Remote desktop vs. remote display

Posted Feb 18, 2013 4:47 UTC (Mon) by dlang (guest, #313)
In reply to: Remote desktop vs. remote display by dpquigl
Parent article: LCA: The ways of Wayland

> The ability to survey boxes and push out patches and policy though AD is also a big feature. We have similar tools that can do this (CFEngine and Puppet) but once again show me a single package that has all of this integrated and makes it trivial to ensure you're compliant on your network for patch levels?

Companies routinely run Linux and Unix on tens of thousands of servers, and keep all of them up to date with all the right patches. Why would that same infrastructure not work for Linux desktops?

apt and yum both provide you will all the info you need to keep your systems on the software that _you_ want them to be on (which isn't necessarily the latest and greatest that's been released, you can trivially run your own repositories that only contain approved software and everything can trivially update from there)

Remote desktop vs. remote display

Posted Feb 18, 2013 6:36 UTC (Mon) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (5 responses)

> Companies routinely run Linux and Unix on tens of thousands of servers, and keep all of them up to date with all the right patches. Why would that same infrastructure not work for Linux desktops?
Because it's much harder to do it for desktops. And I've actually wrote my own cluster computing system for Amazon EC2 that has more than 2000 nodes (Linux, of course) during peak times.

For servers it's easy - you create config files and start required services. Easy peasy lemon squeeze.

It's much more difficult for desktop software. Puppet has lots of useful templates for servers, but almost nothing for desktop. For example, some HP printers require hplip setup that can only be done interactively. Fail.

> apt and yum both provide you will all the info you need to keep your systems on the software that _you_ want them to be on (which isn't necessarily the latest and greatest that's been released, you can trivially run your own repositories that only contain approved software and everything can trivially update from there)
So now we're talking about running your own repositories and checking all changes. That'll require at least one $100k-a-year high-level sysadmin.

On Windows it can be done by an MCSE (Minesweeper Consultant, Solitaire Expert). They'll probably won't understand how this devilish ActiveDirectory works, but it'll work good enough.

That's the problem with Linux - you HAVE to have a solution that can be deployed by average technician. And right now the only way to do it with Linux is to restrict functionality to a known-good set (Chromebooks, various set-top box devices).

Remote desktop vs. remote display

Posted Feb 18, 2013 6:51 UTC (Mon) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (4 responses)

if you want the level of support that you get from your cheap MSCE, just install ubuntu and configure it to automatically install all updates.

your MSCE isn't going to do any more than what the auto-update will do. And just like the MSCE, most of the time everything will 'just work' and when it doesn't, the answer can be the same 'just reinstall the OS'.

And just like your MSCE isn't going to be able to handle a large company this way, the auto-update from the Internet repository isn't going to scale to a large company.

but to claim that this means that it can't be done is redefining "can't be done"

If you have a company with tens of thousands of systems, you had better have a team of highly paid admins checking everything before it gets pushed out to them.

Enterprises running Windows don't rely on windows auto-update, they verify all the patches, roll them out in waves and cross their fingers to find out what business critical software Microsoft broke this time.

Remote desktop vs. remote display

Posted Feb 18, 2013 14:47 UTC (Mon) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (3 responses)

> if you want the level of support that you get from your cheap MSCE, just install ubuntu and configure it to automatically install all updates.
Tried that (I really did!). Didn't work.

The problem are not updates, but all kinds of small maintenance.

>And just like your MSCE isn't going to be able to handle a large company this way, the auto-update from the Internet repository isn't going to scale to a large company.
>but to claim that this means that it can't be done is redefining "can't be done"
Nope. Can you read my arguments, please? I'm saying that for large companies it's certainly possible to migrate to Linux because they have a good IT stuff (or they can just stay on Windows, because they have good IT stuff that can make it work).

For small companies it's different. They usually don't have anybody with sufficient knowledge of system administration - and simply contracting third-parties doesn't really work as well.

While with Windows you can get one of the MCSEs to setup something that almost works. It won't be perfect, but it'll be good enough.

