I made this post because I am really curious if Linux is used in offices and educational centres like schools.
While we all know Windows is the mac-daddy in the business space, are there any businesses you know or workplaces that actually Linux as a business replacement for Windows?
I.e. Mint or Ubuntu, I am not strictly talking about the server side of things.
Linux in corporation fails in multiple ways, the most prevalent is that people need to collaborate with others that use proprietary software such as MS Office that isn’t available for Linux and the alternatives such as LibreOffice aren’t just good enough. It all comes down to ROI, the cost of Windows/Office for a company is cheaper than the cost of dealing with the inconsistencies in format conversions, people who don’t know how to use the alternative X etc etc. This issue is so common that companies usually also avoid Apple due to the same reason, while on macOS you’ve a LOT more professional software it is still very painful to deal with the small inconsistencies and whatnot.
Linux desktop is great, I love it, but it gets it even worse than Apple, here some use cases that aren’t easy to deal in Linux:
- People who need the real MS Office because once you have to collaborate with others Open/Libre/OnlyOffice won’t cut it;
- Designers who use Adobe apps that won’t run properly without having a dedicated GPU, passthrough and a some hacky way to get the image back into your main system that will cause noticeable delays. Who wants to deploy GPU passthroughs for others? Makes no sense;
- People that run old software / games because not even those will run properly on Wine;
- Electrical engineers: Circuit Design Suite (Multisim and Ultiboard) are primarily designed for Windows. Alternatives such as KiCad and EasyEDA may work in some cases but they aren’t great if you’ve to collaborate with others who use Circuit Design Suite;
- Labs that require data acquisition from specialized hardware because companies making that hardware won’t make drivers and software for Linux;
- Architects: AutoCAD isn’t available (not even the limited web version works) and Libre/FreeCAD don’t cut it if you’ve to collaborate with AutoCAD users;
- Developers and sysadmins, because not everyone is using Docker and Github actions to deploy applications to some proprietary cloud solution. Finding a properly working FTP/SFTP/FTPS desktop client (similar WinSCP or Cyberduck) is an impossible task as the ones that exist fail even at basic tasks like dragging and dropping a file.
If one lives in a bubble and doesn’t to collaborate with others then native Linux apps might work and might even deliver a decent workflow. Once collaboration with Windows/Mac users is required then it’s game over – the “alternatives” aren’t just up to it.
Windows licenses are cheap and things work out of the box. Software runs fine, all vendors support whatever you’re trying to do and you’re productive from day zero. Sure, there are annoyances from time to time, but they’re way fewer and simpler to deal with than the hoops you’ve to go through to get a minimal and viable/productive Linux desktop experience. It all comes down to a question of how much time (days? months?) you want to spend fixing things on Linux that simply work out of the box under Windows for a minimal fee. Buy a Windows license and spend the time you would’ve spent dealing with Linux issues doing your actual job and you’ll, most likely, get a better ROI.
From a more market / macro perspective here are some extra reasons:
- Companies like blame someone when things go wrong, if they chose open-source there’s isn’t someone to sue then;
- Buying proprietary stuff means you’re outsourcing the risks of such product;
- Corruption pushes for proprietary: they might be buying software that is made by someone that is close to the CTO, CEO or other decision marker in the company, an old friend, family or straight under the table corruption;
- Most non-tech companies use services from consulting companies in order to get their software developed / running. Consulting companies often fall under the last point that besides that they have have large incentives from companies like Microsoft to push their proprietary services. For eg. Microsoft will easily provide all of a consulting companies employees with free Azure services, Office and other discounts if they enter in an exclusivity agreement to sell their tech stack. To make things worse consulting companies live of cheap developers (like interns) and Microsoft and their platform makes things easier for anyone to code and deploy;
- Microsoft provider a cohesive ecosystem of products that integrate really well with each other and usually don’t require much effort to get things going - open-source however, usually requires custom development and a ton of work to work out the “sharp angles” between multiple solutions that aren’t related and might not be easily compatible with each other;
- Open-source requires a level of expertise that more than half of the developers and IT professionals simply don’t have. This aspect reinforces the last point even more. Senior open-source experts are more expensive than simply buying proprietary solutions;
- If we consider the price of a senior open-source expert + software costs (usually free) the cost of open-source is considerable lower than the cost of cheap developers + proprietary solutions, however consider we are talking about companies. Companies will always prefer to hire more less expensive and less proficient people because that means they’re easier to replace and you’ll pay less taxes;
- Companies will prefer to hire services from other companies instead of employees thus making proprietary vendors more compelling. This happens because from an accounting / investors perspective employees are bad and subscriptions are cool (less taxes, no responsibilities etc);
- The companies who build proprietary solutions work really hard to get vendors to sell their software, they provide commissions, support and the promises that if anything goes wrong they’ll be there. This increases the number of proprietary-only vendors which reinforces everything above. If you’re starting to sell software or networking services there’s little incentive for you to go pure “open-source”. With less companies, less visibility, less professionals (and more expensive), less margins and less positive market image, less customers and lesser profits.
