Linux fails in small business market


Recommended Posts

BigBoy
Linux is losing momentum among medium sized enterprises, according to a survey by Canadian research firm Info-Tech Research Group.

After years of increased interest in the open source operating system, IT managers from medium sized businesses have come to a conclusion that open source is not for them.

The findings point to a rift between large enterprises that are increasingly embracing open source and smaller businesses that opt for a Microsoft-centric world.

"There is a downward trend in the interest for Linux," Frank Koelsch, executive vice president of Info-Tech Research Group told vnunet.com.

"Linux was hot and everybody was looking at it. Now people are taking amore sombre look."

Koelsch based his findings on an independent survey among 1422 IT decision makers in mid sized companies in Canada, the US and UK. .

Of the respondents only 27 per cent runs Linux inside their organisation. Of the group that doesn't have Linux today, 48 percent said they weren't interested in the open source operating system, and only 10 percent said they planned to look at it over the next three years.

Source

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lasker

well I'm positive agree, I run Linux and Windows XP, and be honestly Linux is a pain in the ass to install any simple application, in particular with Mandrake, I can run videos and music without problem but the only thing that the Open Source need to make is a installer like the Windows OS, that the only u need to do is click and install automatically.

Link to post
Share on other sites
blik

Hmm, I dont know how true this article is... Linux use has doubled consistently over the past few years, and the trend continues exponentially... I'm not so clued up on small business sectors though, but iirc the French are moving over to linux on a nationwide scale like Berlin did, its only time till many more countries follow suit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
hellosky

Waiting for the Linux fanboys to yell "LIES" and "INFO-TECH NEDS TO STOP SUCKING M$ c0**!!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
pythro

LIES, INFO-TECH NEDS TO STOP SUCKING M$ c0**!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lasker
Hmm, I dont know how true this article is... Linux use has doubled consistently over the past few years, and the trend continues exponentially... I'm not so clued up on small business sectors though, but iirc the French are moving over to linux on a nationwide scale like Berlin did, its only time till many more countries follow suit.

585725633[/snapback]

Well you maybe right, but like I said before, The really point in Linux now is not make a easy to use Linux, because already is basically easy not for the most, but anyway, The really now focus that Linux need to develop is a installer, a easy and pain less installer, I don't understand why the linux community does not design a Installer that can install anything with just couple of clicks, if they really want people to use Linux, make it a OS easy for anyone and for anyone to install softwares like the Windows OS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
blik
Well you maybe right, but like I said before, The really point in Linux now is not make a easy to use Linux, because already is basically easy not for the most, but anyway,? The really now focus that Linux need to develop is a installer, a easy and pain less installer, I don't understand why the linux community does not design a Installer that can install anything with just couple of clicks, if they really want people to use Linux, make it a OS easy for anyone and for anyone to install softwares like the Windows OS.

585725732[/snapback]

Have you tried Fedora Core's installer, dare I say it's easier than installing XP!

The "newbie" distro's bar Ubuntu (which I'm sure will devellop a graphical install) are simple to install. The other distro's however giveyou> more choice in how you like your system set up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lasker
Have you tried Fedora Core's installer, dare I say it's easier than installing XP!

The "newbie" distro's bar Ubuntu (which I'm sure will devellop a graphical install) are simple to install. The other distro's however give you more choice in how you like your system set up.

585725775[/snapback]

Ok, first, I'm not talking about the installation of Linux, I'm talking about a installer that can is capable of install any software that you want in linux, I think that's why many small business have to face it, if they want linux running they need a linux professional to use their computer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
blik

Ah right, lol, I see what you mean. Yeah I must admit mass software deployment on linux can be frustrating to say the least...

*Me hugs Arch Linux*

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fred Derf

Most small businesses do not have a guru on full time staff. I think many small businesses are wary at being so closely tied with an outside consultant.

Many of my customers like to try to fix things themselves. Usually, that just makes more work for me to do. I currently have only one regular customer where I installed Linux myelf to run as an Windows NT4-style file and print server using Samba. It works pretty well and is fairly invisible to the customer. Actually it's quite invisible because it is headless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hurmoth
Most small businesses do not have a guru on full time staff.  I think many small businesses are wary at being so closely tied with an outside consultant.

585725873[/snapback]

I agree. I was just thinking that most people grew up with Windows and for a small business to switch over to Linux and no one knows what they're doing with it could cost more then just going with Windows to begin with.

