Greetings,

I am currently the IT Manager for a 30-person architectural firm. About 5 months ago we hired a new employee. He is quite good at what he does. He is also extremely opinionated, particularly when it comes to computer software, including server software.

I'm running the office server functions on RedHat, Fedora and Trustix servers. He has managed to convince my boss that there are serious problems with these servers and with Linux in general. After having worked here for over 14 years, I would have hoped my boss would have more trust in my choices.

In any case, I now find myself in the position of having to defend my position here. My boss has gone as far as to hire an independent consultant to evaluate our whole network infrastructure, simply on the basis of the new employee's statemenets about the worthlessness of Linux. I do not relish being put in this position, however I'm going to take a stand.

If there is anyone reading this who works in the field of architecture or engineering, and with CAD or BIM software, who is using Linux as your server software, I would sure be appreciative it if you could write a testimonial for me to help me convince my boss that migrating from Linux to MS would be a horrible mistake.

Also, if you know of any other resources that might be helpful to me, I'd greatly appreciate hearing from you.

ANY help would be MUCH appreciated!!

Thank you.

Greg

I suggest you post this on Usenet, crossposting to appropriate Linux and Enginerring/CAD/BIM newsgroups, and also on http://slashdot.org/ and possibly http://www.groklaw.net/

my favorite resources:
anandtech.com (got tons of reviews & comparisions for linux vs MSFT products)
slashdot.org ( would see lots of people agreeing with u there...)

Maybe your Linux server aren't setup to 100% of their
capabilities or security (I don't know) but migrating a system
that works for no increase in functionality is ridiculous.

Linux has always been used in server applications because
of how it's always being improved.
And it's improved by the community, which means no shortcuts -
noone trying to make money...

What are his arguments for Windows Servers???

Ask him what the costs of the servers would be...

Riddick

Maybe if you post some of his arguments and reasoning people here can point out where he's wrong.

I would also point out that your server have been up for X amount of time, and given the likelyhood that your boss has experienced a crash from time to time, you let him know you feel better about having the systems up for long periods of time. Another point is that if/when a virus runs rampant throughout the system, it won't effect the servers, therefore bringing down the entire office. Finally, you can point to cost. Linux is free and Window's isn't. There's also hidden costs associated with a massive change like this. I'd be very weary about this whole situation seeing as how this new guy doesn't seem to know the in's and out's of your office like you do and wants to rip out everything. It's one thing to ask a question such as, "why is it set up this way", rather then "you set it up wrong, so I think we should rip it all out".

Travis

your boss is going to do what he thinks is good for his business. If he has hired an independed consultent he obviously has more confidence that they will make a better dicission then you would... He would not have spent that kind of money otherwise.

If they determine that MS would be a better solution I don't know what you could say to defend Linux because he would already have a biosed oppinion.

Unfortunatally, he is probably going to go with the MS server and upgrade everything then he will run into many problems that the consultant (convienently), had left out and found himself wanting to go back the way it was.

I would sit tight let the cards play out and watch his biz crumble.

Oh! Get your resume updated!

KC

Thanks to all for you for you help with this.

The existing server is actually functioning perfectly, considering it was set up strictly as a file server. It was extremely inexpensive - which is exactly the way my boss wanted it 2 years ago when I built it.

I have been using Linux servers in this office for over 5 years now (migrated from Novell). I'm currently running Samba, named, Apache, vsftp, dhcpd, qmail on 5 various servers here. I have an old Celeron 133 set up with Samba as our .mp3 server. This computer works flawlessly, with no latency, and hasn't even been rebooted in over a year. I have never - not one time - had one of my servers crash. Even Netware couldn't make a claim like that. The most sophisticated computer in this setup - the file server - is an Intel P4 2.8 with 512 megs of RAM and 2 ATA 133 drives. As long as it's just used as a file server, there is no latency problem whatsoever. I DARE anyone to try this with a Windows box! On the other hand, this server will in no way be enough to handle the traffic generated by BIM software, something of which, of course, I was already aware.

