Linux jobs outpacing Windows jobs
in [General Linux]
|
From: Ignoramus23290 on 3 Nov 2009 22:14 On 2009-11-03, Matt <matt(a)themattfella.xxxyyz.com> wrote: > Ignoramus13931 wrote: >> On 2009-11-03, Matt <matt(a)themattfella.xxxyyz.com> wrote: >>> Ignoramus13931 wrote: >>>> As Windows jobs decline 8% from the beginning of the year, Linux >>>> postings grew 6%. >>>> >>>> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid39_gci1373285,00.html >>>> >>>> What this essentially says, is that corporations are not nearly >>>> averse to Linux as various research studies seem to show. >>>> >>>> If you ask me, the writing is on the wall. >>>> >>>> I am much more optimistic about corporate Linux adoption, than >>>> adoption by clueless individual users. Corporations, at least, are >>>> receptive to the profit, cost and security motive. >>>> >>>> i >>> >>> I strongly agree with your last paragraph above. It generalizes to any >>> large organization, because they have the economies of scale to learn to >>> administer Linux efficiently and to finance the migration. Best is >>> schools, as there is little or no data to migrate. >> >> Economies of scale is where Linux shows its excellence, as you can >> automate most system related things in Linux in a straightforward >> manner. >> >> So you can have one Linux system admin who knows scripting, administer >> many more machines than a comparably intelligent Windows admin. >> >>> Advocate to the guy next to you for practice and support. >>> >>> If you want things to change, advocate to the guy who has the power to >>> change things. >> >> I think that what happens in corporations, such as some I have >> observed, that Linux appears and begins to metastacize, > > > It attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it > touches. Not as much as some think. Example: I have a "DVR" at home. This is a video recorder box supplied to me by a satellite TV company. It is completely proprietary, at least as far as the video technology is concerned. (that is, they may have put up some trivial source code like busybox on their website, but not anything video related). I had a hunch that it ran Linux. (because what else could it run) The only way to find out that it was Linux based, was to open it up, take out the hard drive, and insert it into my Linux PC. Even then, the hard drive contained only data and not executables. I believe that what the TV company did (provifing a DRMed product based on open source) was distasteful, but it probably did not violate any Linux intellectual property. > When one organization adopts Linux (or about any technology for that > matter) the individuals in the organization become accustomed to it so > that when they go home for the day or move to a different organization, > they bring Linux with them. Yep. i
From: John Fuhrer on 3 Nov 2009 22:19 On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:14:24 -0600, Ignoramus23290 wrote: > Not as much as some think. > > Example: I have a "DVR" at home. This is a video recorder box supplied > to me by a satellite TV company. It is completely proprietary, at > least as far as the video technology is concerned. (that is, they may > have put up some trivial source code like busybox on their website, > but not anything video related). > > I had a hunch that it ran Linux. (because what else could it run) > > The only way to find out that it was Linux based, was to open it up, > take out the hard drive, and insert it into my Linux PC. Even then, > the hard drive contained only data and not executables. Most people prefer to use DVR to record things. But, whatever floats your boat........... You're lucky you didn't brick the thing and hopefully you didn't destroy any tamper seals because if you need to exchange it the cable company may not be so friendly. > I believe that what the TV company did (provifing a DRMed product > based on open source) was distasteful, but it probably did not violate > any Linux intellectual property. It's all about money. If they can save a few dimes by using Linux and if Linux works for them, they will. At some point, the Linux community will figure this out.
