[ale] Best Desktop Env or Distro for Windows users?

[Charles Marcus]

> From: Irv Mullins [mailto:irvm at ellijay.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 11:40 AM
>
> After complaining for a couple of months, the most
> productive people sometimes do just that - move on -
> it's easy for them to get better jobs.

Can it happen?  Yeah, sure.  Is it *likely* to happen?  Of course not.  This
is a ridiculous suggestion.  When someone takes a job, they don't base that
decision on what version of Windows the company runs on their desktops.

The main people who will be crying about it are the ones who are probably
spending a lot of time 'playing' on the computer when they should be working
anyway, so I would say, 'good riddance'.

Of course, this all depends on whether or not there is an essential
application that *only* runs on windows that the employee needs.  In this
case, it would of course be necessary to provide access to that program, but
you can still do this and run Linux terminals too.

> In the meantime, all that complaining is costing
> productivity, and annoying the managers.  There'll
> be a few who will spend their time searching for
> flaws in the plan, and making sure that management
> is painfully aware of those flaws.

OK.  Scenario:

Typical Office setting.  Users need to be able to send/receive email, write
letters and send faxes, do an occasional spreadsheet, access the company's
web-based portal.

There is nothing there that cannot be *easily* done on a Linux Terminal, and
99% of all Users would be able to use it immediately, although they may
spend a few hours learning a new way to launch their programs (from a menu
instead of from their desktop), or accessing their files (clicking on an
icon on the taskbar instead of on their desktop).  With OpenOffice.org,
Users can easily open/read and save/send M$ Word and Excel docs.

Sorry, Irv, I see no show-stoppers here.

Why don't you provide some concrete examples of how switching to a minimal
Window Manager based Linux setup would cost in the way of Productivity -
concrete examples, not broad, general statements.

>> Managements *only* concern should be that they have
>> the tools they need to do their job well.

> Management is concerned with showing a profit. Money
> spent re-training people already familiar with Windows
> cuts into profit.

Realistically, there will be very little re-training needed, with a few
exceptions (Power Users, who may have some special programs they use, etc,
that will be using the Win4Lin sessions).

How much retraining is needed to teach someone 'click here to pop-up Menu
choices for WP templates, Faxcover templates, Web shortcuts, Email, etc?

> Add to that the very real fact that 90% of new hires
> will have some experience with Windows, but not with
> other systems. Training then becomes a continuous and
> unjustifiable extra expense which dwarfs any saving on
> licenses or hardware.

Bunk. I have no problem with adding a File Manager to IceWM, so that Users
can have icons on their desktop.  If the SysAdmin is doing their job, there
will be links on the Desktop for Email, Web, LetterHead templates, Faxcover
Templates, etc etc.

All someone has to do is 'look'.  Yeah, thats a lot of retraining involved
there.

Evolution is close enough to Outlook that very little, if any, training will
be necessary.  Same for OOo Writer and Calc.  I just don;t see the problem.

> Then they don't need the "eye candy" of a GUI at
> all - throw away that window manager, and use text
> mode.

Give me a break.  There is a *huge* difference between the eye-candy and the
overhead it requires, and a basic GUI that provides the ability to run GUI
applications.  Your comment is simply not thought out, at best, or
disingenuous at worst.

Charles


---
This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be 
sent to listmaster at ale dot org.