Why do companies use Windows if Linux is better and cheaper?

Why do companies use Windows if Linux is better and cheaper?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open-source_configuration_management_software
redhat.com/en
suse.com/
libreoffice.org/get-help/professional-support/
archive.rebeccablacktech.com/g/search/image/8M6z7_h1PmH4YideoxmCKQ/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

We use mac and linux at my job, except for winbabies who request wangblows

Lack of know how.

Windows has better tools for intranets.

what annoys me is that it's being used at university (along other proprietary garbage such as matlab)

I suspect it's somehow profitable for unis to sell their souls to these fucking companies.

Like what?

Universities usually get Windows for free. The idea is to condition generation after generation of students.
Microsoft gave away free licenses of Windows XP and Office to teachers all over Europe in the early 2000s. They later repeated this in India. Probably even got tax cuts for "charity".

Highly integrated directory service, DNS, file sharing, endpoint management.

Similar solutions exist for GNU/Linux but they're usually proprietary, like Univention or SuSE Linux Enterprise Server

User management
Remote deployment
>inb4 make a bash script as a cron job
everything is much more streamlined

>sudo we can't afford a sysadmin so we pay $50 per computer more.

>a retard who has no required skill or experience at administering large networks presumes his edgy freetardism is of any value

$50 more per computer is negligible for most companies.

normies don't know linux
and frankly windows has a more friendly ui
"Oh no we ran into a problem ;^)" click okay and it 'fixes' it for you

pajeet, 50 dollars is not a lot of money

Linux admins are more expensive. You can hire any old pajeet as a Windows admin.

There's also a lot of cover-your-ass involved. Managers like the idea of there being someone to sue if things go south, and proprietary software gives you that.

Memes aside, companies pick Windows because it just works.

Microsoft gives Windows to universities on the cheap.
Yep, basically this, but I have a feeling another reason is because applel is too greedy to do the exact same thing.

... Until you're hit by a crypto-locker because of a retarded employee.

>The idea is to condition generation after generation of students.
>Microsoft gave away free licenses of Windows XP and Office to teachers all over Europe in the early 2000s. They later repeated this in India.
>India.
It seemed to have worked.

Exchange and Office file compatibility above all else.
You want to have full access to exchange features outside of ews/owa?
You want to edit/contribute to official documentation shared between different users?
Get bent. Buy Office.
You want to install, use Office and have real tech support?
Get bent. Buy and use Windows.

>germoney uses linux
>goes back to windows because it was costing them money.

Because on Windows you can actually install a proper document editing suite and professional applications for research.

Because windows is societal level ransomware and once you've got it, it's extremely had to get rid of.

My work has is about 50% dev and 50% normies. The normies of course, use Windows. The dev team wants to switch to unix based but all the deploy scripts, all the internal tooling, all the documentation was built to work with Windows or using proprietary software. Switching to a unix based system would cripple us for weeks. So we are stuck with Windows and its only going to get worse because all the new things we create have to work with Windows as well.

>Linux is better
>m-muh Wine and Passthrough

Mostly because of office. All the other intranet services they offer like exchange and active directory could be set up by other companies like Red Hat or Canonical but Microsoft has the monopoly on office and that's what everyone uses.

one word DOS companies really like DOS

>Universities usually get Windows for free.

Usually, but not in my country I guess. In Eastern Europe I would say it's a mix of not knowing how to use Linux and professors get paid by MS. It's the students who pay for the software unless it's college but because theres more highschools and colleges MS gets out better.

Same thing with companies, the boss is just a regular person who is too lazy for Linuxs' non-existent learning curve and potientially gets paid by MS.

All we can do is turn workplaces to the light side but it's very hard when it requires more effort, knowledge and plasticity.

Just because its "free" to download doesn't mean it's free to use.
Companies would need to retrain most of their work force to accommodate a switch to Linux and on top of it would have to pay to have their data transferred and hire new system administrators. Not to mention
>(Insert X shitty Linux """"""freeware"""""" here) stops working.
>Shit boss hop on Sup Forums and post a thread for tech support.

WTF is a directory service?

Support and professional software with support. It's nice for management to have someone to yell at when things (which they have no idea how they function) break. When they have to yell "down" to their own staff it makes them look bad in the eyes of their bosses.

