Post a comment

Story: Bergen's CTO: Why we moved to Linux

We have had similar experiences albeit on a much smaller scale. Our migration to Linux started about 7 years ago when we moved from dial-up Internet access to a dedicated IP line. We were already using Netware for our LAN infrastructure and simply required Linux to serve as a gateway between our LAN and the Internet.

From humble beginnings as a simple router, with an email gateway, more and more functions are migrating to Linux simply because the tools are there and readily available. The argument that you need to learn a new OS and need to spend resources configuring a system simply does not hold water in my opinion. You need to know the nature of the beast whether it is Linux, NT, Netware etc. You need to configure your servers regardless whether it is through a pretty GUI or by editing a text file. If you are relying on Windows 'wizards' to configure a server rather than actually knowing what you are doing, then you shouldn’t be let within an asses roar of a server!

The biggest advantage that Linux has over proprietary OS's is that none of the configuration options are hidden behind other configuration options. Also, all tools required are included in the distribution or are readily available. For example if you need a firewall you have a fully featured enterprise firewall one in Linux (ipchains). Once the move starts to open systems away from proprietary systems, it gains momentum and becomes effectively unstoppable.

I do use Windows 2000 on my desktop at home, and do not see Linux as a mature alternative on the desktop quite yet, although I see this changing in the VERY near future. What I do find happening though, is that I am using more and more open source tools on the Windows desktop platform as well - need a http proxy/cache? use squid - need an email server? try Mercury - SQL? MySQL - web server? use Apache - and the list goes on.

As long as Microsoft continue attempting to convince us that a desktop operating system with a limited server OS feature set and limited supporting programs is the way to go, I think that more and more people will make the migration to Linux.

Let's face it. If you need a LAN or WAN server and the Windows 2000 installation you are using had EVERYTHING you need for your server OS, you would be inclined to use it rather than look for alternatives. The fact that you need to look for extra software only will encourage you to go with non-proprietary software, even if it is simply to avoid having to do it again when your proprietary software reaches the end of it's 'support cycle'.

In summary, I don't see Linux 'winning' the battle, I see Microsoft and other vendors of proprietary, closed systems losing the battle by default.

Full Talkback thread