Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Melvin on March 04, 2012, 07:18:36 AM
-
How long will Windows XP remain a viable OS?
-
4/8/2014
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/search/default.aspx?alpha=Windows+XP (http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/search/default.aspx?alpha=Windows+XP)
-
If history will repeat itself, after that date some device manufacturers will immediately remove all drivers for XP from their support sites (because MS doesn't release updates anymore, they fear for compatibility issues!!!), others will withdraw from all responsibility concerning their XP drivers (which will be the last versions either shipped with the product or updated). Most manufacturers won't release XP drivers for their new devices after that.
However, it will probably take many years until finding an antivirus program makes it a security risk for Internet surfing, not to mention using the XP rig as a file server, typewriter and such.
-
How long will Windows XP remain a viable OS?
In your current computer it will never cease to be a viable OS as long as you have a backup copy of all the required drivers as Bizman said. For new computers it's already difficult to find XP drivers.
-
Actually if your OS is still installed, it will never cease to be current...
The problem is if you want to REINSTALL it on an older box. I tried that not too long ago on a secondary machine. Wiped/reformatted/reinstalled, and had SO many problems getting XP to go on it wasn't funny. Not the least of which was you have to manually download and install the SPs until you get to SP2 or 3 to get auto updater to work. Gone are the days you can just set it to install all the updates you need... Those manually downloaded SP1 updates kept erroring out and being pests, corrupting entire OS installs when they quit halfway through, etc.. It wasn't fun in the least.
However, if the OS is still up to date and installed at least to the point you have windows update running, it should last a while.
Unless you need to reformat for some reason.
I ended up moving to Win7 for the advanced memory support and x64 bit features, but XP was still good while I had it. I did like it as an OS. There's a reason it was around for so long.
-
had SO many problems getting XP to go on it wasn't funny. Not the least of which was you have to manually download and install the SPs until you get to SP2 or 3 to get auto updater to work. Gone are the days you can just set it to install all the updates you need... Those manually downloaded SP1 updates kept erroring out and being pests, corrupting entire OS installs when they quit halfway through, etc...
Now that's weird! Your downloads must have been corrupted during download.
I do XP reinstalls about every two weeks without any hassle. I must admit, though, that it's been a long time since I last used a no-SP installation disk. Anyway, the standalone versions of Service packs have always worked perfectly after a clean install. I wouldn't try to "run" them, I'd rather save them to desktop before installing them (actually I have them on a memory stick and copy them to desktop when needed). You never know what might happen in the network during a lengthy install procedure, do you?
I have slipstreamed my original XP SP2 CD's to SP3 the Microsoft way. They work like charm. I haven't had interest to do the same to all my brand specific installation disks, though, that's why I last week installed XP SP1 to a Fujitsu-Siemens and updated it first with the two remaining SP's before installing an antivirus and connecting it to the Internet for the remaining 120'ish updates.
-
Even if you have SP3 included on your disk, there are still around one hundred individual updates to download after an XP install, mostly security patches.
And after that April 2014 date, no more bug fixes and no more security patches.
-
Even if you have SP3 included on your disk, there are still around one hundred individual updates to download after an XP install, mostly security patches.
And after that April 2014 date, no more bug fixes and no more security patches.
Still 2 long years to go. Chances are your old XP computer is dead by then.
-
Now that's weird! Your downloads must have been corrupted during download.
I do XP reinstalls about every two weeks without any hassle. I must admit, though, that it's been a long time since I last used a no-SP installation disk. Anyway, the standalone versions of Service packs have always worked perfectly after a clean install. I wouldn't try to "run" them, I'd rather save them to desktop before installing them (actually I have them on a memory stick and copy them to desktop when needed). You never know what might happen in the network during a lengthy install procedure, do you?
I have slipstreamed my original XP SP2 CD's to SP3 the Microsoft way. They work like charm. I haven't had interest to do the same to all my brand specific installation disks, though, that's why I last week installed XP SP1 to a Fujitsu-Siemens and updated it first with the two remaining SP's before installing an antivirus and connecting it to the Internet for the remaining 120'ish updates.
Unless you're lucky to have an XP install disc that has the SPs on it (mine predates that -- it's such a good OS I've had it that long!), you have to go out to MS's website. It's not openly posted, either. You have to search MS's webpage to find the service pack download links.
I did download them directly from MS several times because I thought at first it was corrupt downloads. I saved them locally and ran them off the HDD. I still had issues.