Unfortunately things are really poised and rigged against open-source solutions and anyone who tries to push for them. The “experts” who work in consulting companies are part of this as they usually don’t even know how to do things without the property solutions. Let me give you an example, once I had to work with E&Y, one of those big consulting companies, and I realized some awkward things while having conversations with both low level employees and partners / middle management, they weren’t aware that there are alternatives most of the time. A manager of a digital transformation and cloud solutions team that started his career E&Y, wasn’t aware that there was open-source alternatives to Google Workplace and Microsoft 365 for e-mail. I probed a TON around that and the guy, a software engineer with an university degree, didn’t even know that was Postfix was and the history of email.
Lots of justification in this. Just be the change you want to see.
I only work with libre formats at work. If someone wants to collaborate, they can easily install libre office or gimp or freecad or gnu cash or whatever. Most libre software is free and cross-platform.
I salute you. Not many that are willing to do so. Maybe because most people don’t have very deep convictions on using FLOSS. It is easier to just do what everyone else does, after all.
I think the opposite. Working on windows is a pain in the ass. Like the system is not made for working and barely support it for actual computer work.
If you only use office or play video games, it’s good, certainly, and it’s good for the security team to have everyone with it because the system is built to only allow specific actions to be done. It’s completely inapt for actual engineering and technical work.
You can’t do whatever you want if you’re an employee in a big enterprise, there are company-wide rules and standards that you have to respect, you can’t expect your colleagues to adapt to you nor you can decide which OS to install on your company PC.
That’s not to say you can’t use Linux at all, you can ask your IT to be allowed to install Virtualbox and use Linux in a VM, that’s what I do, there are a lot of things that don’t strictly require Windows and I use Linux for those.
your colleagues to adapt to you nor you can decide which OS
Sometimes its not even about colleagues, check my reply before https://lemmy.world/comment/6509728
I make it very clear at the interview stage that I use Linux. Its never been an issue.
If someone tried to force me to use proprietary software, I’d say no. If they wanted to fire me over that, it would be ridiculous. It’s free and easy to support FOSS. Its costly & difficult to support proprietary software, so its not a hard sell.
You have more power than you think.
I only work with libre formats at work. If someone wants to collaborate, they can easily install libre office or gimp or freecad or gnu cash or whatever. Most libre software is free and cross-platform.
Okay so tell me, you’re working on a budget with a potential customer that uses MS Office. You want to win that customer and do a big project for him, would you “bitch” about him about using MS Office and ask him to install LibreOffice whenever the spreadsheet formulas don’t work properly?
What if said potential customer is a big company with strict IT policies? What if the person can’t even install software or is older and unable do it but very proficient with Excel?
Are you willing to lose a potential big customer, a project that will pay your bills for months just because a boomer can’t or won’t be able to install LibreOffice?
I tell customers to use Libre Office. I tell them its free, cross platform, give them a link to download it, and ask if they have any further questions.
If they said IT issues, I’d ask to talk with their IT department. Its not difficult to get IT to install trusted, open-source software.
I’ve been a sysadmin for years and I worked longer on Linux than I did on Windows.
Many of your points are management bullshit. The proof? In France the gendarmerie (country police) moved to Linux about a decade ago.
The thing with windows is usually that management want a whole solution out of the box, from a renowned editor, so basically Microsoft. The key point is that they want a contract with a company so they can discard the responsability of failures on someone out of their own company. The second feature is that they are boomers or anti-nerds, so they are never going to be seen using something on a computer that’s not mainstream.
The last problem is from Microsoft that worked hard these last years to remove any compatibility between office and other softwares of this kind. They also enshitified office365 very hard so that is doesn’t work well on Linux.
