make a modest time investment in reevaluating Linux, in particular, Ubuntu.
I am sorry to disagree with you, but you’ve definitely got the wrong impression.

Give Ubuntu 9.04 (preferably x86_64) a try and you’ll see what I mean J.Ja.
There isn’t anything that Windows does that can’t be done with Linux more efficiently and for less TCO.

Thanks!

Dietrich T. Schmitz

I am not sure why you are not understanding me. To make it really clear:

We will not use Linux (or any other non-Windows OS) for this (or any other purpose), not because it is "more difficult to use" than Windows, but because it is "different to use". Period. There is a good amount of respect in our company for non-Windows OS’, and I have no problem with them on a personal basis. But the simple fact is, I cannot put into place an OS which the other members of the staff are not familiar with. I am the only person who interacts with our infrastructure on a daily basis. When other people touch the equipment, it is because there is a disaster. I am a remote worker. Therefore, it is *critical* that the OS be as *familiar to those personell as possible*. And that means Windows. End of discussion. It’s not a matter of opinion as to which is "better", "easier to use", "more secure", or "more reliable". It is a matter of "when something breaks, can the people on site fix it."

In terms of my "wrong impressions of Linux", you could not be more wrong. I’ve used and installed Linux on a number of occassions. I chose FreeBSD for my home server for my own reasons, and ease of use was not part of the equation. I have tried to evaluate Ubuntu on more than one occassion. Unfortunately, its installer is incompatable with the VM technology that I use (Microsoft Virtual PC; not the best, but when I settled on it a few years ago, it was the only/best free VM tool than ran on Windows as a host) and the display does not work right. I am not going to rearrange my life (in this case, experiment with other VM tools) simply for the sake of experimenting with an operating system that has no applicable use to me in the near future.

In fact, at least once a year, I go through a cycle of installing the major non-Windows (and non-Apple, since I’m not paying to try to hack up their software just to try it out) OS’ out there to see how they are, including Solaris, NetBSD, PC-BSD, Ubuntu, Fedora, CentOS, and SuSE. So please, don’t try laying the "unwilling to open your eyes to Linux" rap on me, because I give Linux more opportunities to impress me than I can imagine.

J.Ja

In terms of Windows users being able to learn and adapt? Seriously, there’s no learning curve to speak of for existing seasoned Windows Folk. Just ‘click’. New users will only spend a short time figuring out how to navigate the easy menu. A five year old can learn to use Ubuntu in a few minutes.

VM technology, well, you are using the wrong VM technology. There are plenty to choose from for Linux but the easiest is VirtualBox. In fact, a Linux hosted PC equipped with Intel-VT or AMD-V chip set running Windows as the guest VM will speed-wise approach that of a Windows hardware based install. VB supports VMware VMX files which can be imported directly. I could get my grandmother to install VB and Windows no problem, only she has passed on, but you know what I mean. Easy.

When it comes to risk, users are in the risk pool when they use Windows on the Internet. Big risk. Linux? The risk with Linux is so small that you don’t even need an AV tool. Linux is SAFE. Windows, well let me draw a one-word picture for you:

Conficker

Seriously, you can rationalize why you continue to use Windows and do whatever you want, but I have not see any arguments that support why Linux should not be considered. The TCO of Linux is simply better than any other solution today. And perhaps most important, Linux is SAFE. Enough said.

So, when you can budget the time, revisit Ubuntu. The time spent won’t be wasted.

If your readers have questions regarding Ubuntu in the Cloud they can reach me by clicking on my name below. Thanks and keep an ‘open mind’ J.Ja.

Dietrich T. Schmitz

I’m loathe to change VM technologies, mainly because these applications seem to mangle my PCs when I install/uninstall them. My personal PC is nearly 3 years old, and I plan on replacing it in the very near future with the release of W7. I have heard a lot of good things about VirtualBox, and I will probably be using that for myh next build out.

All the same, even if I really was deparate to replace Windows with some sort of non-Windows OS in our company, it wouldn’t happen. The organization is extremely change resistant (remember, it was only this summer that I got rid of the *NT 4* domain, and the server still lives as a virtual machine), and we are a Microsoft Certified Partner, so between the two, it’s a non-starter, except as a non-mission critical use. For example, we had a "side project" Web server for which Linux was being considered. We ended up using Windows, once again, due to the familiarity issue; the people who would be using that server are not technically inclined to begin with, the kind of people who took 5 years to figure out how to set a static IP, if you know what I mean. Changing OS’s on someone like that will do nothing but cause me headaches, regardless of ease of use.

Heck, it can be argued by usability experts left and right that Macs are much easier to learn and use than Windows, but the typical Windows user finds them difficult due to the familiarity issue.

J.Ja

We have reffered to 3 tables for changing the WI “Created By” in TFS….

But i see only 2 tables mentioned above….WorkItemsAre and WorkItemsLatest which is the THIRD one?