-
Unless you're lucky to have an XP install disc that has the SPs on it (mine predates that -- it's such a good OS I've had it that long!), you have to go out to MS's website. It's not openly posted, either. You have to search MS's webpage to find the service pack download links.
I did download them directly from MS several times because I thought at first it was corrupt downloads. I saved them locally and ran them off the HDD. I still had issues.
One thing to remember is to keep that old 3,5" floppy drive at hand if you have XP without service pack 2 or 3. Installation to sata drives will fail without it :)
-
Jusr slipstream the installation and be done with it. That way you have all the patches and service packs on a disk ready for the next installation. Heck, you can add the drivers into it as well so you have one disk with everything you need to get up and running.
If you have a CD/DVD burner, there really is no reason not to build your own install disk.
-
Jusr slipstream the installation and be done with it. That way you have all the patches and service packs on a disk ready for the next installation. Heck, you can add the drivers into it as well so you have one disk with everything you need to get up and running.
If you have a CD/DVD burner, there really is no reason not to build your own install disk.
Actually, there's a very good reason not to do it: not knowing how. ;)
My solution is to backup everything via Acronis True Image. I've actually had to do a total restore once from Acronis and it worked OK. (If you can believe it, I tried installing an old version of MS Flight Simulator, probably 2004, and it completely hosed my system, probably by clobbering some new dll with an old one.)
-
There is a program called nLite that does this and creates an unattended install too... hang on...
http://lifehacker.com/386526/slipstream-service-pack-3-into-your-windows-xp-installation-cd
-
Google it 715. It really is not that difficult to do. nLite (http://www.nliteos.com/) makes it pretty simple, if you do not want to do the command line thing.
-
does nlite do windows 7 also?
-
does nlite do windows 7 also?
There is a beta version of rt7lite (http://www.rt7lite.com/) available (when the site is not being jammed with users hitting the download page) which is specifically for Windows 7.
nLite might work, but I have not tried it with Windows 7.
-
does nlite do windows 7 also?
There is also a program called Acronis that you can do single back up images or contininous back ups of your C: drive to a second HD if you have one.
It has you create a rescue disc that you boot to after a reformat and it rebuilds your C: drive back to the state is was when you saved the image.
It is very easy to use. It works with XP, Vista and W7.
I use it manually to create an image every 3 months or so (it over writes the prior one or creates a new one whichever you choose).
I find this better than a slipstreamed disc because you cant constantly updated it.
The very best is to do both. Create a slipstreamed install disc as a base install of your fully installed C: drive. Then use Acronis to keep doing periodic backups.
I am sure there are other similar programs, I have used this one for 3+ years successfully.
Yama
-
Actually, there's a very good reason not to do it: not knowing how. ;)
As Skuzzy said, Google for slipstreaming instructions. I have used nLite and although it's quite easy to use, there's also a bunch of options to screw things totally (done that, too). I lately tried the Command line option for slipstreaming SP3 to my original SP2 discs, because nLite isn't free for commercial use. With the advice I found it was quite an easy task, although English isn't my native language. Also, someone has told me that the result using built-in Windows tools directly may be more accurate than using third party tools to run the same commands. There's less possibilities for typos in the coding that way.
-
that date in 2014 would be the earliest possible date for support to go away. However XP was a bit of a benchmark in computing since it is the OS that was around during an explosion of business computer purchasing. A lot of companies will continue to use XP for as long as possible and they will be making a big stink if Microsoft stops supporting it before enough of them are ready to upgrade.
-
that date in 2014 would be the earliest possible date for support to go away. However XP was a bit of a benchmark in computing since it is the OS that was around during an explosion of business computer purchasing. A lot of companies will continue to use XP for as long as possible and they will be making a big stink if Microsoft stops supporting it before enough of them are ready to upgrade.
The vast majority of companies I know are migrating at full speed to 7 at the moment. Some have already done so. It's becoming rare to see xp boxes in a business environment. Most companies lease their computers - when the 3 year lease expires they move to win7 machines. The late updaters are just now ending their 3 year leases so there are still some left.
-
XP will still be in massive use for industrial applications.
Nearly everything I've ever worked with ran on a windows XP kernel or DOS. Most need to be running service pack 1 to function properly.
-
XP will still be in massive use for industrial applications.
Nearly everything I've ever worked with ran on a windows XP kernel or DOS. Most need to be running service pack 1 to function properly.
