[Gllug] Linux migration in small businesses

[Ken Smith]

Garry Heaton wrote:
> How easy is it to get small businesses (eg. 5-30 users) to switch from 
> slow/failing Windows/SBS/Exchange servers to Linux SAMBA/Postfix 
> equivalents? Anyone had much success in generating this kind of business? 
> I'm referring just to the servers, ie. running Windows XP with Linux/SAMBA 
> either within a workgroup or a domain.
>
> Garry
>
>   
I'm coming a little late into this thread but I can add my 2p's worth in 
connection with Linux in the SMB sector.

Just a few random thoughts......

I have found the SMB's who want to 'play' with their servers are wary of 
Linux as its unfamiliar. While we could discuss the various 
merits/demerits of users wanting to 'play'; especially when they have 
enough knowledge to dig deep holes that they can't dig themselves out 
of. Often in SMB's the senior folks are fully aware that their vital 
business data is 'in there' and want to feel some sense of controlling 
their destiny. Something without a "Start" button in the bottom left is 
scary and something that looks like DOS (to the uninformed) is terrifying.

There is also the unspoken concern that Linux skill is rarer that 
Windows so they have to deal with the risk of being left in the lurch 
with a system that they think needs scarce skills to sort out.

By contrast, in SMB's where this 'want to play' factor is not present, I 
have installed Linux as SAMBA, DNS, DHCP etc without the client really 
knowing what the technology is and they don't care. And it 'Just Works' 
(TM).

One killer is where the client is keen to use some application ('cause a 
friend uses it and its "brilliant") but the application is some Win32 
contrivance. These are often industry specific database systems often 
based on some combination of Win32 application and some type of backend 
database. My questions like "Is that software able to use MySQL or 
Postgres?" are met with blank stares. Well it just uses SQL - they say - 
what they mean is MSSQL Server!

Mini rant ---- I get appalled when I find small industry specific 
applications, often written in MS Access or similar, that struggle to 
scale beyond 3/4 users and lock the users to Win32.  In the late 90's I 
was developing applications with a backend db and a web browser as the 
front end. -- end mini rant.

Linux on the desktop. I often find that users are so wedded to 
applications like Outlook, that encouraging the use of anything slightly 
different, such as Thunderbird or Seamonkey, becomes an crisis of 
cataclysmic proportions. By contrast my wife switched from XP to FC8 
seamlessly. Although there were a few frustrations eg

- Palm Sync not working (Hal is/was broken for Palm's at the time - I 
gave up on the Palm)
- Video players, other than Flash, are a muddle of players one that 
works with this and another with that format. I don't find that too bad 
but to the average punter its an ugly mess
- She missed XP Windows Explorers ability to flick through photo's 
really easily. This was a great loss
- She really struggled with Gimp - I know, I know Gimp is fine but, she 
is a Paint Shop Pro user and neither Wine nor Crossover could bridge 
this gap for her. That challenge has brought XP back as a 2nd OS on her PC.

Although I use FC8 daily as my desktop I still use W2K and XP as well. 
In FC8, I find NetworkManager truly obtuse. I'm afraid XP's (with SP2) 
ability to cope with Wireless Networks leaves NetworkManager standing 
floundering in the dark. (Sorry.. That's not a flame bait - just my 
experience - when I'm trying to sort wireless out I switch to XP)

One of my personal campaigns is to unseat MS Exchange. I have seen, and 
had to sort out, Exchange systems that get into terrible muddles. A 
while back I looked for something to add to the samba, bind, dhcp, 
sendmail, dovecot, fetchmail, procmail setup that I currently use for an 
office server. Several of the offerings, I forget which ones, are either 
all-in-one canned server offerings, or they replace the e-mail area with 
their own code as well as adding a groupware system. In the end I 
adopted OpenGroupware with their Zidelook connector to Outlook. It just 
adds the Groupware function alongside the existing e-mail setup. Even 
though, it has a strong preference for Cyrus IMAP. That's a switch I'm 
about to make.

So far I have had three commercial opportunities to deploy 
OpenGroupware. One died because the client got frightened of Linux. The 
"I want to play with something that looks familiar" syndrome I described 
above killed that one.

One was live for about a year, when some egit, who did not know much 
about linux managed to wreak some chaos on the server at around the same 
time as a friend recommended a Win32 CRM package as "Just the dogs 
b01..ks" to the MD. Relations were fractious anyway, so I backed away - 
I guess W2k3/Exchange is there now.

The third site has been live with OpenGroupware for about six months 
now. Even there, the slight differences between how the connector 
"connects" Outlook to the OGo server causes them problems. It not that 
they are dumb - it just isn't exactly like the Exchange setup they have 
seen elsewhere. And so its all foreign to them and they need their hands 
held through the difference. Just like the indicator switch being on the 
wrong side in older cars, is off putting.

One wrinkle is that, you might imagine, that low budget charities would 
be an ideal "target" for Linux. Well, the charity discounts available on 
MS software actually tip the balance the other way. The sale of Linux 
into such environments isn't a simple as it might appear.

Sorry this is a bit long - but we have come a long way in the open 
source world - but we have a fair bit further to go. The current way 
forward in most commercial SMB's is Linux Servers and Win on the desktop.

:-)

Ken
>
>   


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug