Windows Worm knocks down corporations

[RoMi]

The next obvious question is then: why don't they use Linux?!

Because they aren't iago.

Even at work iago has to use Windows.

[Joe]

Nah, iago uses Slackware at work.

[iago]

I use both.  Our managed desktops are Windows, because there is currently no good central Linux management solution (like Active Directory).  But my laptop and the servers I look after are all Slackware. 

[Sidoh]

Active Directory are teh pwn!

[Newby]

It's because... They NEVER do tech support themselves. They'll get like that expensive Red Hat thingy... so they have tech support, which ends up more expensive than Windows.

LOL! You sound like my dad.

That's his only argument as to why Windows > Linux in business / servers.

"Sure, it's free, but in the end, ti's more expensive to maintain."

[Ergot]

I would just get Slackware or some other free distro and hire an iago or something.

[Quik]

Actually, Red Hat is less expensive than Windows in many businesses.

And yes, Red Hat is a logical choice for corperations.

[Sidoh]

Actually, Red Hat is less expensive than Windows in many businesses.

And yes, Red Hat is a logical choice for corperations.

So is windows.

( Not saying Windows is better, but you just said it was a logical choice. )

[Quik]

Well, no. Most software companies which develop platform-independant software choose Red Hat because of the enormous amount of support that comes with it, and the small amount of resources required to upkeep it (security, IT team, etc etc).

[Krazed]

Well, any company in this world (that uses computers) has a security department to take care of things. Linux and Windows are both logical choices for companys. However, in most offices, windows is used because it's what most people are adapted to. People are lazy, they don't want to learn something new. Also Ergot's point, Linux is free, however for the training that would be required, and the constant tech support, it would become expensive.

[iago]

Well, any company in this world (that uses computers) has a security department to take care of things.

Actually, very few companies have security departments.  Most of them will hire a consultant, pay them big $$$ for a couple weeks to assess/design/implement/document security measures, then they part ways. 

[Quik]

Well, any company in this world (that uses computers) has a security department to take care of things. Linux and Windows are both logical choices for companys. However, in most offices, windows is used because it's what most people are adapted to. People are lazy, they don't want to learn something new. Also Ergot's point, Linux is free, however for the training that would be required, and the constant tech support, it would become expensive.

Corperate linux is NOT free, but gets many of the features, plus its own, of Windows and not being Windows, yet doesn't lose functionality. And many computer professionals know how to use all types of operating systems.

[Ergot]

However, many average people do not. That an unfortunate downside. It's just that not too many people are exposed to Linux at ALL. Even a bit of DOS would help them out, but Microsoft doesn't like people using command line ;/ ?

[Newby]

Installing drivers is NOT something that is easy in Linux....

Now, imagine installing drivers on 50,000 Linux boxes.

Sound like something a corporation wants to do?

Now, installing drivers on 50,000 Windows boxes is phenemonally easier. Windows Update makes it damn near impossible to fuck up installing drivers!

[Sidoh]

Well, no. Most software companies which develop platform-independant software choose Red Hat because of the enormous amount of support that comes with it, and the small amount of resources required to upkeep it (security, IT team, etc etc).

Actually, Red Hat is less expensive than Windows in many businesses.

And yes, Red Hat is a logical choice for corperations.

Are you saying that software companies are the only types of corporations or something?