Well those are a niche market anyway. I remember the problems that came with those already when moving to NT4/XP. Soon that stuff will get hopelessly outdated.
-
The vast majority of companies I know are migrating at full speed to 7 at the moment. Some have already done so. It's becoming rare to see xp boxes in a business environment. Most companies lease their computers - when the 3 year lease expires they move to win7 machines. The late updaters are just now ending their 3 year leases so there are still some left.
That may be true among your customers and mine, too, but the world is a large place. Funny as it sounds, a worldwide company in 88 countries upgraded from Windows NT to Windows 2000 in their shops as lately as a year ago, at least in Scandinavia. The hardware was delivered to the shops, and the local shopkeepers don't have admin rights or even access to the Internet throught those rigs.
Long after Win98 was buried I read that it was still widely popular in Africa.
The leasing companies have to dump their old hardware somewhere...
-
That may be true among your customers and mine, too, but the world is a large place. Funny as it sounds, a worldwide company in 88 countries upgraded from Windows NT to Windows 2000 in their shops as lately as a year ago, at least in Scandinavia. The hardware was delivered to the shops, and the local shopkeepers don't have admin rights or even access to the Internet throught those rigs.
Long after Win98 was buried I read that it was still widely popular in Africa.
The leasing companies have to dump their old hardware somewhere...
How could they do that? There are no win2000 drivers available for any current hardware.
-
How could they do that? There are no win2000 drivers available for any current hardware.
Who said the hardware was current? Most likely they had bought it cheap from a leasing company, or some large company who upgraded their hardware, or some big bankrupt's sale.
-
How could they do that? There are no win2000 drivers available for any current hardware.
You are assuming current hardware. I still have a Windows 2000 box, at home. Runs fine.
-
Well those are a niche market anyway. I remember the problems that came with those already when moving to NT4/XP. Soon that stuff will get hopelessly outdated.
What you call a niche market carries a lot more weight per unit than home computing does. Anytime a product is used to make money, that product becomes a lot more valuable because you can't just up and change equipment without downtime.
All of my customers just continue to use old computers, and buy old computers when their fails. The cost is usually too high to allow upgrading because upgrading a front end that resides on a computer usually means replacing all of the control system components so that $500 workstation won't do it's job unless we spend $200k on a new system since it won't work with the one they have. My wealthiest customer still sources replacement electronics that are out of production from what I take out of rural schools that we retrofit. All 80 or so computers on that network have been out of production since 1988 and to get the system to work with a XP front end we had to void the warranty on our own product to get it to work.
If you want a computer for an industrial application there are certain things to expect.
In my experience it's always been this:
1. You may have to uninstall windows service packs
2. You must be using a particular version of java that is no longer current
3. You must be using a particular version of Internet Explorer that is no longer current.
-
I'm getting dragged into the current decade with my new company...every pc they put out (control systems/graphical interfaces in jails) has Win 7 on it. Hated it at first---just seemed like they dragged all the icons around and plunked them in different places, and called it a new version. Now, I can at least competently operate it, and it DOES have a nice feature, which I've tested on job sites--has it's own hard-drive mirror program
-
I'm getting dragged into the current decade with my new company...every pc they put out (control systems/graphical interfaces in jails) has Win 7 on it. Hated it at first---just seemed like they dragged all the icons around and plunked them in different places, and called it a new version. Now, I can at least competently operate it, and it DOES have a nice feature, which I've tested on job sites--has it's own hard-drive mirror program
I'm glad I switched to 7 Home Premium.
-
You are assuming current hardware. I still have a Windows 2000 box, at home. Runs fine.
Usually when a large company migrates to a new OS it means getting new hardware in the process :)
The IT management of the company bizman mentioned has to be seriously inept if they skimp cost by getting junk hardware (at least for any desktop use). Desktop work productivity has been shown to increase so much with current hardware and large double screens that the investment pays itself off in a few months.
-
The company in question uses those old rigs in their shops. If my memory serves me right, the shopkeeper doesn't even have access to the Internet with those rigs. They are used on the selling desk for Intranet use to find product details and maybe also for their appointment calendar. Now that I think about it, they might not save anything on the local hard disk. Remotely administrated closed network with strict management rules. Safe and cheap.
