"Microsoft bigots” is how Scott Akers describes users and administrators who won’t consider so-called solutions outside the Microsoft realm.I confess, I'm one of the above. You see, Linux may have a role somewhere in the enterprise but it sure isn't cheaper and it's really a bad decision for the desktop.
We work in tight budget times throughout the US. Open source evangelists attempt to persuade management in such high pressure times that money can be easily saved by a Linux conversion. Sorry, but these guys are out to lunch. The cost of migration and support kills ROI. Add to that retraining users and poor application support and the nirvana of Linux is gone. This situation in which the MA Dept. of Revenue finds itself is due to poor management, not "predatory" Microsoft licensing practices. Running Windows 95 eight years after its release is just dumb IT leadership. One easy unmentioned solution for this situation would be a terminal server situation which would replace the Win95 environment. It would be a lot simpler to implement, manage and deploy. But I also imagine that DOR's hardware is on its last leg if they're still running Win95. But that's a cost they don't discuss with the article's writers.
Oh well, just another day of brainwashing the American public. Stay tuned for more challenges to the Linux apologetic. And please don't call me a bigot.