Linux

[RangerCharlie]

Our town is putting in a computer teaching center that will also host web access stations.
The contractor wants to put in Linux stations as he said that in a month all the window XP systems will be down with bugs from the web surfers.
The center will be used as a distance learning facility and classroom.

I don't know squat about Linux, what are your suggestions?

Is Linux as easy (use) as he is letting on?

My objection is that it is to be used as a learning center and most users are on XP.

Oh and the contractor would have the exclusive support contract for the Linux stations as no one around here does them.

[chokeu2]

Linux is superior to MS products, but there is a small learning curve. My question is what applications are going to be installed on the machines? Linux is a great networking and utility OS, but MS has far more applications for basic users.

(I'm a Linux bigot, but in this instance I can't see that it is the best choice for what you're doing).

[RangerCharlie]

The stations will need to have a MS Office type of suite, web development software, plus anything else that the courses would require.

The Internet access stations I could see it, but not the classromm PC's.

[Hoepoe]

Providing the following criteria are met, you won't have a problem:

1. The contractor knows what he's doing
2. The correct distribution
3. Users wil lneed to get used to new names for same tasks..ie: OpenOffice, Not office, Firebird, not IE etc.

The newer Linux distributions are very user friendly, the downfall for now is too much choice, several choices for web browsers etc. This is great, but not for a newbie; if the contractor guy knows what he's doing, he'll install only packages/apps that are required and not the full suite that will jusyt confuse everyone.

Anyhow, if you need anyhelp, let me know

Hoepoe
(full time geek)

[Doogie320]

Like chokeu2 stated, there is a learning curve. I had 13+ years of Windows and DOS experience before trying linux and my curve was a bit steep. Admittedly I was also trying to network it and Admin it, but things are different. For the average user for home, I'd say use Linux. For someone who will not always use the OS and has seen Windows I think its a waste.

It sounds like the contractor is just lining up work for himself rather than looking out for the best interests of his customers.

[RangerCharlie]

Also if the site is used to train people for the business world, them MS software is what they will need to learn on.

I'm leaning to MS setup myself.

[Hoepoe]

Originally posted by RangerCharlie
Also if the site is used to train people for the business world, them MS software is what they will need to learn on.

I'm leaning to MS setup myself.

Not really, times are changing. Several government agencies as well as municipalities (Europe) are migrating to Linux for their desktops.

In addition to this Linux supports all formats including Micro$oft wheras Micro$oft onky supports Micro$oft.
I will say however that Dooggie320 is on the matrk, when all is said and done, this guy is out for himself and in this case, not what's best for the trainee.

Hoepoe

[charmon]

It's going to be a long time before open source applications take the place of the MS stuff. That's just a fact of life. MS is ingrained in the population. Most of the people that are pushing Linux based stuff are IT people. Hell, I've been in the biz for 10 years and I still have a problem with linux cause I've been on MS products forever.

[whizit]

For the training aspect I would stick with MS operating systems and applications just due to the fact of not confusing the users and enhance their training plus whatever application you are training on may not be available for linux. But I am fairly certain there would be a comparable linux application. (note there could be ways around this using emulators though)

For web access machines, Linux should be fine.
For maintence and support purposes you should stick to one OS though.

Server wise I would use Linux over MS any day of the week. I have actually have had a linux server with 568 days uptime.

For typical users the learning curve is small, But when it comes to configuration, linux can be a pain.

I finally decided to use linux as my primary workstation OS on my "beast" machine back in August after trying MS betas of their 64 bit OS's.

What this migration included was the ability of my kids to network boot their PCs and use the same OS as I by using terminal services. So they pretty much got "new" pc's the same time I did without the need for me to buy them new PCs.Try doing that with MS with a 0$ cost. Their learning curve was small since all they do is surf, chat, and type documents.

My linux distribution came with all the applications I basically needed and actually installed easier than the MS products I tried.