At one point we set up an accounting database on it, but we experienced some latency when the office manager backed it up. This was not really a problem - I just moved the database back to the user's computer, which was something I was going to have to do anyway as accounting software will be "updated" later this year in such a way that the database will have to be on a Windows machine. This is the only issue there has ever been with this or any other server in this office.

The new guy - who is very good at what he does (computer renderings) - just picked it up and ran with it because, as another poster suggested, "he is trying to make a name for himself," and because he is a lock-step MS adherent.

The problem is a complex political one - in reality it doesn't have much to do with computers, and, since it involves humans, is ultimately not fixable. After all these years of working here, I am the loser in a popularity contest, it would appear. No matter the ultimate outcome, that's not an acceptable position for me to be in.

The consultant will certainly hear all this from me, but, yes, I am most definitely updating my resume.

Thanks again.

Greg

I'll give you the best example of why Linux is the de facto standard in my office. We store our Outlook .pst files on one server so they can get backed up quickly and if need be, shut down quickly. (don't ask. ) We were running Win2k server for this task. One day, I was making a change that had nothing to do with the server and accidently unplugged the network cable. Seeing my mistake, I plugged the cable back in as quickly as possible (less then 20 seconds) No one was able to get back into Outlook. Everyone had to reboot. Exiting Outlook and going back in did not work. So I had 1 Linux server running as our print server, so I thought "This would be an excellent time to see if Linux is really up to snuff". So over the course of a weekend, I moved everyone's pst file over to our new Linux machine. Fast forward a few months. I was updating some items, including the kernel, and I mistakenly told the machine to reboot. (I was in robot mode and didn't think about it, we've all had days like that. ) Realizing I had about 40 people who had Outlook open, I thought I was about to have an avalanche of pissed off people coming to my office. I had tweaked Linux to turn on only the bare bones items at start up, so it booted up in around 45 seconds. I then waited for the people to come. And I waited. And waited. No one came. I checked around the office and poked my head into various offices and asked people how Outlook was working. Each one of them said "fine, why?" The only person who had an issue, was a lady who went from her inbox to her sent items the instant that the server went down. I told her to jump out of Outlook and jump back in without rebooting (praying that it would work) It worked flawlesslly. No one lost a thing, no one had a single hiccup except her. It's that kind of error correcting (even if it is user related) and stability that has made me the Linux fan I am today. I would let your boss or independant guy know that you simply can't get this kind of stability out of Windows and you certainly won't get it out of the slower machines you've mentioned with a newer Windows install.

Travis

Your new mantra is "TCO".

Take a look at this white paper, (there are pretty pictures, so management can understand it too):
http://www-1.ibm.com/linux/whitepape...Analysis05.pdf

Also, when he goes home, swap the little snot's workstation with that Celeron 133.

Dont worry he will come back to Linux and fire that guy. Switching from Linux to Windows is really weird, especially for Stability and performance. He must be insane. Cheers.

Yeah, keep us updated. I'd love to hear how this is going to turn out!

Travis

Moved: This thread is more suitable in Linux Enterprise and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.

I would strongly argue on the stability sode of things, every system is going to have potential security problems and financial implications and these tend to vary depending on the installation type and the staff supporting the infrastructure.

One problem with independant consultants is that they often decide to report findings that they think will please the mangement, this gives them more chance of being hired again. My advice would be the same as meeting anyone you want to get on well with, try to be the first one to greet the consultant, welcome him and show him how well the existing infrastructure works. Don't be afraid to point out any small weaknesses or downsides, your pro MS friend will likey do this anyway and it will seem like less of an issue if you have already spoken about it and even suggested any planned improvements to remedy the problem.

Try not to think of it as the management not trusting you, think of it as a way to reinforce to the management what a good job you have been doing.

strange situation. maybe you can put the burden on the new jerk - ie, if the system is working fine now, what could he hope to achieve by spending $XX in hardware and licenses and redoing the whole thing? seems hard to believe that he has some reason why a different fileserver OS is going to make the firm or him more profitable. as to the consultant, if he/they also do the migration work or sell the software, then they have an obvious incentive to recommend a switch.

one idea would be to ask the consultant to come up with a dollar figure for the cost to switch relative to today, vs. the cost savings due solely to the switch - that one may be an eye-opener for the clueless managers