On Wed, 2004-08-11 at 13:51, Sid Boyce wrote: it clown wrote:
I think why linux is growing so slowly in companies are because of the it managers that do not deserve that title.They dont know whats out there. Whats better or how to save money. When the dinosaurs retire things should change, i hope.
There are never any sudden moves in IT, the snowball starts out egg size and you don't see an avalanche for ages. Some of those decision makers are accustomed to the warm blanket that a Microsoft provides and I personally have seen the FUDsters at work if you ever try to come out from under, they have even got managers sacked. Some articles by consultants have recommended a gradualist, planned and coherent strategy to migration, their arguments seem sensible - every step must be manageable and carefully targetted for little or no disruption - as seemless as possible. . . . History is repeating itself, pre-1985 IBM was king of the castle with
Sid Boyce: their mainframes, and everyone else had to claw their way in (DEC VAX, HP 3000, Novell Netware). In the early 1990's it was Novell, and then Microsoft had to fight the big bad network operating system vendor with LAN Manager (LAN Damager). IBM tried OS/2. And someone bought Banyan Vines. And then MS came out with NT 3.51 and slowly one or two blue boxes started to pop up next to a lot of red boxes (Novell). The red boxes became less, and the blue boxes took over. Now penguin boxes is starting to sprout where blue boxes have been, and a new cycle began. Rudolf