digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

The City of Chicago goes Linux, saves over 85%!

principal.com — The City of Chicago's announced successful migration to Red Hat Enterprise Linux for essential government programs including the vehicle registration system online job applications restaurant inspections ethics training and more. The City of Chicago migrated to Red Hat in order to reduce costs and improve support performance and scalability.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • metalhead3767, on 10/12/2007, -7/+51This is great!
    • nstanosheck, on 10/12/2007, -3/+51Yeah, can you imagine, a DMV (the Department of Motor Vehicles that issues license plates, car registration, inspection stickers, drivers licenses, etc.) computer system that just works?
    • pwill, on 10/12/2007, -4/+58The city has already saved more than $250,000 and is reducing server hardware maintenance and operating costs as a result of Oracle's certification and support infrastructure on Red Hat.

      After seeing this, I don't see why any city would be reluctant to switch...
    • i440, on 10/12/2007, -65/+11Linux should really be about quality, not cost.
    • shrewduser, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20i440,

      once again you offer up a strange undiggable comment,

      cost vs benifit is what almost everything in an economy is about, your kind of right, this is also about quality. Linux isn't implemented just because the price is right, its because linux offers a lot of value to the consumer, cost is just one of the advantages to linux, but to really save money/generate value (as chicago is) you need more than no up front cost to....
    • bigred, on 10/12/2007, -35/+22Anyone that has ever done cost/benefit analysis of Windows vs Linux knows that the training required to get an employee comfortable with linux is going to end up costing you more in the short and long term than any number of licences and support contracts for windows.

      Linux in the enterprise is only good in servers where you can hire one person to take care of the servers, since the end user does not directly deal with the linux environment, no extra training is required for them.
    • MrSpontaneous, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4@nstanosheck: that's crazy talk!
    • JFitzpatrick, on 10/12/2007, -6/+37@bigred: I disagree completely.

      The average user has absolutely no knowledge of how the operating system they are using even functions (or even what the directry structure for the principal parts of the operating system look like.) In my experiences with end users outside of Computer Dorkdom, the end users don't care -at all- about what the system is run on, how it was compiled, if it is open source or closed source, etc. As long as they know what "thingy" to click on they are happy. For instance: I still see tons of Point of Sale systems that run DOS with a very very simple GUI. Do you think any employees at the stores understand they are using a very old version of DOS or even care? They just need to know where to type why, what to click, etc.

      I applaud the City of Chicago for their move... not because I'm a linux fanboy (I ran it for a few months back in the 90s, but missed Photoshop and the familiarity of Windows to be honest and ended up switching back.) but because they are saving the taxpayers money. How can we not applaud a government decision that actually saves money for once?
    • w0rd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16In my experience if it has "Word","The Internet/Blue E" and "Solitaire" then the user doesn't care. Of course that is only the ones that hardly know how to use a mouse. In sales it is all too common.
    • r2d7, on 10/12/2007, -16/+4Where's the cost saving on RedHat? It's just as expensive as Win2003 .... let's please not pretend that they didn't buy support mmmkay?
    • titlesaysitall, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2IMO Linux's greatest strengths (Command Line etc.) is it's greatest weakness when dealing with average consumers (like the mom looking to buy a Dell for her son's birthday). Sure big corporations/organizations buy them but that's because they are very experienced with the platform. Put a Linux'ed box in an average joe and they will be like "apt install what?" It may be great for most Linux users but it's probably why it may never go mainstream consumer wise.
    • Terc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12r2d7,
      Lets not pretend they were running Solaris without support mmmkay?
    • r2d7, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6They weren't running Windows.

      TCO for RedHat vs. Win2003 swings both ways depending on which google result you click, half saying one's cheaper then the other - which means they're closer to the same then either will admit.
    • cmiz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20During my stint as a system administrator, I found Linux to be a lot cheaper overall for servers (the company i worked for used both). The fact of the matter is that any decently sized company would easily drop over a hundred grand on licenses for windows server 2003 (i'm talking 25+ VLK licenses), and that is a lot to make up for the standard argument that *nix administrators cost more per year. I've also found that even though "windows administrators" are paid less, they usually are shoddy at best. anyone that knows enough about windows system security to be good at it is only a few weeks of familiarizing away from being a *nix admin and is probably paid about as much as one. (I also found installing server after server with the same disk not having to worry about any sort of serial numbers was a liberating experience.)

      As for linux desktup boxes for you average joe user, in my experience, setting up the machines is the lions share of the work, and once a decent linux distro is up and running, most average computer users (e.g. somebody who uses a computer for most of their work) is able to sort of figure things out. a day of training should be way more than enough to have them up and running.

      don't get me wrong, windows isn't a terrible operating system, but if you're looking to cut costs and the people you have working on your systems are savvy enough to swap to linux in short order, the whole TCO argument from microsoft is nothing more than a steaming heap of 100% grade A FUD.
    • Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1actually the DMV systems seem to work fine by me...the people on the other hand...
      well lets just say Dane Cook's description is right...