Actually I have stumbled upon another international chain of gamer's shops who have a similar concept. They had to visit the Internet operator's shop in the next pit if they needed to google for something. :lol
-
The company in question uses those old rigs in their shops. If my memory serves me right, the shopkeeper doesn't even have access to the Internet with those rigs. They are used on the selling desk for Intranet use to find product details and maybe also for their appointment calendar. Now that I think about it, they might not save anything on the local hard disk. Remotely administrated closed network with strict management rules. Safe and cheap.
Actually I have stumbled upon another international chain of gamer's shops who have a similar concept. They had to visit the Internet operator's shop in the next pit if they needed to google for something. :lol
Wow, sounds awful for work ergonomy :)
Then again I used to work in a company that had a Windows 3.1 computer and a dos or unix based selling system, couldn't say which from the terminal. That was all that was needed for the shop. Was a pain in the bellybutton since you couldn't do much anything with the 3.1 - but luckily we didn't need to do much either. Orders were printed to a dot matrix printer directly etc.
The old sales system was about 10 times better than the new system that replaced it. The new system was sooo slow and lacked features, it wasn't even funny.
-
Usually when a large company migrates to a new OS it means getting new hardware in the process :)
The IT management of the company bizman mentioned has to be seriously inept if they skimp cost by getting junk hardware (at least for any desktop use). Desktop work productivity has been shown to increase so much with current hardware and large double screens that the investment pays itself off in a few months.
Inept, or frugal?
I'd like to see that study and who paid for it. I can categorically state the Windows desktop is more of an impediment to me than any other single thing on my computer. It digs into my productivity, in a huge way. I am dreading when I have to switch to Windows 7 as it gets in the way of my productivity even more than XP does.
I have a very old 800Mhz P3 Linux system, at home, that I can get more done, faster, than I can with my state of the art Windows computer.
-
I'd say frugal. They don't need to worry about malware or BHO's or toolbars at all. I guess the main reason for upgrading from NT to 2k was unavailability of motherboard and printer drivers for newer hardware.
As for productivity, I can't see any difference between an old workhorse or a brand new TD style dedicated rig when all that has to be done is to scroll an online product catalogue, check product availability in stock or manage bookings in the Intranet. Facebook status updating or watching funny Youtube clips don't add sales when there's a queue behind the desk. And on the ergonomic side, they can choose whatever type of a mouse, keyboard and monitor they wish.
-
It's simple !!!! I say we all go back to Windows ME and call it a day lol… I really liked ME... I had a heck of a time giving up on it... although it saved me from the hell they called VISTA.. talk about a POS WOWIE
I won't bring up the 8 bata I am running.. :0
Salute
Gatr
-
Inept, or frugal?
I'd like to see that study and who paid for it. I can categorically state the Windows desktop is more of an impediment to me than any other single thing on my computer. It digs into my productivity, in a huge way. I am dreading when I have to switch to Windows 7 as it gets in the way of my productivity even more than XP does.
I have a very old 800Mhz P3 Linux system, at home, that I can get more done, faster, than I can with my state of the art Windows computer.
When people do a desktop job like coding or text processing, it's hugely beneficial to be able to open up several documents, web pages etc. to the screen at once. That's why antique hardware with tiny screens is going to give a major blow to productivity.
-
I'd say frugal. They don't need to worry about malware or BHO's or toolbars at all. I guess the main reason for upgrading from NT to 2k was unavailability of motherboard and printer drivers for newer hardware.
This is far from the truth. As long as the user has access to personal email or USB memory sticks the system is just as vulnerable as any. The only protection they have is against information leak if they're really disconnected from general internet.
This, then will require either dedicated copper (very very expensive) or a private subnet which artificially blocks everyone from the internet. If the users can't even access their e-mail on their machines ... well I'd say that's pretty huge pitfall in terms of functionality too.
If they can at least select their monitors and input devices, then it makes a little more sense I guess. But they're still dealing with aged hardware that has run thousands of hours - those old boxes must be unrealiable as hell causing support cost to rise.
-
When people do a desktop job like coding or text processing, it's hugely beneficial to be able to open up several documents, web pages etc. to the screen at once. That's why antique hardware with tiny screens is going to give a major blow to productivity.
I do coding, text processing, database design, network applications, and so on. A lot of it. I have no problem, at all having a dozen, or so, things going on at one time using a CLI. UNIX has had virtual screen switching far longer than Windows has been around. I also have job/task notification between screens, which does not interfere with what I would be currently doing, unlike Windows which insists on switching focus when an application issues a popup. I can move a job to run in the background or bring it to the foreground in any screen I want.