Also... LIES!! INFO-TECH NEDS TO STOP SUCKING M$ c0**!! :laugh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen
Ok, first, I'm not talking about the installation of Linux, I'm talking about a installer that can is capable of install any software that you want in linux, I think that's why many small business have to face it, if they want linux running they need a linux professional to use their computer.

585725828[/snapback]

"Installers" are a Microsoft thing. They rely on each vendor to set up their own method of installing. And, if called, they each determine how the app gets uninstalled (usually leaving bits in the registry, among other places).

Linux generally uses a central "Package Manager" such as apt (or the GUI front-end to it, called synaptic). These make managing applicaions actually easier in Linux than it is in Windows.

Link to post
Share on other sites
thechitowncubs
"Installers" are a Microsoft thing.  They rely on each vendor to set up their own method of installing.  And, if called, they each determine how the app gets uninstalled (usually leaving bits in the registry, among other places).

Linux generally uses "Package Managers" such as apt (or the GUI front-end to it, called synaptic).  These make managing applicaions actually easier in Linux than it is in Windows.

585728248[/snapback]

Even though that is a good program, it leaves many people in the dust. It uses a naming scheme that many people can't really decipher. It seems as though they need to add another column with the "english" translation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Grasshopper

Before anyone starts bashing me i just want you to know I had nothing to do with it...

My friend who has been working w/linux for ever, Hates it. He bought winxp and got rid of his linux. I asked why, He said its much easier. Even w/Suse and RHE and all the distro's that he's used. He has used all types of linux distros for at least 10 years and he is the guy i go to because i want/am to learn linux. No more. He got rid of his after the winxp install. He said he is done with having to make drivers for his computers. (yes, He makes newer one's for newer computers that he uses at home)

Is it really getting that bad? when is Linus Torvalds going just let someone "OWN" the rights and market it? Hell, He uses Apple products. Linux can't compete w/windows as long as they're 1,000's of distro's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
drshdw
"Installers" are a Microsoft thing.  They rely on each vendor to set up their own method of installing.  And, if called, they each determine how the app gets uninstalled (usually leaving bits in the registry, among other places).

Linux generally uses a central "Package Manager" such as apt (or the GUI front-end to it, called synaptic).  These make managing applicaions actually easier in Linux than it is in Windows.

585728248[/snapback]

I could never get those package managers to work correctly, or it wouldn't support this or that or blah blah, big hassle, people hate hassle. There is no reason not to release a uniform installer standard that is used on all distros, it's not that hard, and it would make linux a lot more appealing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen
Even though that is a good program, it leaves many people in the dust. It uses a naming scheme that many people can't really decipher. It seems as though they need to add another column with the "english" translation.

585728273[/snapback]

Sounds like you are describing a "need" that is already met...

post-36818-1112674972_thumb.jpg

Voila! Synaptic already categorizes the apps by type and sub-category. Much like going grocery shopping and having the different breads & bakery stuff in one area, and meats in another and so forth.

Plus, updating the entire PC can be done here - from the kernel on up. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
imtoomuch
"Installers" are a Microsoft thing.  They rely on each vendor to set up their own method of installing.  And, if called, they each determine how the app gets uninstalled (usually leaving bits in the registry, among other places).

Linux generally uses a central "Package Manager" such as apt (or the GUI front-end to it, called synaptic).  These make managing applicaions actually easier in Linux than it is in Windows.

585728248[/snapback]

By "managing applications" you sure don't mean "installing" and "uninstalling" do you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen
By "managing applications" you sure don't mean "installing" and "uninstalling" do you?

585728311[/snapback]

No. Installing and Uninstalling are unintelligent operations, and are de-centralized.

Package Management is a central location to select applications and have it intelligently bring in any other dependencies (libraries, for example) that may be required.

Link to post
Share on other sites
EduardValencia

i'll repeat it,and i don't care if people flame at me

Open source is bad for everybody. a massive adoption of this will cause the collapse of the software industry,many countries,including india and U.S will see devasting effects.people will loose their jobs,because u can simply develop your application at home or you can have it freely,the internet wll be a reign of hackers without control and supervision.

Just my 2 cents :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen
i'll repeat it,and i don't acer if people flame at me

Open source is bad for everybody. a massive adoption of this will cause the collapse of the software industry,many countries,including india and U.S will see devasting effects.people will losse their jobs,because u can simply develop your application at home,the internet wll be a reign of hackers without control and supervision.

Just my 2 cents  :)

585728325[/snapback]

:no: And the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt are spread just a bit further...

Since when does the software industry exist solely on initial software sales? Most of the business is in support and customization, anyhow.

Who is claiming that all applications should be Open Source? Surely there is room for propriatary apps, but an OS should not be one of those for the most part.

