[Nottingham] Jobs in Open Source?

[Alex Tibbles]

> Requirements to upgrade to GNU/Linux where I work:
> 
> Compatibility with (Legacy) Windows Applications
> (for 7 years in some
> departments)
> - Windows itself
If they are old, then it is (more) likely that Wine
will support them. Perhaps that's worth a look.

> Annual maintenance agreements for above software (an
> audit requirement).
> - only if you are running windows xx for many
> companies
Do you mean that the suppliers of this legacy software
will not offer support on platforms other than
windows? If you mean audit requirements of support
contracts in general, then I'd be shocked to find a
single piece of GNU/Linux software that no-one would
offer a contract on.

> Distributed user configuration
> - Active Directory distributed permissions
samba has some (fairly good I hear) support for AD
(google "samba active directory"), as of version 3.

> Centralised application roll-outs, and upgrades.
> - Active directory enabled applications
All the 'enterprise' Linuxes do this.

> A single standard desktop, for support costs.
> - Probably running Windows at home too.
Standardizing doesn't necessarily save - it may be
cheaper to have some Linux at per-seat support, it may
not. If the 'all Linux' case is cheaper, then
supporting both as part of a migration plan may well
save money once migration is over (after a certain
number of years). Things that need to be looked at.

> Minimal training of non technical staff (about 500
> of them).
> - Mainly in the use of a different office
> application.
Is openoffice.org that different? I find it pretty
much the same (but then I only use word and excel and
equivalents).

> Minimal Training of IT staff (9 of them).
> - Many don't even want to more than the minimal
> amount of work to get
> paid. Only one other person familiar with anything
> but Windows.
Again, look at how much they cost - if you could fire
half of them to support Linux, then training the rest
is a worthy expenditure. Getting the cheapest
personnel available is not necessarily the cheapest
way of doing things...

> Automated roll-out of OS releases, and patches. 
> - SUS and Active Directory.
See above.

> Cheap, fast and trouble free migration/upgrade.
> - A single day offline would be too slow, for, say,
> an Exchange
> migration/upgrade. 
Server-side and client side migration may be
decouple-able.

> Cost/Benefit and Risk
> - GNU/Linux and Open-Office would possibly be
> cheaper but is it worth
> the risk of moving from Windows?
Evaluate and quantify the risk.

> > All that might be lacking are the pretty
> hand-holding reassuring GUI's 
> > and forms for configuring whatever (that then blow
> up in yer face (:-)) ...
> 
> It would be nice to have the choice between GUI and
> console, as I know
> where I feel more productive.
> 
> > (Note that you can add your own 'enterprise
> stuff', and then there is 
> > always a bash script or few (;-))
> 
> I could, but people without bash skills would have
> to support the
> system. It's one extra thing to learn.
Bash scripting is not really much different to DOS
batch file, just a little less annoying.

> > Have another look!
> 
> Every day I do.
Good.

I'm really in no position to judge, having not
conducted a large migration, but do hear stories (from
around the world) about companies who have switched
and saved money. If the potential saving is large
enough , then it needs to be investigated. 

alex


	
	
		
____________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" 
your friends today! Download Messenger Now 
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html