Computer Geeks in Movies.

[blue]

It's WINDOWS. Use Win7. Then get back to me.

I did, beta. RC, and RTC. If I didnt have a choice outside of windows, Ild stick with XP.

Bill Gates leaving the company was the best thing that ever happened to MS.

After Balmer steps down Ill agree.

Be honest.

How many BSOD/Virus calls you get are the result of user doing things on the internet they should not be doing? Reading chain emails? Pron? Etc?

Hmmm?

Thats the thing. My own machines, when I used XP, should have been so riddled with viruses, malware, trojans, redirects, fake anti viruses, rootkits,,etc, etc.... because of where Ive been on the disgusting areas of the Interweb it really shouldnt be a competition. But my home machines remained fairly clean of any sort of malware/virus/trojans. My XP machines also stayed fast because I wiped and reloaded them every few months, I stored anything important on a server so I can restore my PCs in less then 45 minutes.

From what Ive seen Facebook, Myspace, and fansites spread more malware then pron sites these days.

If the USER practices smart computing....

Thats the problem. Getting the Basic User to practice Safe, Best Practices

Again, this is not personal.

Im not attacking you, I dont see you as attacking me.

But, get into a 30 million dollar process manufacturer and get back to me.

Why would I want to do that?

DOn't forget TCO, user training and user productivity. Technology is EASY. Making it useful to a business is another subject altogether. Eh?

Wouldnt TCO be less with open source technologies? More tech savy employees would be more valuable to businesses in the long run I would think. Am I wrong?

Our business is getting the client to use technology to make their job easier.

I very much agree. ETA: But is making them dumber in our best interest?

Is Ubuntu/Open Office worth a month of downtime and user training? Is it worth the headaches the customer's client will have ?

Im not arguing that it is and I would not push Ubuntu or OpenOffice on a client/user. To many clients/users are afraid of something that isnt MicroSoft based.

Have I said otherwise?

Nope.

I often tell clients... "Yes, going to Mac will save you in AV costs. About $1000 a year. But it will cost you $100,00 to move your staff to Mac's"

You see?

Absolutely.

My question is what would it cost to switch to Unix based workstations with Windows based servers?

[Lady's Human]

Wouldnt TCO be less with open source technologies? More tech savy employees would be more valuable to businesses in the long run I would think. Am I wrong?

Have you ever tried to get someone who is technologically illiterate to change to a new application? The easier you make it, and the more familiar platforms you use, the easier training becomes.

Easier training=cheaper training and a more efficient operation.

In many cases the applications costs between different platforms is negligible, and compatability and ease of use trumps all.

A more tech savy IT person is great. A tech savy graphic artist is still a graphic artist at the core. The arts training and ablities are what matters, and you tailor the platform and app suite around the population, not vice cersa.

[blue]

The dumbing down of users, I hear what you and Puck are preaching.

[Lady's Human]

It's not dumbing down users, it's tailoring the applications to the users.

I can teach a geek to use Photoshop in a heartbeat, but I can't teach a geek to be an artist. Hence, Photoshop has a GUI which is intuitive and makes it easier for an artist to be an artist.

[Puckstop31]

The dumbing down of users, I hear what you and Puck are preaching.

Not at all.

Time is money. What will make the user the most efficient at their job with the least amount of capital/training investment?

Like I said in my first responce... OS is not anywhere near as important as productivity software and the process it supports.

[blue]

ETA: In the spirit of the original intent of this thread, add "Law Abiding Citizen" to movies where the "Good Guys" use Macs.

It's not dumbing down users, it's tailoring the applications to the users.

Not at all.

Yeah that was an unfair statement on my part. However I do work with network engineers who would love to dumb down users to make their jobs easier. I also see how its easier and more cost effective to sell clients and end users ready made MS/Windows solutions, its even more profitable in the long run.

I can teach a geek to use Photoshop in a heartbeat, but I can't teach a geek to be an artist. Hence, Photoshop has a GUI which is intuitive and makes it easier for an artist to be an artist.

Im to cheap to buy Photoshop and Im to lazy to pirate it, well lazy and I dont need PS. Now GIMP is free and I dont find it easy or intuitive. If the PS interface is similar to GIMP, which application do you think Im going to recommend? If you said the free one give yourself a gold star.

Time is money. What will make the user the most efficient at their job with the least amount of capital/training investment?

If it is all about capital and training, IE (or is it EG?) the user has no experience with any OS, why would Unix based work stations be a negative to productivity? Unix based machines would be cheaper the Windowz machines, or am I wrong on that too?

I also get that it is easier for you to hire employees that are already MS certified, rather then trying to find certified Linux techs.

Like I said in my first responce... OS is not anywhere near as important as productivity software and the process it supports.

I disagree and I think you know why. OS is important when it comes to making tech support companies money.

[Lady's Human]

If it is all about capital and training, IE (or is it EG?) the user has no experience with any OS, why would Unix based work stations be a negative to productivity? Unix based machines would be cheaper the Windowz machines, or am I wrong on that too?

There are almost no users entering the workforce with no OS experience. The Windows and Mac GUIs have been in place long enough to where the bulk of the users entering any workplace are going to have experience in some way shape or form with one of those OS packages.

Im to cheap to buy Photoshop and Im to lazy to pirate it, well lazy and I dont need PS. Now GIMP is free and I dont find it easy or intuitive. If the PS interface is similar to GIMP, which application do you think Im going to recommend? If you said the free one give yourself a gold star.

Does Gimp have 24/7 tech support available?

Has GIMP been vetted for use on intranets?

Is GIMP going to be updated with security patches, and can I trust those patches?

The cost of the user license is minimal compared to the total cost of NOT using a product which is industry standard. I remember bringing a file on a PC formatted disc into a print house and getting charged extra because it wasn't a Mac file. Industry standardization drives the car, not the initial cost of the product.

OS and a vetted tech support base are important when it comes to the user being able to run reliably 24/7/365.

[blue]

There are almost no users entering the workforce with no OS experience.

The Amish. Rimshot. Im going to agree with Puck and go him one better, End Users dont know an OS from a web browser. In the end most end users will fight to keep what they know, that might be Winblowz and IE or OSX and Safari.

Does Gimp have 24/7 tech support available?

Do I care? No. Do I care that Photoshop has 24/7 tech support? Again, No I do not. If I sold or pimped Photoshop I would care. If the client needed 24/7 support I would recommend PS, otherwise I would recommend GIMP.

Has GIMP been vetted for use on intranets?

Good question, I dont know. GIMP is an open source alternative to PS. Im guessing by your question that PS has been vetted on intranets?

Is GIMP going to be updated with security patches, and can I trust those patches?

I dont pimp GIMP so I dont know, ask the open source community that supports GIMP. If a company wanted what PS can do without the price and was willing to take the risk I would suggest GIMP and leave the decision up to them. If it was my choice on a clients network with Winblows workstations I admit I would recommend Photoshop.

Myself, Ild trust GIMP over PS because PS needs regular security patches

The cost of the user license is minimal compared to the total cost of NOT using a product which is industry standard. I remember bringing a file on a PC formatted disc into a print house and getting charged extra because it wasn't a Mac file. Industry standardization drives the car, not the initial cost of the product.

You should have asked what formats were supported by the printer, and formatted your file to accommodate the printer, dont blame the printer for costing you extra.

OS and a vetted tech support base are important when it comes to the user being able to run reliably 24/7/365.

Thats the bottom line isnt it? Windoze isnt reliable 24/7/365, no OS is. Winblowz just costs more upfront and for long term support.

Puck, I hope you arent ducking my question.

My question is what would it cost to switch to Unix based workstations with Windows based servers?