Also, this: It just works... for the most part.

You clearly don't have enough technical knowledge to be on this board. Please go back to Sup Forums or wherever you came from.

see also: LDAP

You think Deborah in accounting is going to be able to figure out how to print an email from Linux or Mac, an OS she has never seen, when she can barely remember her password? Lol. Windows will always have majority market share because less intelligent employees (women) are somewhat familiar with it.

>the failed tech support fag who never touched chef and alike

Because Linux is a clusterfuck the only time a company uses it is when they force everyone to use Fedora or Ubuntu

they need to be told how to do anything in windows, as well
what difference does it make?

1. Windows is standard in the business world. All clients, customers, and new hires can be expected to support Windows
2. For older companies, the company already owns licensed software for the Windows platform and all the staff already know Windows
4. The middle management want to cover their ass and nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft (See 1. and 2.)

Because Windows is a clusterfuck the only time a company uses it is when they force everyone to use AD or MSO

Fixed for you.

>nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft
This is where you are wrong.

ironically, if Linux had AD without the functionality being spread across nine different programs and services it would probably be used more

Windows is easier to install and setup and takes time to do it. And installing windows programs also takes less time than making them work on wine. Also windows is easier to repair and fix in most cases and takes less time.

Of course thats a stupid argument for single computer but when you need to maintain 50 PC-s and fixing issues must be ASAP windows saves alot of time.

Imagine for example release of update on 50 PC-s working on Archlinux, and fixing conf files on all these 50 pc-s.

lets get real for a moment. You install windows 10 in about 45 minutes and for most linuxes its about the same but remember. Biggest base linuxes are about 1 gigabytes or 2 while windows 10 can be more than 5 gigabytes of data. And what happens when you open them. On the linux there are about 2 functional buttons, 3 are nonfunctional and in those two buttons there are some pictures to play with. Maybe slide down or up. On windows though, you feel like a god. Its professional its fast, its all functional. You have a godlike user interface. The thing that the linux does not have. You have those two buttons in the linux, but you still search google for codes to write in terminal. Linux is free because its not worth a penny. Nobody would sell a paper without taking the money. Just not sure why people still buy android while windows phone does 10 times more. Trust me. When you work with windows you know some genius ground breaker dedicated himself to give you an operational os

>Archlinux
Virtually no one with a job uses Arch Linux for their job. It's a toy distribution.

>Imagine for example release of update on 50 PC
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open-source_configuration_management_software

All of your claims are total bullshit. Go away Microsoft shill.

>Windows is easier to install and setup and takes time to do it.
I find linux much faster and easier to setup.
>Also windows is easier to repair and fix in most cases and takes less time.
This is absolutely false.
>And installing windows programs also takes less time than making them work on wine.
Some things are no different to installing on windows, though that's not always the case. there are also some cases (especially older software) where it's easier to run under wine than windows.
In general, for newer software, I'll agree is less likely to be as easy to setup windows software under wine than windows.

Most application is webapp anyway. Install a browser that start automatically, and hide/forbid everything else

My work place won't even allow windows on our machines because of the botnet.

You'll get all sorts of bullshit reasons in this thread but I'll give you the real reasons

1. It's what people are used to
2. Because of "corporate" support, absent in the case of Linux

The second point of huge. Consider this, Bob is a guy who works in a company, he's a dumb shit with no passion for his job because that's what happens in 99.99% of the cases. His learning ability is very tiny too, so whenever he encounters a simple problem like his computer not connecting to the internet, his first reaction is to bitch about it to the IT guy. Similarly if he uses a spreadsheet program and doesn't know how to do something, he will call the tech support instead of doing a simple Google search because we all know, he's a dumb little shit.
If he were using Windows, he'd call windows tech support, but if he were using FOSS, he wouldn't have anyone to bitch about it to, because well, it's open source, a community project, no single company is responsible for it it.
So in the end Bob the faggot tells his boss Linux is bad because he doesn't have anyone to bitch to about his own unwillingness to learn, his boss in turn gets windows installed on all machines.

