Forum Topic

I went to the East Acton Forum last night, where it was confirmed to be caused by an un-named but apparently common virus. I was told that all staff are now banned from using any external plug-in memory device or disc. There has been no attempt to remove the incredibly expensive virus collector called Microsoft and replace it with a much more secure Unix-compatible system as used by many of the larger financial organizations, unfortunately most of the council do not understand what is available and are not prepared to check.  The EU is trying desperately to persuade the UK to change, but is hitting a wall of ignorance. The government pays lip service, and I have attended two large seminars organized by the Prime Minister's office on the introduction and promotion of Free Open Source Software to the UK, attended by many top organizations, companies, Universities, and other educational institutions, but it is then ignored. There are University courses, but little official help for new users.  The BBC also insists on using Microsoft, despite many of their IT staff wishing to move to a Unix-compatible system. The normal estimate is that five times the IT staff are kept busy running around after a Microsoft system, while most of the work involved in running a Unix-compatible system can be done remotely and in comfort, working from home or using a portable computer, even a handheld, as convenient.  I have given away literally hundreds of demo DVDs which run a Unix-compatible system direct from the DVD, without any installation, yet I am sure that many are never even viewed unless it is discovered to be very good at rescuing files from a crashed Microsoft system. The same disc ISO image can be downloaded from many official university mirror sites around the world, but it is large and so takes time to download.

Chris Bell ● 6328d

Sorry - Windows 5 or 6 - do you mean Windows NT or 2000? I can only assume your naming of the operating system demonstrates your familiarity with the Microsoft software as the current versions of the OS are Windows 2008, with maintstream support for Windows 2003 still going strong. However - I suspect that lack of knowledge of the MS software probably contributes to the failure of your systems. Microsoft make it quite easy to setup a system that will fail by adding lots of out of the box quick setup features. These make it too easy to set up a crap system if you are unfamiliar with the underlying systems and requirements for the applications you are using. Open source is not the panacea you think it is - most people don't understand Unix or Linux or whatever underlying Operating System is or the other software used. If and when it goes wrong you do need to have a good understanding of and OS or application in order to repair it. This is true for ALL computing. I have run with Microsoft software for over 20 years in both corporate and public sector environments - I know it has failings and foibles - but by following the best practices of IT these don't fail very often. (I run/manage systems for a large insurance company which relies on IT heavily and this is reliable - but you cannot rest on your laurels and these need constant review to address new requirements and issues all the time) It is all very well running a small operation on Open Source - but try telling a board of directors or shareholders that you've not ot any formal support arrangements for your business critical systems and see how long you stay employed.Yes - this is STILL the sideshow for the real problem with the Ealing systems failure - apparent failure of the control of their system access (use of removable media) and apparent failure of their antivirus systems. This is all something that should be focused on and not the operating systems. As Ealing IT is outsourced - the comany that provides this should be held accountable for their failing to control and maintain the systems to prevent this failure.

Niall Connolly ● 6320d

Microsoft have already announced the numerical code for their projected next version, and Windows 5 or 6 follows their own numbering.I used to work for a very well known Broadcasting Corporation. The head of IT in our building showed me a huge bank of boxes running Microsoft, then pointed to an old box in one corner running Free Open Source Software that he said could easily do the same job.It is assumed that any Unix compatible will be used in an unfriendly environment, and security precautions are in place to cope. Modern distributions are supplied with even more embedded security, but it is not always enabled by default.Properly written and configured software is much easier to support than closed source, and there are plenty of competent engineers. I met a lad who was on work experience from school last week. He had read through the source code of the existing company database, compared it with the latest version of the database software, decided there would be no problem, built a pair of new computers with the latest version of the MySQL code, backed up the existing company database on to the new boxes, written his own test facilities, demonstrated that it would recover itself after some loss of data, and then retired the old boxes.I spoke to one system administrator working for a huge company that only managed to get support from Microsoft by stating the total number of boxes showing the same problem, and threatening to phone once for each of them, with no break after each previous call.

Chris Bell ● 6320d

Once again - missing the point of the issue.Its not what you use, but how you use it and administer it. I fail to see why you keep banging on about Unix systems being better than Microsoft - this is not addressing the root cause of the issue - the management of the systems.I don't disagree with your basic premise that Unix is more stable than Microsoft or that Microsoft is bloatware that needs a lot processor to perform the same tasks etc etc. For a lot of reasons Unix and derivatives are better - except for one - support and accountability - neither is guaranteed with Free Open Source software.The key point is this - plenty of companies and organisations run these systems perfectly well without issues like the Ealing failure. The most pertinent question is why they were paying probably a large amount of money for a "stable" and "well managed" environment which then failed due to someone apparently using an infected storage device which then spread through the systems unhindered by appropriate controls. Microsoft is not bad software - It too is secure out of the box and if you configure it appropriately it is a stable system so please get off the Unix soapbox and understand that most problems with IT are caused by people not computers. All computers only do what you tell them to do if you give them the right instructions. As a complete aside - I have inherited systems which were written by a "lad who was on work experience from school last week" and from bitter experience invariably find that whilst they might work well - they are usually not well documented/supported. Would I trust my company database to this sort of systems development scheme - not bloody likely and neither would my company auditors / board etc....Bit difficult to explain how the key information of the company was left in the hands of a "work experience lad" now without a red face.

Niall Connolly ● 6320d

The relative costs of running the two are generally as stated because once working they are so much more reliable and do not need continuous attention in situ. Most administration can be done from a comfortable seat almost anywhere, often using no more than a palm keyboard, if not done automatically.Administration is generally logical and not too difficult, although there will be some effort required by existing Microsoft Only administration staff.Microsoft are happy to make a huge loss supporting highly visible organizations and schools because they gain so much from the publicity. There is no charge, and no PR budget, with Free Open Source Software, much of it written by Universities and large organizations and made available to the community. Some is also included complete with the relevant free licenses within Microsoft products.I have spent several years trying to persuade Ealing to help organize a series of lectures for new users, we had a qualified Microsoft lecturer ready to provide a series of talks and comparisons, but he recently gave up waiting and left for New Zealand. I have also tried to organize a practical Community Club where new users could learn without fear of breaking something important, and have a stack of IBM servers and a CISCO router donated for the purpose by Imperial College, yet it took well over a year to convince Ealing Adult Learning that we were not talking about playing computer games.You mention netbooks, but do you mean the tiny palm size notebooks? The ones I have seen have been designed for schoolkids and have very few resources. Standard computer and laptop manufacturers can churn out very cheap identical standard boxes because they are charged very little for bulk OEM licenses without the full software kit because M$ make more money later once users are hooked in. Many people have tried to purchase the hardware without the M$ Tax, but are either charged more or refused completely. Most people either wipe the drive and re-install or build their own. I know many professionals and shop owners who use Free Open Source Software to rescue customer files, repair and then test the faulty equipment, and say that M$ is not good but they can not spare the time to show their customers the alternatives. For most customers it is justFearUncertaintyDoubtOtherwise known as FUD.

Chris Bell ● 6234d