CIOs express caution over Linux

Linux is comming in from the bottom, the same way that PCs moved in. FOr the longest time, PCs were littile toys not meant for serious work. But they're here. Once Linux oozes in it will become the standard, they will be comfortable.

And not using Linux for "Mission-Critical" work is rediculus (sp). It has been shown to be able to stand up for years. As long as you have power to a Linux cluster it should NEVER break. What about the companies that DO depend on Linux and IT WORKS. And the company next door CAN'T get it to work?

I have seen messages on the internet. "I've been an IT manager for 20 year and I can't get Linux to work?" But then how can this simple high school graduate get it to work?

Option 1 Linux runing for years. And nobody to blame but yourself.
Option 2 Other OSes breaking and being able to blame somebody else for it. It sounds like a lack of talent to me.

You need to spend alot of $$$$ on it to make it good. Sounds like SNOBBERY to me.

MarkP

Politely putting the term Mission Critical to the side for a moment, as it is used in such a blanket manner as to almost be inane, one can say that there is a vast difference between a CIO that views the deployment of software "as a product" and a CIO that views the deployment of software "as a process".

In the face of competition, organisations have to constantly present unique optimising capabilities to both the market and their working environments, the type of which can only be achieved throught the "proactive" use of software facilities. This requires a deeper understanding of and a deeper level of responsibility towards working environments than was formerly the case.

If a CIO is looking from the standpoint of ensuring that his delivery is used agressively within "the market" or "his or her organisation" in order to optimise all aspects related to transaction based opportunities, she/he would usually pick an option that requires a lot more from his/her staff than seeking to pass the responsibility up a chain -the latter takes too much time and does not let workers deal with the type of problems that ensure that they remain innovative. (Here said with the knowledge that there is a vast difference between innovation and recklessness).

If the CIO is a "classic Manager", who views software from a management perspective, and takes the name "Administrator" a bit too seriously, seeking safety as opposed to opportunity, he would of course choose the safer option.

One wonders what environment the best performers would choose to work in from the options above. The world is certainly changing, demands on staff are changing, and the demands for unique skills are rising. It is now easy to move a whole exchange to India if the skills derived in India are comparable to skills present at home. The days of running around like a confused Homer Simpson shouting "Oh God the systems down!!!! What do we do? What do we do? Do you have your credit card?... Call Microsoft!!! Call Microsof!!!"... are quickly going.

Linux based systems, because the demand a lot more, will continue to produce an elite force in the market, with unique capabilities and advanced abilities.

Anyway the folks at Amazon do not seem to think in a naive way. Neither do those at Pixar or the French Tax Office... Or Reuters... The list is endless... So I guess there will always be some traditionalists in every bunch...

Comments like these crack me up, one of the commonest comments I hear from CIO type's is "If anything goes wrong with Linux we have no one to sue" to which I reply "How many times have you sued Microsoft?, and would you want to?".
People who make comment like this are stuck with one or two vendors and are scared to change, talk to an IT director who came up from a Unix based environment and they are incredibly open to Linux.
I would suggest that anyone that needs to "shout at" the company supplying services to them then they have serious problems with their IT already; besides there are plenty of companies like IBM and HP which will take this kind of responsibility if you pay them

Lack of IT skills is the real problem with adaption of Linux and the problem propogates through the school system to university to corporate level where (MS) brand loyalty is taught and accepted as a matter of fact.

In fact "IT" is a misnomer - one should actually rephrase IT as MT for Microsoft Technology in many "IT" departments.

Although most responsible management regimes advocate spread of risk and choice in vendor/product/supplier - in the corporate IT environment these sound principles are often ignored.

In my experience - "IT managers" would rather let their companies and share holders foot the enormous bills for the comfort and luxury of expensive proprietary and "user-friendly" software which "makes it easy" for them to disguise their genuine lack of any real IT skills.