Why are XP Users Not Flocking to Linux?



  • http://news.softpedia.com/news/Are-Windows-Users-Disappointed-When-They-First-Try-a-Linux-OS-437933.shtml

    Has anyone done any tests and found people resistant to Linux even where it makes more technical and financial sense?



  • We simply tried to go to Open or Libre Office and that as a huge no go!



  • @Dashrender said:

    We simply tried to go to Open or Libre Office and that as a huge no go!

    What didn't they like about it?



  • The formatting from all of our old documents was very askew.

    It was decided that if our internal documents were going to look this bad, how would documents from the outside world look?

    Keep in mind this was 6 years ago. Open/Libre Office might be a lot better today.



  • @Dashrender said:

    The formatting from all of our old documents was very askew.

    It was decided that if our internal documents were going to look this bad, how would documents from the outside world look?

    Keep in mind this was 6 years ago. Open/Libre Office might be a lot better today.

    Oh, six years ago. Yeah, things were a lot different then. You should do some modern tests.



  • I had the discussion with the boss a month or so ago... she didn't want to have to deal with any type of conversion issues at this point. In not so many words, even though she wants to reduce the budget, she told me to drop it.



  • My boss cringes if I mention to him upgrading his Office suite above 2003.. he only uses Excel 2003.

    Although cheaper alternatives for the company as a whole he will entertain just not his stuff. Some people just dislike change, especially if it effects them.



  • @Seth-Cooper said:

    My boss cringes if I mention to him upgrading his Office suite above 2003.. he only uses Excel 2003.

    Although cheaper alternatives for the company as a whole he will entertain just not his stuff. Some people just dislike change, especially if it effects them.

    I wonder at what point Excel 2003 won't run any more? Probably never really, because you could always virtualize a Windows 7 machine with Office 2003 on it.



  • Office 2003 will run on Linux with Wine or Crossover.

    Office 2003 to OpenOffice is a pretty minor transition.



  • As someone from the business side of things that did try to move from Windows 7 to Linux, I can understand the hesitation. If you are not computer savvy, you are not going to know how to find things in Linux. If you only ever used the ribbon in MS office, you will not be easily able to find all of the customization tools in Libre office. These systems are not as user friendly as tech people would like to think 🙂 Sorry guys.

    There is a learning curve, and if you have your average users in that environment it will cause major headaches when the rest of the world does operate in Windows.

    As a tech person I was able to make the move. It was annoying and frustrating at times, and that every document was reformatted, and that when I sent a document out to an MS office person it they had format issues nothing looked the same on my machine as it did for someone else no matter how I saved it. It was annoying to figure out how to install something (didn't take me long to figure it out, but wasn't intuitive to me).

    In order to make this type of move LOTS of other businesses would need to. Otherwise there are so many little annoying issues that just get in the way of being productive. Nothing is horrible and you would need to weigh out price versus the annoyances, but they are there and that needs to be considered.



  • @Minion-Queen said:

    It was annoying and frustrating at times, and that every document was reformatted, and that when I sent a document out to an MS office person it they had format issues nothing looked the same on my machine as it did for someone else no matter how I saved it. It was annoying to figure out how to install something (didn't take me long to figure it out, but wasn't intuitive to me).

    Hmm.. you did this 'test' less than a year ago (what 6 months ago?) and you still had formatting issues - lol... that is why we didn't move forward 6 years ago with Open/Libre... can't believe it's still and issue. and you've just saved me from even wasting my time trying it out.



  • We tried 4 years ago for a client that was looking to save money. After months of formatting issues with docs and spreadsheets (shared with users using Office) they asked how much do I have to spend to change back to MS and when can it be done.



  • It's not an open format and it changes with each release. Copying the formatting is extremely challenging.

    Internally you can just avoid it and use PDF for interchange with other companies.



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    It's not an open format and it changes with each release. Copying the formatting is extremely challenging.

    Internally you can just avoid it and use PDF for interchange with other companies.

    I suppose that works as long as you're not editing a document together with them.



  • @Dashrender said:

    @scottalanmiller said:

    It's not an open format and it changes with each release. Copying the formatting is extremely challenging.

