I’m just tired. On the last post about having Linux at our work, many people that seems to be an IT worker said there have been several issues with Linux that was not easy to manipulate or control like they do with Windows, but I think they just are lazy to find out ways to provide this support. Because Google forces all their workers to use Linux, and they have pretty much control on their OS as any other Windows system.

Linux is a valid system that can be used for work, just as many other companies do.

So my point is, the excuse of “Linux is not ready for workplaces” could be just a lack of knowledge of the IT team and/or a lack of intention to provide to developers the right tools to work.

  • Tibert@compuverse.uk
    1·
    11 months ago

    The article only talks about deployment costs. What about the rest?

    For you a company should just throw away it’s employees to hire inexistent Linux experts or people using Linux software or whatever?

    There is the server side. There I agree that using Linux is great.

    On the client side it can be more complicated. A lot of schools in various domains teach the students how to use the software on windows. Not Linux.

    Furthermore, a company doesn’t pop into existence the moment where it thinks it needs to switch to Linux.

    The company already exists, providing work to the employees, trained on windows. So switching on Linux may change the software if it cannot be used on Linux (not everything is a saas). And that can be a time consuming process for the employees too because they don’t know how to use it efficiently.