For networked-apps/many-simple-workstations, see the Linux Terminal Server Project at www.ltsp.org. Uses inexpensive workstations ($200-$300 each) or you can convert existing workstations, even old Pentiums, by just putting in a boot floppy. Don't like it or need dual-boot? Just pop out the floppy and boot what's on the harddrive (presumably Windows). Apps run on the Linux server which means app management is MUCH easier (only one box to wrestle with, not dozens). You can even deploy Windows apps this way using Netraverse's server version of Win4Lin, or Citrix (there's a free Citrix client for *nix that works quite nicely). From a systems management point, server-based computing is the way to go. The City of Largo, FL is the poster child for this strategy. It saved them a boatload of money over MS solutions. Petre >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< On 1/22/02, 8:59:14 AM, Fred.Zellinger at seagate.com wrote regarding Re: [TCLUG] Municipal Linux [Long]: > Hey, > Just some random thoughts. > Almost all of the Linux distros are set up to install on a single user > machine by default. This works fine for a single user, but in large > organizations, this is a bad deployment scheme and a vast under-utilization > of Linux's capabilities. > I have read accounts of other people's experiences in converting an > organization to Linux and getting them off the M$ train, and it seems that > to really make Linux more easily maintainable, you have to have some sort > of centralized software deployment/file repository solution(i.e. NFS or > Samba). > At my company, and many others, the apps may be M$, but the network > deployment/file repository is Novell. The IT people never touch my desktop > computer, all their time is spent managing the network resources. This, I > think, is the key to saving time and $$ in maintenance costs. > What Linux distro is structured to be > networked-apps/many-simple-workstations? I know you can add this on by > yourself later, but then.... > Why not roll your own? I know this may be a lot of work, but it would be > nice to have a "standard" which is specific to your clients. (Actually, > with distros like RH, you can do an installation, chose your packages, and > in the end, build an auto-install floppy which can be used to configure new > machines the same way). Having a standard distro broken into two parts: > network file/apps server and client desktop workstation, would help > maintainability. If you use a distro which is 1 piece only, 1 size fits > all, then maintaining a large number(>100) machines could consist of lots > of remote scripting, or full re-installs. > Fred > Jack Ungerleider > <jack at jacku.com> To: tclug-list at mn-linux.org > Sent by: cc: > tclug-list-admin at mn Subject: Re: [TCLUG] Municipal Linux [Long] > -linux.org > 01/21/02 09:54 PM > Please respond to > tclug-list > On Monday 21 January 2002 01:04, Joshua b. Jore wrote: > > I'm working with one of the Minneapolis city council members (and his > > office manager) to demo free software. My argument is that that free > > software can save on the IT budget and any money involved would be more > > likely to stay local. (staff/consulting/support instead of licensing) > > > My personal take on this is that unless they were going to make a change, > for > example upgrade Win2K to XP (or better NT4 or 9X to XP) then there would be > a > savings for the IT budget. If all you're going to do is replace the > existing > environment it'll cost money. (Downtime for conversion and training, cost > of > a commercial distribution if you go that way.) So think about your > arguements > very carefully when playing the "cost card". > > I would like some suggestions for how best to present this stuff. I > figure > > there is a different case for free software in the server room and on the > > workstation. Since this will be on his personal computer I'd like to show > > off something functional that will compare nicely to his pre-existing > > Windows 2000 installation. > > > <flamebait type=opinion> > I spent sometime last year with the support team in a government > organization > that dealt directly with elected officials. Since they ultimately "write > the > checks" and because they are elected officials they can do what ever they > want. In this situation one influential elected official chose to use a > "non-standard" software configuration. (No, it wasn't Linux.) While the > support crew had to provide service for this "lone wolf" it was for a > one-off > configuration that was difficult for them to replicate. As a result they > spent a lot of time dealing with this individuals issues. > In your case while the lack of license costs might be a savings. Doing it > in > one office in the entire city (which is heavily invested in a M$ > infrastructure) will most likely cost more due to the support issues than > was > ever saved in license costs. Converting the whole city systems to being > Linux > based might accomplish the goal, one individual won't. > </flamebait> > <alternate opinion> > That said, removing the dependency of governmental organizations on a > single > supplier of "critical" equipment is a good thing. If the councilmember and > staff want to "blaze a trail" and prove it can be done and from their try > to > get movement away from M$ that's a good thing. > </alternate opinion> > > I assumed I would use some variety of Linux with a GUI desktop. Which > > variety and GUI is probably where I could use the advice. If anyone has > > any specific experience advocating for free software in government I'd > > like to hear about it. > > > Personal favorite is SuSE, (I know its not a US distro. but hey, its a > global > economy, right?) and for this situation (user workstation) 7.3 personal > would > probably do the trick. It loads KDE, StarOffice and Netscape 6.1(?). Its on > the shelf locally for $39.95 with a nice box and 3 manuals. ;-) > > Joshua b. Jore > > Minneapolis Ward 3, precinct 10 > > http://www.greentechnologist.org > > > -- > Jack Ungerleider > jack at jacku.com > _______________________________________________ > Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, > Minnesota > http://www.mn-linux.org > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > _______________________________________________ > Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > http://www.mn-linux.org > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list