One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?
-
Hi,
Just found one more Endpoint Manager. Might be easier with hosting on some VPS for assets on different locations.
-
Expected to run on a Windows server. No thanks. This isn't 1998. Dear Lord.
-
@scottalanmiller said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
Expected to run on a Windows server. No thanks. This isn't 1998. Dear Lord.
Windows servers are still relevant. Not everything can be accomplished on Linux. What does 1998 have to do with it?
-
@imager said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
@scottalanmiller said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
Expected to run on a Windows server. No thanks. This isn't 1998. Dear Lord.
Windows servers are still relevant. What does 1998 have to do with it?
Windows is still relevant, but just because it's still relevant doesn't mean it's always relevant and for this workload, it's absolute total incompetence for the product to have been written with Windows as a requirement. That, from a software development standpoint, is one of the best known, most obvious, and most complete forms of incompetence and unprofessionalism. That means that the developers had zero, less than zero, regard for the needs of using this software in production - which means we can't trust anything that they do. No production mindset.
1998 was the last time that there were tools and processes that would still have some advantage writing in a "unique to one platform" kind of way for software along these lines. That was the very last "hurrah" of this old approach to software development. Already dying out, already behind, but not yet totally unprofessional and unacceptable. By 1999, that era was over.
-
@imager said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
Not everything can be accomplished on Linux.
Actually, it can. When it comes to writing software, you can do anything with any language, on any OS. The idea that you need Windows to do software tasks is crazy outdated.
As IT people, we are sometimes backed into a corner and need Windows because someone on the development side screwed the pooch and turned the OS into a requirement, instead of a decision. The same would be true if they wrote for only Linux. There's no real case, especially with software like this, where making any OS a requirement is acceptable, to any degree.
That they test on Windows, recommend Windows, support Windows only... that's all fine. But writing using Windows-only tools that exist only to trap the absolute most worthless developers and they fell for it... something even an intern should know not to do... tells us more than any IT pro needs to know about what the developers think of us and their own software.
Software developers never need a specific OS to do a task. That's an IT problem caused by developers. So yes, anything can be written on Linux. In fact, Windows could be written on Linux (and there are rumours that MS has done it to see what would happen.)
-
@imager said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
What does 1998 have to do with it?
-
@imager said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
Windows servers are still relevant. Not everything can be accomplished on Linux.
So no rebuttal? No one suggested that Windows Servers aren't relevant, that was a very emotional response to saying that "requiring a specific OS" was a ridiculous problem to have in this day and age. Your response gives the impression that you are internally struggling with ascribing value to Windows and sense any suggestion that they are not absolutely necessary as an attack on your own value. Let it go dude, our professional value is not tied to vendor products. As IT folks, we can't care about one product over another, our whole value comes from being above that stuff. That's for best buy workers and Internet trolls, not business infrastructure decision makers who need to stay focused on how our decisions drive profits.
You make the wild claim that not everything can be accomplished on Linux. This flies in the face of all known programming knowledge since the beginning of computers. Care to elaborate what you know that no one else in the industry knows?
-
@scottalanmiller said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
@imager said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
Windows servers are still relevant. Not everything can be accomplished on Linux.
So no rebuttal? No one suggested that Windows Servers aren't relevant, that was a very emotional response to saying that "requiring a specific OS" was a ridiculous problem to have in this day and age. Your response gives the impression that you are internally struggling with ascribing value to Windows and sense any suggestion that they are not absolutely necessary as an attack on your own value. Let it go dude, our professional value is not tied to vendor products. As IT folks, we can't care about one product over another, our whole value comes from being above that stuff. That's for best buy workers and Internet trolls, not business infrastructure decision makers who need to stay focused on how our decisions drive profits.
You make the wild claim that not everything can be accomplished on Linux. This flies in the face of all known programming knowledge since the beginning of computers. Care to elaborate what you know that no one else in the industry knows?
To add, the need for IT to run any server OS, on hardware or virtualize, is really starting to dwindle. With the direction modern management and practices are going, I can see both SMB and enterprise use of servers going the way of the Dodo.
-
@obsolesce said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
@scottalanmiller said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
@imager said in One more Endpoint Manager - open source - what does it sounds?:
Windows servers are still relevant. Not everything can be accomplished on Linux.
So no rebuttal? No one suggested that Windows Servers aren't relevant, that was a very emotional response to saying that "requiring a specific OS" was a ridiculous problem to have in this day and age. Your response gives the impression that you are internally struggling with ascribing value to Windows and sense any suggestion that they are not absolutely necessary as an attack on your own value. Let it go dude, our professional value is not tied to vendor products. As IT folks, we can't care about one product over another, our whole value comes from being above that stuff. That's for best buy workers and Internet trolls, not business infrastructure decision makers who need to stay focused on how our decisions drive profits.
You make the wild claim that not everything can be accomplished on Linux. This flies in the face of all known programming knowledge since the beginning of computers. Care to elaborate what you know that no one else in the industry knows?
To add, the need for IT to run any server OS, on hardware or virtualize, is really starting to dwindle. With the direction modern management and practices are going, I can see both SMB and enterprise use of servers going the way of the Dodo.
While I generally agree - there will always be cases where situations warrant the performance of proximity to their data. Though I suppose this could be offset by putting both the data AND the desktop in the DC - then it's about the performance of the interface to that desktop. And as Scott loves to continue to mention, the US is a practical 3rd world country for internet access