I hope that helps

[Remember When]

Linux (or something like it) is very probably going to be the OS of choice for businesses and computer nerds (over Microsoft stuff). Very (very ) similar to UNIX, it has a lot of power.

I would highly recommend your training center do some training with the Linux because of its future use and prospects. However, for the run of the mill user, for now, unfortunately Microsoft is the most viable.

But, I also agree, your contractor is building in some "job security" since there are not a lot of Linux experts* yet and the general "guy who's messed with computers" isn't going to be able to handle the Linux network.





*expert: Ex - former or has been
spert - drip under pressure

[Hoepoe]

Originally posted by whizit


Server wise I would use Linux over MS any day of the week. I have actually have had a linux server with 568 days uptime.

For typical users the learning curve is small, But when it comes to configuration, linux can be a pain.

I finally decided to use linux as my primary workstation OS on my "beast" machine back in August after trying MS betas of their 64 bit OS's.

What this migration included was the ability of my kids to network boot their PCs and use the same OS as I by using terminal services. So they pretty much got "new" pc's the same time I did without the need for me to buy them new PCs.Try doing that with MS with a 0$ cost. Their learning curve was small since all they do is surf, chat, and type documents.

My linux distribution came with all the applications I basically needed and actually installed easier than the MS products I tried.

I hope that helps

Curious; Which distro?

Hoepoe

[RangerCharlie]

Yeah Whizit, I remember your stuff and it worked good. I could be comfy with that setup.

How about remote servicing of the network? How does Linux fair there?

[Hoepoe]

RC, remote access/servicin is fine, secure.

I would recommend either Mandrake 10 or SuSE 9.2 or Novell Desktop for ease of use.

Hoepoe

[whizit]

I am using SuSE 9.1 pro 64 bit right now with LTSP for terminal services. LTSP I downloaded and installed outside of the distro.

I also have a older RH box for webhosting, mail and etc.

[RangerCharlie]

Met with the contractor last night and here was his proposal.

Linux server with 24 terminals using VMWARE to allow the use of WinXP during class times. The rest of the time the stations will just be net terminals where the user has to get a logon from admin for tracking purposes.
He assured us that any MS app could be run this way and the user would not notice the differance. The benifit of the terminals is that the server handles it all and the machines are less likely to get corrupt/infected.

As the ISP he is very concerned about people just walking in to use the terminals for bad things and he would be responsible. Linux would solve this he says.

[whizit]

Originally posted by RangerCharlie
Met with the contractor last night and here was his proposal.

Linux server with 24 terminals using VMWARE to allow the use of WinXP during class times. The rest of the time the stations will just be net terminals where the user has to get a logon from admin for tracking purposes.
He assured us that any MS app could be run this way and the user would not notice the differance. The benifit of the terminals is that the server handles it all and the machines are less likely to get corrupt/infected.


I have never personally used VmWare but I have heard from reliable sources it just works. IMO I use Linux for reliability, stability and cost. VmWare just raised the cost which doesnt make it so appealing to me anymore especially for smaller installations. Of course I could be way off course here.


Originally posted by RangerCharlieAs the ISP he is very concerned about people just walking in to use the terminals for bad things and he would be responsible. Linux would solve this he says.

I wonder if he ever tells his other clients this, plus I have never seen a person use Linux for "bad" things *snicker* :p

[RangerCharlie]

I think it was $299 for a license for the site for VmWare.

I guess I will be learning Linux as the idea sounds reasonable.

[Hoepoe]

Sounds ok.

Let me know if you need the force of the geek ;-)

Hoepoe

[RangerCharlie]

Yeah, I think it's $55 per station for the MS licenses.
I am being open minded with this, so we shall see.

Any of you run MS Terminal Server?

[charmon]

I use it in the Financial Aid department at the college I work at.

[gerg]

Can't commnet on VMware on Linux, but we recently started using it on our personal Win2000 machines. We are upgrading DB2 on AIX from 7.2 to 8.2. Needed the additional image to allow the installation of both clients. So far it has worked well.