Mr. Majestic wrote:

You show me the corporate policy somewhere that mandates a Linux
initiative, without justification to senior management that controls the
budget.

You're blowing smoke here, pure smoke. Coversion from one platform to
another cost money. It's not for free, and it's not going to be slipped
in no back door, when its coming out of other people's budgets, as there
are other stake holders involved.

Idiot. Nothing that Jed has written is in opposition to any of that. You
like building straw men that you can knock down?

JEDIDIAH wrote:

snipped
yawn

Big mouth JEDIDIAH, you are a dumb home user that knows nothing about
how corporations work. And you know nothing about how IT works either.

JEDIDIAH wrote:

snipped
yawn

Big mouth JEDIDIAH, you are a dumb home user that knows nothing about
how corporations work. And you know nothing about how IT works either.
All you have is lip service. All you can toss out is your worthless
brand of lip service. And you suck at it.

And about the only ones that will suck-up to you and kiss your worthless
behind about your lip services is someone like chris(v)ictim,
ron(b)ambi, az-no-one, Pussy Balls Poaster, and HPT aka High Balls the
Lint Licker, which like you are the COLA clown crowd..

On 2009-11-05, Köhlmann is aka 'Petey Toro' OLAY! <OLAY at (no spam) 49OLAYr.com> wrote:


JEDIDIAH wrote:

snipped
yawn

Big mouth JEDIDIAH, you are a dumb home user that knows nothing about
how corporations work. And you know nothing about how IT works either.

blah blah blah...

[nonsense removed]

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

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 suppose it depends on the job and how many people work there and what
they need to do. A small company usually has the attitude of "use
whatever you want, as long as it works", and care less about security
and stability, etc., than they do that things just do what they are
supposed to. If you and maybe a few others suggest Linux, you'll
usually get it. If you have a lot of people using Windows, they
probably won't change any time soon. Then again, even in a building
with hundreds of workers, usually people are just using high level
applications and never do anything on the OS level or anything serious
anyway, so as long as you can offer whatever solution and people can
open their workstation and do the job (entering data, or whatever),
then you might be able to make the change, if they don't get too
paranoid.

In fact, in my particular case, I don't use one OS to the complete
exclusion of another. I have an old, no longer supported version of
Windows available for those few times when it does what I need done
more easily than Linux (like when it's simply easier to use the old
software that I know versus learning new stuff I would use
infrequently), and I have an up-to-date version of Linux that I use
over 98% of the time. When the time comes that those choices no longer
work, I will make new ones.

But the really nice thing about it is, *I* get to make the choices,
because I'm a "clueless individual user." <gloat, gloat