That's what Linux has to do - offer an easy-to-use _complete_ system. So that a trained monkey (MCSE) can setup everything, including commercial third-party software. It also must work all the time for the most common scenarios. Right now it's not really possible with the "regular" distributions, but it's becoming possible with the _new_ Linux distributions (Chromebooks and Android).

Remote desktop vs. remote display

Posted Feb 18, 2013 16:12 UTC (Mon) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] (2 responses)

The problem are not updates, but all kinds of small maintenance.

I have a friend who owns a small residential seminar centre about 150 km from where I live. Her PC, which I set up for her more than five years ago, is used for the usual office-type tasks and is running Linux. I see her once or twice a year, and among other things we usually spend an hour or so over coffee going over user questions and doing the type of »small maintenance« she can't do by herself. (She can, and does, install distribution security updates on her own.) Very occasionally I get a phone call if something goes wrong, but whatever it is is usually nothing to do with her computer – it is more likely to be an ISP outage of some sort or other.

There is no way whatsoever that this sort of arrangement would work with a Windows machine.

While with Windows you can get one of the MCSEs to setup something that almost works. It won't be perfect, but it'll be good enough.

Please explain why it is impossible to get a modern Linux install to a point where »it won't be perfect, but it'll be good enough«. It is funny how many people are willing to cut Windows huge amounts of slack but will tolerate nothing short of absolute perfection when it comes to Linux.

Remote desktop vs. remote display

Posted Feb 18, 2013 16:45 UTC (Mon) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (1 responses)

>I have a friend who owns a small residential seminar centre about 150 km from where I live. Her PC, which I set up for her more than five years ago, is used for the usual office-type tasks and is running Linux.
How about QuickBooks or TurboTax or something like it? Or maybe a couple of games?

> Please explain why it is impossible to get a modern Linux install to a point where »it won't be perfect, but it'll be good enough«.
Because it is. A lot of software is simply not available on Linux, a lot of hardware STILL doesn't work completely.

In my experience EACH company has at least a couple pieces of infrastructure that are not supported under Linux. From softphones with T.38 fax sending to high-end printers with Windows-only configuration utilities. Or maybe that nice order-tracking system with WinCE-based wireless scanners. Or maybe that small Access database that tracks lab samples. Etc.

Seriously, start a company and try to offer migration services. You'll quickly see that the RealWorld(tm) is quite a bit different from "just use OpenOffice instead of MS Office".

What can be done? First, you need to start from a "known good" situation. Chromebooks offer a nice opportunity here - they work just fine, have a nice management infrastructure and are explicitly designed NOT to replicate all desktop tasks. So using Chromebooks to augment existing Windows-based infrastructure should be quite easy (we haven't tried it yet, to be honest). Then this platform might become attractive to third-party developers, so it can be slowly expanded into more general 'desktop' usage.

Remote desktop vs. remote display

Posted Feb 18, 2013 17:38 UTC (Mon) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link]

How about QuickBooks or TurboTax or something like it?

My friend's (external) accountant takes care of that.

Or maybe a couple of games?

We're talking »office PC«, remember? Here in Germany, you get to deduct the cost of your office PC from the taxes you pay for your company, but if you do so the tax office doesn't like you to play games on such a computer. Hence, no games. (My friend is not a computer-game person, anyway.)

A lot of software is simply not available on Linux, a lot of hardware STILL doesn't work completely.

A lot of that software is software you may not really need (as dskoll has aptly demonstrated) if you're willing to think outside the box.

And for most categories of hardware there are specimens that are well-supported by Linux. Hence the problem reduces to one of getting the right hardware to begin with. Of course if you buy the el-cheapo-stuff-of-the-week and then expect it to work perfectly with Linux you may be in for a surprise every so often. And on the other hand, it isn't as if every piece of hardware worked perfectly with Windows all of the time, either.

Seriously, start a company and try to offer migration services.

It's funny, but the guys in the office next to ours (our sister company) are doing exactly that, among other things. AFAIK they're doing fine and I don't hear them complaining more than one would expect. I guess it helps if you're competent …