I can do all that on a 19 inch screen and again, far more efficiently than Windows does it on a 55 inch screen.
-
I do coding, text processing, database design, network applications, and so on. A lot of it. I have no problem, at all having a dozen, or so, things going on at one time using a CLI. UNIX has had virtual screen switching far longer than Windows has been around. I also have job/task notification between screens, which does not interfere with what I would be currently doing, unlike Windows which insists on switching focus when an application issues a popup. I can move a job to run in the background or bring it to the foreground in any screen I want.
I can do all that on a 19 inch screen and again, far more efficiently than Windows does it on a 55 inch screen.
That's a matter of personal preference. You can get multiple desktops for windows also. It saves time and helps focusing on the work when you can have two or three documents open at the same time without having to switch from a desktop to another. I always work with 2 screens when possible.
You also have to realize that while you, a long time computer expert, have no problem switching through multiple desktops and whatnot, an average office worker who doesn't master even control+c/control+v shortcuts is not going to zoom past desktops. He needs a large real estate to work with.
-
That's a matter of personal preference. You can get multiple desktops for windows also. It saves time and helps focusing on the work when you can have two or three documents open at the same time without having to switch from a desktop to another. I always work with 2 screens when possible.
You also have to realize that while you, a long time computer expert, have no problem switching through multiple desktops and whatnot, an average office worker who doesn't master even control+c/control+v shortcuts is not going to zoom past desktops. He needs a large real estate to work with.
No, the difference is I took the time to learn how to use a system in the most efficient manner possible. Windows is an extreme impediment to that. Windows forces everyone to work how Microsoft thinks you should work. UNIX is the opposite of that. With UNIX, you can tailor/configure a system to do exactly what it needs to do, thus helping the person become more efficient at using it.
I used to work in an engineering department which used Apple computers. After a year I had everyone switched and trained on UNIX systems. Productivity was off the scale. All the other engineering departments were forced to UNIX because they could never figure out how our department got so many things done, so quickly, and with fewer mistakes.
-
This is far from the truth. As long as the user has access to personal email or USB memory sticks the system is just as vulnerable as any. The only protection they have is against information leak if they're really disconnected from general internet.
If they can at least select their monitors and input devices, then it makes a little more sense I guess. But they're still dealing with aged hardware that has run thousands of hours - those old boxes must be unrealiable as hell causing support cost to rise.
The fact is, the user doesn't have access to anywhere else than the product catalogue and the calendar, restricted by user management. If anything needs to be installed, like a printer, the local user puts the installation cd in and calls to the admin, who remotely logs in and does the job. IMO with that policy even plugging a malware loaded memory stick in can't do any harm, unless one is left in place during the very seldom remote administrative tasks. Speaking about support costs, the worst that could happen would be the computer breaking right in the middle of sending/printing the sales report of the day. If that should happen, the admins would send a "new" rig, the shopkeeper would plug it into the net, log in, send the broken one to the admins for digging out the last report and continue as if nothing had happened. Of course their monitors and input devices are neat enough to match their glittery product stands.
-
No, the difference is I took the time to learn how to use a system in the most efficient manner possible. Windows is an extreme impediment to that. Windows forces everyone to work how Microsoft thinks you should work. UNIX is the opposite of that. With UNIX, you can tailor/configure a system to do exactly what it needs to do, thus helping the person become more efficient at using it.
I used to work in an engineering department which used Apple computers. After a year I had everyone switched and trained on UNIX systems. Productivity was off the scale. All the other engineering departments were forced to UNIX because they could never figure out how our department got so many things done, so quickly, and with fewer mistakes.
But in real life people are forced to use windows :) The general public could never migrate to unix, it would take months of training.
-
The fact is, the user doesn't have access to anywhere else than the product catalogue and the calendar, restricted by user management. If anything needs to be installed, like a printer, the local user puts the installation cd in and calls to the admin, who remotely logs in and does the job. IMO with that policy even plugging a malware loaded memory stick in can't do any harm, unless one is left in place during the very seldom remote administrative tasks. Speaking about support costs, the worst that could happen would be the computer breaking right in the middle of sending/printing the sales report of the day. If that should happen, the admins would send a "new" rig, the shopkeeper would plug it into the net, log in, send the broken one to the admins for digging out the last report and continue as if nothing had happened. Of course their monitors and input devices are neat enough to match their glittery product stands.
It seems that they have an extremely limited use for the computers. In fact so limited that one has to wonder why they bother with windows at all.