From: Matt on 4 Nov 2009 00:07 smr wrote: > Robert Heller wrote: >> At Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:51:21 +0000 smr <stevie.rice(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >> >>> Matt wrote: >>>> Ignoramus13931 wrote: >>>>> On 2009-11-03, Matt <matt(a)themattfella.xxxyyz.com> wrote: >>>>>> Ignoramus13931 wrote: >>>>>>> As Windows jobs decline 8% from the beginning of the year, Linux >>>>>>> postings grew 6%. >>>>>>> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid39_gci1373285,00.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What this essentially says, is that corporations are not nearly >>>>>>> averse to Linux as various research studies seem to show. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you ask me, the writing is on the wall. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am much more optimistic about corporate Linux adoption, than >>>>>>> adoption by clueless individual users. Corporations, at least, are >>>>>>> receptive to the profit, cost and security motive. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> i >>>>>> I strongly agree with your last paragraph above. It generalizes to >>>>>> any large organization, because they have the economies of scale to >>>>>> learn to administer Linux efficiently and to finance the migration. >>>>>> Best is schools, as there is little or no data to migrate. >>>>> Economies of scale is where Linux shows its excellence, as you can >>>>> automate most system related things in Linux in a straightforward >>>>> manner. >>>>> So you can have one Linux system admin who knows scripting, administer >>>>> many more machines than a comparably intelligent Windows admin. >>>>> >>>>>> Advocate to the guy next to you for practice and support. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you want things to change, advocate to the guy who has the power >>>>>> to change things. >>>>> I think that what happens in corporations, such as some I have >>>>> observed, that Linux appears and begins to metastacize, >>>> It attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it >>>> touches. >>>> >>>> When one organization adopts Linux (or about any technology for that >>>> matter) the individuals in the organization become accustomed to it so >>>> that when they go home for the day or move to a different organization, >>>> they bring Linux with them. >>>> >>>> >>>>> slowly at >>>>> first and faster later. >>>>> This is possibly a safer route to successful Linux migration than top >>>>> to bottom pronoucements such as "move everything to Linx next month". >>>> The metastasizing that you mention prepares the ground, to mix a couple >>>> of metaphors. >>>> >>>> >>>>> The downside is that the Microsoft tax is stil being paid this way, >>>>> but I consider this minor. >>>>> >>>>> i >>> It's always better to slowly shift people's perceptions of things - >>> "this is something we've been using to do some jobs in the company" as >>> opposed to "this is the new thing head office forced on us." But that >>> first box is a difficult issue - somebody needs to administrate that >>> single CUPS server. >> Which brings us full circle: Linux jobs outpacing Windows jobs. Somebody >> is hiring *new* Linux Admins and NOT hiring new Windows Admins... > > My post doesn't go quite full circle, my point is that companies that > gradually adopt into Linux need to start with a single installation - > "that first box". Eventually this leads to companies with a huge > installed base of Linux that really like it but initially it's lots of > machines running some other operating system and one running Linux. > > I would*n't* say that they would hire a new Linux admin at *that* point, > I think that's something the existing staff would handle. I'm saying > that at that point the existing staff need to administrate all of the > systems they had before as well as this new box that runs an entirely > new system - so what you're left with is relying on the current staff to > learn to professionally administrate a new operating system for a single > machine while doing their normal jobs at the same time. I'm saying > that's off putting to administrators. It's great once you start moving > lots of machines over to Linux and you can set up scripts that handle > lots of machines at once and that's where it really shines but it's > dealing with the hassle of the test machine that's a stumbling block. I'm thinking that more often, that first Linux box is being maintained mainly by whoever is using it, If that first user is not mainly a sysadmin, he asks permission to use Linux, and they say okay, but you have to maintain it yourself. Same thing happens if he is mainly a sysadmin, but then it might be that the guy was hired specifically as somebody who knows Linux and as somebody who can expose the other admins and their bosses to the practice of running Linux. That would be followed by incremental steps toward Linux by the company, stuff like: migrating the servers, switching some users to cross-platform FOSS apps such as OpenOffice, migrating one department as an experiment, and hiring more admins and other workers who have experience in both worlds.
From: Matt on 4 Nov 2009 00:19 Ignoramus23290 wrote: > On 2009-11-03, Matt <matt(a)themattfella.xxxyyz.com> wrote: >> Ignoramus13931 wrote: >>> On 2009-11-03, Matt <matt(a)themattfella.xxxyyz.com> wrote: >>>> Ignoramus13931 wrote: >>>>> As Windows jobs decline 8% from the beginning of the year, Linux >>>>> postings grew 6%. >>>>> >>>>> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid39_gci1373285,00.html >>>>> >>>>> What this essentially says, is that corporations are not nearly >>>>> averse to Linux as various research studies seem to show. >>>>> >>>>> If you ask me, the writing is on the wall. >>>>> >>>>> I am much more optimistic about corporate Linux adoption, than >>>>> adoption by clueless individual users. Corporations, at least, are >>>>> receptive to the profit, cost and security motive. >>>>> >>>>> i >>>> I strongly agree with your last paragraph above. It generalizes to any >>>> large organization, because they have the economies of scale to learn to >>>> administer Linux efficiently and to finance the migration. Best is >>>> schools, as there is little or no data to migrate. >>> Economies of scale is where Linux shows its excellence, as you can >>> automate most system related things in Linux in a straightforward >>> manner. >>> >>> So you can have one Linux system admin who knows scripting, administer >>> many more machines than a comparably intelligent Windows admin. >>> >>>> Advocate to the guy next to you for practice and support. >>>> >>>> If you want things to change, advocate to the guy who has the power to >>>> change things. >>> I think that what happens in corporations, such as some I have >>> observed, that Linux appears and begins to metastacize, >> >> It attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it >> touches. > > Not as much as some think. I was using your cancer analogy as a silly cheap shot at that famous quote by Ballmer, of course. > Example: I have a "DVR" at home. This is a video recorder box supplied
