Linux

48190 readers

1330 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Using Gnu+Linux at work (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hello everyone, my company (our department is of around 150+ developers/machine learning people/researchers) is currently considering switching from Windows to Gnu+Linux for company devices (as in the machines we use in our daily work) and we are currently in the phase of collecting requirements. I'm not in charge of the process or involved in the decision phase, but as an enthusiast I'm curious about it. We handle data and other sensitive resources, so the environment should remain managed by the IT department (what's possible to install, VPNs, firewalls, updates and similar). What do companies generally use in this kind of scenario? I'm assuming they generally do some stuff with either Canonical or Red Hat, but are there alternatives? Are there ways to do something that works across distributions by using flatpak or the nix package manager? What are your experiences?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you aren't letting people install packages and customize the environment, you don't need Linux for desktops. Give them a locked down Mac, instead. You can do it on Linux, but it defeats the purpose. You're devs would hate it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

You're thinking as if it was Windows. In enterprise environments, companies control a set of proxy repositories and whitelist/blacklist packages.
If you're a dev and need a specific package (or set of packages) that aren't listed, then you can request it through a ticket.

What do companies gain from a full Linux environment?

Better integration with services (if it's already a linux/unix shop).
Cost reduction from licenses (although an increase in training/in-house expertise costs)
Machines will run supported as long as the silicon stays welded.
Better security if implemented right.
(A big issue of Windows is that for running secure you need to cut a lot of it, which generates shadow IT).

However if not done right, there's a long list of head-aches, including some software that's no longer compatible and has no real professional linux option (design suites, SCADA/ICS, CAD software, etc).
Even if there's a similar tool, it's highly possible that there are trade-offs that will require a lot of investment.

In most cases this gets solved in two ways:

Designers get a Mac so they can stop whinning and IT churns a solution to integrate all the outdated stuff running on that OS with the rest of enterprise services.
Windows stuff that doesn't require a beffy computer gets deployed on a VM with RBAC integrated with the company's IDP.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In enterprise environments, companies control a set of proxy repositories and whitelist/blacklist packages. If you’re a dev and need a specific package (or set of packages) that aren’t listed, then you can request it through a ticket.

That's fine for Windows desktops, Mac desktops, and Linux servers... but the advantage of a Linux Desktop is allowing a dev to customize the desktop and packages to what is most efficient for their use. Sure, you can do this to a Linux Desktop, but who would want to work on that? If you take that advantage away from a Linux desktop user, they would benefit more from software compatibility that comes with Windows or Mac. A locked down Linux Desktop has the same problems of limiting the dev from customizing it to match their most productive workflow, combined with no native MS Office apps, no Adobe apps, and more. That's a double whammy to your user.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

the advantage of a Linux Desktop is allowing a dev to customize the desktop and packages

Again, who says they can't? A Linux repository works as a catalog of software (packages) where you can pick and choose what to install.

Distribution != Desktop: As an IT overlord, I can dictate what distro you use, but you can pick your ~~poison~~ desktop as long as it is compliant.

combined with no native MS Office apps

Use Office 365 like everyone else or just a proper solution that doesn't have finicky WYSIWYG.

no Adobe apps

How many need Adobe apps in a company? Then you provide an alternative for those few.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

In our case we need Linux because the software we use only run there or is better integrated. Infact we use WSL for the core activities, bit WSL is crap.