-
But in real life people are forced to use windows :) The general public could never migrate to unix, it would take months of training.
People are not "forced" to use anything. They use Windows because Microsoft has ("had" actually since they have started dismantling it) a world class marketing department who convinced everyone that they needed Windows.
Learning to use a UNIX system is no different that learning to use Windows. If you are not familiar with either, then you have to learn and be trained.
When I was first plopped down in front of an Apple computer to write drivers for it, I had an Apple engineer help me. It took a week to teach me enough to keep me from locking it up every 30 minutes.
There is no such thing as an "intuitive" computer system. My daughter grew up on UNIX and the CLI. First time she was plopped in front of a Windows box, she just about threw the monitor and mouse out the window. Her frustration with the "handicapped" way the system operated was overwhelming.
I am not saying Windows does not have a place, but its very design does inhibit productivity. Yes, you would have to spend more time training someone to be efficient using a UNIX system, but higher productivity pays off in the long term or you can suffer mediocre productivity, right from the start, with Windows.
-
People are not "forced" to use anything. They use Windows because Microsoft has ("had" actually since they have started dismantling it) a world class marketing department who convinced everyone that they needed Windows.
Learning to use a UNIX system is no different that learning to use Windows. If you are not familiar with either, then you have to learn and be trained.
When I was first plopped down in front of an Apple computer to write drivers for it, I had an Apple engineer help me. It took a week to teach me enough to keep me from locking it up every 30 minutes.
There is no such thing as an "intuitive" computer system. My daughter grew up on UNIX and the CLI. First time she was plopped in front of a Windows box, she just about threw the monitor and mouse out the window. Her frustration with the "handicapped" way the system operated was overwhelming.
I am not saying Windows does not have a place, but its very design does inhibit productivity. Yes, you would have to spend more time training someone to be efficient using a UNIX system, but higher productivity pays off in the long term or you can suffer mediocre productivity, right from the start, with Windows.
can UNIX run AH?
what kind of system do you need for UNIX, is it Apple only?
-
can UNIX run AH?
what kind of system do you need for UNIX, is it Apple only?
No, and that is one of the only reasons I still run Windows. Games. I still use if for video editing as well, for right now. Everything else is done on a UNIX box.
UNIX/Linux runs on just about everything. It is not an OS for everyone. For me it is a no-brainer. It has been around a lot longer than Windows and was the first OS I used.
-
People are not "forced" to use anything. They use Windows because Microsoft has ("had" actually since they have started dismantling it) a world class marketing department who convinced everyone that they needed Windows.
Learning to use a UNIX system is no different that learning to use Windows. If you are not familiar with either, then you have to learn and be trained.
When I was first plopped down in front of an Apple computer to write drivers for it, I had an Apple engineer help me. It took a week to teach me enough to keep me from locking it up every 30 minutes.
There is no such thing as an "intuitive" computer system. My daughter grew up on UNIX and the CLI. First time she was plopped in front of a Windows box, she just about threw the monitor and mouse out the window. Her frustration with the "handicapped" way the system operated was overwhelming.
I am not saying Windows does not have a place, but its very design does inhibit productivity. Yes, you would have to spend more time training someone to be efficient using a UNIX system, but higher productivity pays off in the long term or you can suffer mediocre productivity, right from the start, with Windows.
Skuzzy you're looking at this from a specialist angle :) Regular users can never handle things like user rights management in linux - way too complicated for every day regular use. I know this from experience after trying to introduce linux to non computer savvy people.
Either you preconfigure the linux box so that the user has everything (and I mean everything) ready and working or you're stuck with endless fix'em up calls.
The second problem is lack of software. Most commercial software is available on windows only, heck some are only available in DOS still.
-
Skuzzy you're looking at this from a specialist angle :) Regular users can never handle things like user rights management in linux - way too complicated for every day regular use. I know this from experience after trying to introduce linux to non computer savvy people.
Either you preconfigure the linux box so that the user has everything (and I mean everything) ready and working or you're stuck with endless fix'em up calls.
The second problem is lack of software. Most commercial software is available on windows only, heck some are only available in DOS still.
[/quote]
That is what IT is supposed to be for. Bunch of lazy chumps these days. I took a bunch of engineers from Apple to UNIX in less than a year. Yes, I configured the boxes from top to bottom as the IT guys had no clue what to do . Engineers are the most anal retentive people you will ever meet.
Software will simply depend on what needs to be done and how you want to do it.