From: Köhlmann is aka 'Petey Toro' OLAY! on 4 Nov 2009 00:22
Matt wrote: > smr wrote: >> Robert Heller wrote: >>> At Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:51:21 +0000 smr <stevie.rice(a)googlemail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Matt wrote: >>>>> Ignoramus13931 wrote: >>>>>> On 2009-11-03, Matt <matt(a)themattfella.xxxyyz.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Ignoramus13931 wrote: >>>>>>>> As Windows jobs decline 8% from the beginning of the year, Linux >>>>>>>> postings grew 6%. >>>>>>>> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid39_gci1373285,00.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What this essentially says, is that corporations are not nearly >>>>>>>> averse to Linux as various research studies seem to show. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you ask me, the writing is on the wall. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am much more optimistic about corporate Linux adoption, than >>>>>>>> adoption by clueless individual users. Corporations, at least, are >>>>>>>> receptive to the profit, cost and security motive. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> i >>>>>>> I strongly agree with your last paragraph above. It generalizes to >>>>>>> any large organization, because they have the economies of scale to >>>>>>> learn to administer Linux efficiently and to finance the >>>>>>> migration. Best is schools, as there is little or no data to >>>>>>> migrate. >>>>>> Economies of scale is where Linux shows its excellence, as you can >>>>>> automate most system related things in Linux in a straightforward >>>>>> manner. >>>>>> So you can have one Linux system admin who knows scripting, >>>>>> administer >>>>>> many more machines than a comparably intelligent Windows admin. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Advocate to the guy next to you for practice and support. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you want things to change, advocate to the guy who has the power >>>>>>> to change things. >>>>>> I think that what happens in corporations, such as some I have >>>>>> observed, that Linux appears and begins to metastacize, >>>>> It attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it >>>>> touches. >>>>> >>>>> When one organization adopts Linux (or about any technology for that >>>>> matter) the individuals in the organization become accustomed to it so >>>>> that when they go home for the day or move to a different >>>>> organization, >>>>> they bring Linux with them. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> slowly at >>>>>> first and faster later. >>>>>> This is possibly a safer route to successful Linux migration than top >>>>>> to bottom pronoucements such as "move everything to Linx next month". >>>>> The metastasizing that you mention prepares the ground, to mix a >>>>> couple >>>>> of metaphors. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> The downside is that the Microsoft tax is stil being paid this way, >>>>>> but I consider this minor. >>>>>> >>>>>> i >>>> It's always better to slowly shift people's perceptions of things - >>>> "this is something we've been using to do some jobs in the company" as >>>> opposed to "this is the new thing head office forced on us." But that >>>> first box is a difficult issue - somebody needs to administrate that >>>> single CUPS server. >>> Which brings us full circle: Linux jobs outpacing Windows jobs. >>> Somebody >>> is hiring *new* Linux Admins and NOT hiring new Windows Admins... >> >> My post doesn't go quite full circle, my point is that companies that >> gradually adopt into Linux need to start with a single installation - >> "that first box". Eventually this leads to companies with a huge >> installed base of Linux that really like it but initially it's lots of >> machines running some other operating system and one running Linux. >> >> I would*n't* say that they would hire a new Linux admin at *that* point, >> I think that's something the existing staff would handle. I'm saying >> that at that point the existing staff need to administrate all of the >> systems they had before as well as this new box that runs an entirely >> new system - so what you're left with is relying on the current staff to >> learn to professionally administrate a new operating system for a single >> machine while doing their normal jobs at the same time. I'm saying >> that's off putting to administrators. It's great once you start moving >> lots of machines over to Linux and you can set up scripts that handle >> lots of machines at once and that's where it really shines but it's >> dealing with the hassle of the test machine that's a stumbling block. > > > I'm thinking that more often, that first Linux box is being maintained > mainly by whoever is using it, If that first user is not mainly a > sysadmin, he asks permission to use Linux, and they say okay, but you > have to maintain it yourself. Same thing happens if he is mainly a > sysadmin, but then it might be that the guy was hired specifically as > somebody who knows Linux and as somebody who can expose the other admins > and their bosses to the practice of running Linux. That would be > followed by incremental steps toward Linux by the company, stuff like: > migrating the servers, switching some users to cross-platform FOSS apps > such as OpenOffice, migrating one department as an experiment, and > hiring more admins and other workers who have experience in both worlds. LOL, it's obvious no one here has been through any conversion effort from one platform to another in any shape form or fashion. This is some kind of a total joke here, and it's two home users conversing with each other. |