Most corporate workers are like Bob, not everyone is unwilling to learn, but everyone wants the easiest and quickest way out of a problem, and calling the tech support is always faster then emailing one of the devs

So there you have it, it's not a complex issue or anything, anyone with a corporate job will know this

the problem with this, is that support plans for linux are available, such as from Red Hat

>2. Because of "corporate" support, absent in the case of Linux
?
redhat.com/en
suse.com/

Mainly ActiveDirectory and ease of use. Why pay extra for a Linux sysadmin when everyone and their inbred kids are A+ MS certified?

The majority of web facing and core infrastructure is Linux in corporate environments. Windows is typically used to run your office domain because employees need their fucking calendars and shit.

That's for the platform based problems, like if you cannot find where to find a particular setting in the os, but what if you have a problem with libre office, or maybe another package like a PDF reader, or maybe an email client, the red hat tech support won't be able to help with that.
The decision of the OS running on machines ultimately lies with the IT of any company, the IT guys obviously prefer people bitching about stuff to anyone but them, so they automatically prefer windows

You also should note people working in non tech related fields are extremely technologically incompetent

> why

>more thoughts out of my ass
libreoffice.org/get-help/professional-support/
>Red Hat
>SuSE

not only that, libreoffice is a core package, it ships as part of the OS
a problem with libreoffice IS a platform problem

I work at a big 4 company. Work laptops have winXP on them by default. And we can use redhat if we want

Well I was not aware of this.
The point isn't this though, most software on Windows is paid, and has some kind of support behind it, while Linux too has software, free in this case, with support, but there's no call help line kind of support, that most companies prefer

I'll say it again though, you guys really underestimate how bad your average Joe is with tech if he isn't in the field

>Why do companies use Windows
In a whole lot of cases it seems to be for legacy reasons. A lot of them use custom software for "mission critical" things.

You know there is something odd when the company is using a piece of binary blob custom ordered software made by a local company that went under years ago on an ancient version of Windows...

In a lot of cases it's just a matter of cost, though. If you have 1000 employees who've used Windows for years then it's pretty costly to train them all to use GNU/Linux or anything else for that matter.

Nobody in the corporate world will rely on or care about wine or passthrough, if you need something done on Windows then you'll buy a Windows computer for it - even if you're normally using GNU/Linux for everything.

AD on linux is pointless if the network don't have windows clients.
Time to upgrade the pasta. Windows phone landed in the trash. Maybe this was the best decision by those geniuses. :^)

Only if those 1000 employees are sysadmins which would be quite funny. I use windows for web development and i see no problem to use osx or linux as the workflow don't have anything to do with the system itself.

We use both at my uni, linux for coding, Windows for proprietary Software like CATIA.

Hello, newfriend. Fresh in from Reddit?

archive.rebeccablacktech.com/g/search/image/8M6z7_h1PmH4YideoxmCKQ/

I've never seen Windows fix itself. Usually it tries, but ends up wasting a couple hours and days it couldn't find anything to fix.

Yum curry bobs

it's the same reason why they don't hire only women when people say that women earn less
it's just not true, windows is better because everyone already uses it, there's almost no CLI programs and it's easy to learn
and there's a ton of software that just doesn't exist on linux or the alternatives are complete garbage like photoshop

>HillaryShrugWhatDifferenceDoesItMake.PDF
Lmao

Only because they had to spend money on re-education me Microsoft was cutting them massive breaks.

>corporate discussion
>let's pretend it's Sup Forums

...

>let's count to 5

Holy shit, what are you even trying to say? What's all this crap about buttons? No button has ever made me feel like a god. Are you a 12 year old Indian?

I am taking CS and i am forced to use microsoft software to do most of my projects (compile X in microsoft compiler, now compare to intel, now compare to gcc) as a consumer, most software is on windows anyway

i'm not familiar with what you're referring to

What the fuck?

That can't possibly be a good CS course.

>1.
>2.
>4.
>POTATO!

Windows is used to run the computers of the stupid fucks who work at the company since they're all low level plebian scum that barely know how to open word.

Linux runs what you see on the outside.

Your companies website? Your fortune 100 e-commerce site? It's running Linux and there's hundreds of Linux VM's and containers running in the backgeound to make it all work.