Why does everyone equate "Open Source" to "$0.00"?

Those positions are absurd, and just not true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
EduardValencia
:no: And the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt are spread just a bit further...

Since when does the software industry exist solely on initial software sales?  Most of the business is in support and customization, anyhow.

Who is claiming that all applications should be Open Source?  Surely there is room for propriatary apps, but an OS should not be one of those for the most part.

Why does everyone equate "Open Source" to "$0.00"?

Those positions are absurd, and just not true.

585728340[/snapback]

i could agree with you in certain things,but i think if we are in a opensource enviroment,where everyone shares freely their work,it will be tougher to sell products.so if i want to develop an application and sell it,users will have 10 times free choices in opensource enviroment.so why pay?

correct me if i'm wrong :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike Douglas
i'll repeat it,and i don't care if people flame at me

Open source is bad for everybody. a massive adoption of this will cause the collapse of the software industry,many countries,including india and U.S will see devasting effects.people will loose their jobs,because u can simply develop your application at home or you can have it freely,the internet wll be a reign of hackers without control and supervision.

Just my 2 cents  :)

585728325[/snapback]

Watch out, open source hackers use fluoridation in the water supply to subvert the masses ;) What you're suggesting somes quite a bit like communism, a giant monolithic industry (controlled by our favorite monopoly) where a free market is considered "dangerous" and stopped by a large wall of FUD. I can here the thought police coming now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike Douglas
i could agree with you in certain things,but i think if we are in a opensource enviroment,where everyone shares freely their work,it will be tougher to sell products.so if i want to develop an application and sell it,users will have 10 times free choices in opensource enviroment.so why pay?

correct me if i'm wrong  :unsure:

585728377[/snapback]

An open source market is no longer a "product" market but a "services" market. Lets say Subway hires your company to create a "Sandwich On The Go" automated telephone service. You could use the open source code of Asterik (a really awesome project). By using Asterik, you just saved 2 man years worth of programming. You save development money from if you had developed an propreitary solution (= more profit) and Subway gets there system a year ahead of schedule.

Link to post
Share on other sites
imtoomuch
No.  Installing and Uninstalling are unintelligent operations, and are de-centralized.

Package Management is a central location to select applications and have it intelligently bring in any other dependencies (libraries, for example) that may be required.

585728322[/snapback]

Oh! Now it's completely obvious how the two are so dissimilar...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dalik

In order for linux to become the number one OS from home users to large corps are these and I am sure I have missed a lot but these are big ones.

Linux needs a generic software manager, and I think the portage system works great, its used in Gentoo and is based off of ports system in BSD type of OS. With this the system will see what version you have and if there are updates and will download the source or binary form and will install the app for you. In most cases that I have used it all I need to do is search for the app then type "emerge app" and it does the rest and it will uninstall the app if you pass in the right switch. Of course there needs to be a GUI front end for this app for support for kde and gnome. Also this system needs to be able to to install an app that was downloaded from a site that isn?t in the portage system for example, you download a compressed file or a package with a special ext and you can click on this file and click install and will install it on the system.

Linux needs a generic GUI OS installer, something like windows and I think some distros has there own GUI that makes it easy like mandrake which I haven?t used in a while but I am guessing that it only got better. Point in click installer!

Better driver management, I would like the option to install and remove drivers on the fly. For example I can remove a driver and that would disable the hardware or use a generic linux drive like video, and then I can use the emerge to search for the correct drive and the portage system can install the drivers and edit the config files and if portage cant edit and enable the new drivers then portage would let the user know what do to in order to get the driver to work.

To me I think the linux file system is messed up but then again I am really used to windows. I kind of think linux is to detailed, I would like to see a file system that is 2005 and not 1970's. I find myself looking in many locations just to find where an app was installed, and it can be very different from distro to distro, and that is my number one reason why I don?t like linux, I cant find stuff in a short period of time. There needs to be 1 standard file system layout used by all distros, system files in this folder, user installed programs in this one folder, config files in one folder, mail files in one folder, apache websites in one folder, all installed in the same location by default but the location can be changed during install. Like windows, when you install an app the installer gives you a default location nearly 100% of the time in the program files location.

Now these ideas are some that I think need to be addressed to gain the trust of many new users. These applications that I would like to see have to be generic so any distro can use these apps and it will work without any change to configuration. If they want to add there picture all that a distro needs to do is change a configuration file. So the linux installer app can be customized for that distro as in visuals but the options are the same, (e.g. selecting time zones and network configuration, disk management)

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.