The question of the price is a fraud. Large companies need an it service for Windows on top of the licences and infrastructure. It’s way cheaper with Linux. The biggest work with an enterprise Linux is to make it compatible with the shitty Windows environment, and the compliance with the useless security thought for windows.
Many of your points are management bullshit.
Yes, they are and I never said they weren’t management BS. Nevertheless management pays the bills, management makes the decision.
The key point is that they want a contract with a company so they can discard the responsability of failures on someone out of their own company.
You’re just saying what I said before…
The last problem is from Microsoft that worked hard these last years to remove any compatibility between office and other softwares of this kind
Yes, but the end result is that nobody sane would even risk not using MS Office and that’s what it is.
Large companies need an it service for Windows on top of the licences and infrastructure. It’s way cheaper with Linux.
It depends, integration between MS products and services usually comes out of the box or working with minimal setup while with open-source solutions / Linux that isn’t always the case. Also Windows sysadmins are usually cheaper because you can get more and they require less training to be “efficient” than Linux ones.
The biggest work with an enterprise Linux is to make it compatible with the shitty Windows environment, and the compliance with the useless security thought for windows.
Yes but you still have do it and it has a cost. Simply going full Windows is cheaper at that point.
That’s where we disagree : anybody sane would use Linux rather than windows. Windows usage is based on ignorance.
You have zero idea about Windows system integration if you think it comes out of the box. Or you live in America. In Europe, data safety is a concern, and it raises many, many problems with Windows “out of the box”.
Well thought out post and largely true.
As a small counterpoint, I am supposed to use Windows at work but I use Linux. I would say that I am a “very heavy” but intermediate Microsoft Office user. That is, while I am not expert level in Office, I have to create and consume multiple documents per day. I give ( or submit ) several PowerPoints per week. These typically use templates supplied by Marketing or others. I create and consume multiple Excel files daily which almost always have multiple worksheets. I must admit that I have gotten authoring Word files down to maybe one per week but I open 3 a day at least.
Of course, I do not actually use Microsoft Office most of the time. Most of the above is in LibreOffice. I spend a tonne of my day in Outlook which I use in a browser ( Office 365 ). If I am opening a document from an email, it will often open in Office 365 online ( in my browser in Linux ). So do I use Microsoft Office quite a bit but rarely author anything there. While I prefer Firefox, I use Microsoft Edge on Linux and most often that is where I have Outlook open. Sadly, I have at least 3 to 4 Microsoft Teams meetings a day. Teams and GoToMeeting are why I started using Edge. It is just a nicer workflow if Teams and Outlook are in the same browser.
Anyway, I have very little problem exchanging documents. I had to switch to default fonts that Windows users will have of course but that was long ago now. So, I would not say that “alternatives such as LibreOffice aren’t just good enough” is a fair assessment for everybody. If I was an expert user in any one app ( in Finance maybe ) I could see this being true but I bet most office workers could use LibreOffice just fine these days.
Outside of Office, most of what I use are web applications which work just as well on Linux. I use containers a lot and they work better on Linux. Linux is quite bit snappier on the same hardware.
I am just a datapoint though and the issues you raise are real. I would perhaps just be less absolute about it. Trying Linux can still make sense. Also, you can try LibreOffice on Windows before jumping all the way to Linux.
I have very little problem exchanging documents
Yes but you still have some little annoyances here and there. Is it worth having to fight your software to get your job done? Isn’t just easier and more productive to use MS Office (ROI described above and whatnot).
Teams and GoToMeeting are why I started using Edge. It is just a nicer workflow if Teams and Outlook are in the same browser.
See this is what most people feel about Office, its just nicer to use the Microsoft thing and not ever having to worry about anything.
While I agree that for some people LibreOffice might work, there’s the following simple test:
Id’ say your comparison pictured is not valid. It’s not the same document in both programs. On the left you have opened Lorem Ipsum.docs and on the right you have a new untitled document.
If one truly wants to share final documents use pdf not a draft format like docx.
i mostly agree except its leagues ahead for sysadmins and devs, it isnt even a contest. to counter your specific example, filezilla works great. i havent used a tool for this specific niche on linux that wasnt much better.
affinity photo is great on linux too if you are not too stuck with adobe. cant say much about other usecases you mentioned.
also wine runs old software better than windows in some cases. i have better luck with it on linux. funnily enough old linux software is a pain on linux in the rare situations where i need it.