>he can't count from 1 2 4
kek

Windows is slower than dogshit. I used Windows for about 6 months (most paranoid 6 months of my life fucking windows BOTNET) and got used to it. Slow, shitty, ads, spyware, bloat, just the norm from Windows.

I installed Arch Linux on my laptop and everything is fast and quick, things happen in an instant. Slack is fast and loads quickly, it scrolls flawlessly. There's no spyware, no back doors that are intentionally left there. Most noticable impact was the sheer speed of all tasks and also the

To be honest Windows beat everyone to the punch in early 1980's in easy of use and then capitalized on it's popularity early on adhering to the easier implementation of programs and cross compatibility between versions.

And then they shillled the fuck out of it in later versions, streamlined tasks to make them easier to the end user and created an easy to use and administer ecosystem that is somewhat efficient although having an Extremely large resource overhead.


However as time is moving forward and education is becoming norm the movement to adopt Linux and *BSD derivatives is advancing rapidly.

Probably because brainlet boss thinks Microsoft Office is an essential piece of software

The only people that use Wine are idiots who haven't realized Wine barely works and isn't suitable for gaming. They're on a never ending path to failure.

Boot into the BOTNET if you want to play games, come back to normal afterwards.

Excel is more essential than you think. My company relies on Excel format nearly all of their financial data.

The best part is, my company won't upgrade from 2nd gen shit tier i5's with 8GB of RAM and 5400rpm hard drives, so 10/10 money wasted is because of shit tier computers. Half of finance can't even import workbooks into Excel because they're over 200MB and end up using too much RAM.

>Windows beat everyone to the punch in early 1980's in easy of use
you do realize windows 1.0 didn't come out until the mid 80's ('85), right?
and the macintosh was easier to use until windows 95
microsoft was just at the right place at the right time, getting their DOS hack sold to IBM, and the IBM PC happening to become a common target for clone systems, making the clones also MS-DOS capable, proliferating its use

>~200M
>can't fit in 8G ram

That's Windows and Microsoft products for you. A 200MB file when loaded into excel starts eating upwards of 2GB. With all of the corporate bloat to make sure we don't get fucking owned, because naturally Windows is insecure, 2GB is all you have free.

>allowing opening of mail attachments, executables or downloaded files on companys hardware

Stop working for meme startups.

>train every new emoloyess on how to use an os they have never seen
>pay for Windows licenses in bulk once every 5 years

>2GB is all you have free.
you're using a 32bit version of excel? (32bit processes in windows are limited to 2G ram, as the other half of the space is reserved for kernel use, this can be switched to 3G/1G with a kernel argument)
.. wait, don't tell me there's no 64bit version of excel

also, if you're placing so much data into an excel document that you can't feasibly load it all into memory, then you should be using something other than excel, something that uses a database that can be paged in and out of memory as required, as that is much more scalable

>professional applications for research
explain the existence of Scientific Linux

Institutional momentum.
It's what 99% of normalfags and boomers know, not to mention the incredible influence and monetary resources of MS and its near monopoly vs. A Gang of Autists with tendies and d'nations.
That, and normies want daddy Microshaft around for tech support instead of the aforementioned Gang of Autists.

Not my problem. We have a whole team dedicated to creating company images for all of our workstations and laptops.

In greece its 2.5x the pay of what my brother gets(he is a chef)

LibreOffice seems to have a plethora of tools and manipulations in Calc, it's Excel equivalent.

Why pay a bunch to license Office when this shit is THE EXACT SAME

LibreOffice Calc is very slow with large tables

I know that, it's because they haven't developed multi-core support.

I'd help out but I don't know jack shit about how you'd go about doing that.

Sorry I mis-wrote as i'm so used to calling it windows I meant , Microsoft as a company was able to proliferate their platform in the early 80's as you so kindly corrected me.

Companies also use SAP.
They expect software to be awful and expensive.

yes, microsoft product as a whole, that would fit much better, especially things like microsoft basic, which was used in a lot of machines before the IBM PC and MS-DOS came into the scene

Because they need someone to blame and collect money if their shit doesn't work. They're losing profit at that time and they want it insured. We get paid like $50k for every minute our ticketing system is down.

Can't ask free and open software made by volunteers to hand over $50k/minute.