    Internally you can just avoid it and use PDF for interchange with other companies.

    I suppose that works as long as you're not editing a document together with them.

    Yes, Word is a document collaboration / editing format. PDF is a sharing / distribution format. It's rare that you do document editing with external companies. It happens, but it is rare. If you do that, you always have problems because there are several formats out there and really the best one for cross platform compatibility is OpenDoc, not Word, as Word does OpenDoc just fine as does OpenOffice, LibreOffice, Calligra and others.



  • I've tried to move to Linux, but I can't. The tools that I need to do my job in an efficient manner aren't present on Linux. In order to run them, I'd need to dink around with wine or use a VM. What's the point of that? With Windows, I can just install the applications and go, no dinking needed. If I'm running a VM for my previous OS for certain applications, why did I bother moving OSes in the first place? It only adds complexity.

    Many companies use XP for particular applications that may not be compatible with newer versions of Windows. If there's a compatibility issue with newer versions of Windows, it's more than likely that the application doesn't have a native Linux version.



  • @Nara said:

    I've tried to move to Linux, but I can't. The tools that I need to do my job in an efficient manner aren't present on Linux. In order to run them, I'd need to dink around with wine or use a VM.

    Is that because you are supporting Windows?



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    @Nara said:

    I've tried to move to Linux, but I can't. The tools that I need to do my job in an efficient manner aren't present on Linux. In order to run them, I'd need to dink around with wine or use a VM.

    Is that because you are supporting Windows?

    I'm supporting vSphere. Sure, vCenter uses a web interface, but until you get vCenter up and running, you need Windows. I'm also an Outlook user. So far, I haven't found an email client that has the level of functionality and smooth operation that Outlook does. I need something that'll support Outlook Anywhere, sync across multiple computers, have offline and online access, follow-ups with date-based reminders, access shared calendars, and have message rules. I'm also an OneNote user. There's nothing like it that has a native Linux application.

    Beyond that, I do support Windows environments. In many cases, LOB applications and/or job-specific applications don't support Linux. There are some that do (and I've worked with a couple), but when deciding on major applications, function comes before platform. The product that has the most beneficial use for the company is the best choice.



  • Even using Exchange I've started to prefer OWA over Outlook 2013. Smoother, more reliable operations.



  • @Nara said:
    In many cases, LOB applications and/or job-specific applications don't support Linux. There are some that do (and I've worked with a couple), but when deciding on major applications, function comes before platform.

    Agreed, but my findings have been that it is extremely rare today to find truly good quality software that is Windows only. More likely it is a poor choice that just isn't realized until it is too late. Windows-only apps should be a red flag. There are great Windows-only apps, but they are pretty rare. And they tend to be the same ones that only support legacy Windows. The factors that make them not support Linux, BSD and Solaris are the same ones that block them from supporting modern Windows much of the time. What seems like a good program today often turns into the unsupported quagmire of tomorrow.



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    Even using Exchange I've started to prefer OWA over Outlook 2013. Smoother, more reliable operations.

    I can't stand OWA. It isn't as feature-rich, and isn't available offline. It also doesn't support application plugins, such as CRM.



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    @Nara said:
    In many cases, LOB applications and/or job-specific applications don't support Linux. There are some that do (and I've worked with a couple), but when deciding on major applications, function comes before platform.

    Agreed, but my findings have been that it is extremely rare today to find truly good quality software that is Windows only. More likely it is a poor choice that just isn't realized until it is too late. Windows-only apps should be a red flag. There are great Windows-only apps, but they are pretty rare. And they tend to be the same ones that only support legacy Windows. The factors that make them not support Linux, BSD and Solaris are the same ones that block them from supporting modern Windows much of the time. What seems like a good program today often turns into the unsupported quagmire of tomorrow.

    Do you have some examples of mainstream business apps that are available for both platforms that have native clients that don't require a platform like Java in order to run?



  • @Nara said:

    @scottalanmiller said:

    Even using Exchange I've started to prefer OWA over Outlook 2013. Smoother, more reliable operations.

    I can't stand OWA. It isn't as feature-rich, and isn't available offline. It also doesn't support application plugins, such as CRM.

