On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 19:11, Ken Elliott wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> I think what you are doing is a pretty good idea, and is badly needed. I
> used to sell servers aimed at CAD users. It was pretty much a
> one-shoe-fits-all system.
Then you _are_ selling a "hardware-to-application" platform. That's the
_ideal_ place for Linux, in such a "vertical application" that you
completely control. The end-user could care less that it is Linux. In
fact, such solutions like this are why people don't realize Linux is far
more proliferated.
Microsoft forces Windows branding, even on vertical applications and
black box solutions. You know it is Windows.
The concept of trying to sell an "application-only" in the Linux space
is not going to net much. You now have to worry about hardware-OS
compatibility, which is an additional layer of cost and support -- and
something you don't control. This is required in the Windows world,
where you cannot customize Windows (Embedded NT/2000 is not nearly the
same thing ;-) and sell, Microsoft enforces its "branding" on you (which
is a smart marketing approach, not a demonization).
As such, it's much better to sell an application-specific "black box."
> I had an interview sheet, automated the install and shipped the server
> for the customer to install.
Exactly! Black box solutions that are easy to customize.
> My target was architect/civil engineering firms using AutoCAD. It was
> prefilled with software and had install scripts for the workstations.
> The servers had removable drives so I could send them a new box and
> have them swap the drives if there was an issue. Worked pretty well.
Yep. Lower TCO. Microsoft doesn't like to talk about the TCO of "black
box" solutions.
I personally loved the "Microsoft bigot" at one company who bought
several "CD image servers" out of an add in Windows Magazine. When he
got them, he talked about them being the greatest thing since sliced
bread.
Until we telnetted into them and showed him they were Linux-based.
> I've thought about doing the same thing with a Linux box. Your project
> sounds like the right direction, but I'd like to suggest a slightly
> different near-term target. Aim for the small company that has a tech guy
> that takes care of the computers part-time. That's what I did and it worked
> great. You end up teaching him a few things and he does all the leg work.
> Your support effort goes down as he gains experience.
Yep. Because mom & pop don't want to pay consulting fees. They will
nickle'n dime you until you're making less than minimum wage in
billables against actual time worked.
-- Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@ieee.org -------------------------------------------------------------------- Subtotal Cost of Ownership (SCO) for Windows being less than Linux Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) assumes experts for the former, costly retraining for the latter, omitted "software assurance" costs in compatible desktop OS/apps for the former, no free/legacy reuse for latter, and no basic security, patch or downtime comparison at all.----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:33:31 EDT