    I'm in love with OWA for my main office! After we upgrade to Exchange 2013 I plan to move 90% of my users to it. One less thing to worry about setting up, and will allow everyone anywhere access to their email (of course, they will hate the new password requirements I will put on them for it's use.)



  • The Geekery have been trying to make Linux "happen" in the office space for the past 30+ years. It's not happening. Get over it. Behind-the-curtain business functions, monitored and operated by geeks hiding in a closet somewhere in the building? Sure; Linux is great. Something that I have to touch, and that other business people have to share and use? Forget it! It is NOT the tool for the job. Sorry. Go back to your closet and watch YouTube vids of League of Legends tournaments...



  • @art_of_shred said:

    The Geekery have been trying to make Linux "happen" in the office space for the past 30+ years. It's not happening. Get over it. Behind-the-curtain business functions, monitored and operated by geeks hiding in a closet somewhere in the building? Sure; Linux is great. Something that I have to touch, and that other business people have to share and use? Forget it! It is NOT the tool for the job. Sorry. Go back to your closet and watch YouTube vids of League of Legends tournaments...

    Priceless advice there! I've tried Linux on and off for 14 years. As much as I'd like to love it, something always brings me back to Windows. As a sysadmin, I haven't seen anything like Group Policy for Linux. Perhaps I missed it somewhere?



  • One thing I have noticed about a lot of *nix apps are that the GUI's look horrid. LibreOffice could use a huge facelift. It functions a lot better than it used to be it still looks and feels the same, which is old. I don't want to use a GUI that looks like a GUI I used in 1998.



  • @Bill-Kindle said:

    One thing I have noticed about a lot of *nix apps are that the GUI's look horrid. LibreOffice could use a huge facelift. It functions a lot better than it used to be it still looks and feels the same, which is old. I don't want to use a GUI that looks like a GUI I used in 1998.

    If the functionality great, I'll ignore a poor UI (like GFI MAX), but if both are lacking, there really's no appeal for me to want to use the application.



  • @Bill-Kindle said:

    One thing I have noticed about a lot of *nix apps are that the GUI's look horrid. LibreOffice could use a huge facelift. It functions a lot better than it used to be it still looks and feels the same, which is old. I don't want to use a GUI that looks like a GUI I used in 1998.

    That's a tough one for LibreOffice because a huge piece of their market is in avoiding the ribbon interface and not making pre-2007 MS Office users transition to the new style. Libre really played on their legacy GUI. It's not really that dated, it's just that it doesn't use a ribbon which Microsoft used to forcibly change the look of the era. But the LO interface is not really bad at all. Lots of people actually prefer it to modern MS Office. Not me, but a lot of people.



  • @alexntg said:

    @art_of_shred said:

    The Geekery have been trying to make Linux "happen" in the office space for the past 30+ years. It's not happening. Get over it. Behind-the-curtain business functions, monitored and operated by geeks hiding in a closet somewhere in the building? Sure; Linux is great. Something that I have to touch, and that other business people have to share and use? Forget it! It is NOT the tool for the job. Sorry. Go back to your closet and watch YouTube vids of League of Legends tournaments...

    Priceless advice there! I've tried Linux on and off for 14 years. As much as I'd like to love it, something always brings me back to Windows. As a sysadmin, I haven't seen anything like Group Policy for Linux. Perhaps I missed it somewhere?

    GPO is definitely a high point for Windows, no doubt there. The reason it is lacking in Linux is because Linux doesn't really have the need. Basic administration tasks can be scripted faster and easier on Linux than GPO is to apply on Windows. Having administered thousands of Linux machines at once, the ability to make changes to a large number of them at once is so good.

    GPO is one of those tough things. It's an amazing technology, but in many ways it is one created out of a weakness of Windows and represents a kludge, not a strength. It is an attempt to get Windows up to par with where Linux starts without such a technology.

    Linux does have GPO-like options (cfEngine, Chef, SaltStack, Puppy) but they really aren't needed.



  • I seen many companies here in our country are still using XP. Even some banks are still using XP 😞


Log in to reply