      "So I went to the DMV, or as I like to call it, satans *****"
    • CarbonX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2If only they'd migrated the Bureau of Punctuation. ;)
    • Librarian1968, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0Gotta add my $0.02 about the average user (even though the story ain't about switching from MS). If it's a GUI, they'll get it. If it is a file system you can customize, you put the 10 programs they'll use in the same folder and they'll get it.

      Open Office? That may be like pulling teeth to the average user.
    • dimitrisokolov, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3
      Right. I've used pretty much every distro of Linux since Slackware 1.0. My current Ubuntu freaks out trying to get on my wireless network. I have to jump through hoops to get the EVDO card up and running. I'm always downloading some new library and recompiling something or the other.

      Linux on the desktop in an office....good luck w/ that one. Even for power users, Linux is more of a pain in the ass in the long run. The quality of the desk top apps are just not there in Linux. Gnome, KDE all those interfaces are not as good as Windows and nowhere even close to Mac OS X.

    • FallibleDragon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9@r2d7: Linux (yes, even commercial variants like redhat) is MUCH cheaper than Windows. It compares with windows Advanced Server/Enterprise Server, and it comes WITH many of the programs that have inadequate, extortionately expensive windows counterparts. That is... with Linux, you get a great, industry leading webserver software (not the IIS security threat that windows offers) but ALSO a wealth of add-ons like application servers, blogs, credit card payment service interfaces, advanced Object-Oriented Databases (add on the price of SQL Server, then realise SQL Server sucks), high availability, compatibility layers to interface with all sorts of systems (including windows networks, apple networks, other databases, etc.), mail/groupware servers (add on the price of Exchange Server), remote management tools, imaging systems, backup systems...

      Windows is a toy, designed for single-user *personal* computers, and so-called "pros" who buy it for servers and workstations end up paying corporations like they're just out of kindergarten.
  • redhatcat, on 10/12/2007, -13/+37Yet another stronghold of GNU/Linux is founded! Let the enlightenment and freedom continue!
    • shrewduser, on 10/12/2007, -19/+32can we stop calling it GNU/linux?

      linux was NEVER a GNU project (never has been) yes there's usually some GNU stuff packaged in there when you install a distro, (GNOME, is GNU afaik, but KDE is not for example) but seriously calling it GNU/Linux not only sounds bad, and is technically wrong... but its confusing to the consumer...

      so stop it.. ;)
    • nwily, on 10/12/2007, -8/+25What non-GNU compiler have you been using to compile your linux kernel?

      Its not a matter of Linux systems containing some GNU tools, it would be almost impossible to build a system without them.
    • ricree, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14No one ever said that Linux was a GNU project. However, some important parts that are needed to take the linux kernel and use it as a working system are GNU software, and many others are licensed with GNU's GPL.
    • awhiteflame, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7@shrewduser:

      Quite right. That's why we say GNU/Linux, as if to say, GNU + Linux. Not GNU's Linux.
    • i440, on 10/12/2007, -27/+4@shrewduser

      You hate me, but I completely agree with you. It's /Linux/. And only Linux. The GNU project is just being arrogant in this regard.
    • muyuu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10In fact, the number of packages that are neither GNU nor the Linux kernel is already so high, it should be called by the distro name first and foremost.

      Merit where it's due. Red Hat scores this contract, so it's a point going for Red Hat Enterprise Linux and the FOSS it includes.
    • Nerevar, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2I'm sick of all this squabbling over GNU/Linux vs just Linux. I blame Richard Stallman.
    • w0rd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+23Okay here is the deal:
      1. GNU geeks are hardcore about representing. They always say GNU/Linux. Some of them say that Linux could not exist without the GNU compiler. This has to do with pride, parading or a passion for freedom. It often comes off as annoying.

      2. Linux nerds that called it Linux for years and are afraid to look stupid because they are terrified that they might be wrong. They spread ***** around such as trying to imply that when someone says GNU/Linux, they are asserting that Linux is a product of GNU. It often comes off as annoying.

      3. There are people like me that are tired of the arguments about this. Saying Linux is fine. Saying GNU/Linux is fine.

      Now that I've pissed everyone off, time to get buried.
    • timmarhy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10i440 stop talking out your ass. there can be no linux without GNU.

      its a sign of respect to all the hard work the GNU folks put in. without them there would be no linux kernel, and no apps to go with it.

      why don't you piss off and do something constructive instead of trolling every single linux thread on digg.
    • shrewduser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4i440,

      i don't hate you, i don't know what gave you that impression, yes i disagree almost always with what you say.

      yes the GNU tools and projects are integral to a complete linux distro, and yes its usually compiled with the major FREE compiler (which happens to be gcc) but does that mean we should put the word GNU in front of linux? (or freeBSD or macOS for that matter?) or the words ibm or intel in front of windows? (used to be compiled with their compilers, might even still be although i doubt it)

      the whole argument is madness/arrogance. nobody is forgetting about gnu, it just doesn't need to be in the linux name.... its just stupid.
    • i440, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4@timmarhy

      “there can be no linux without GNU.”

      Without a working kernel, GNU would've never gotten off the ground, and a working Linux installation need not have much GNU software at all. In addition, the few components that /are/ vital could've easily been written by some other organization.

      Demanding that the operating system be called GNU/Linux is just arrogance and foolish pride. The even go as far as calling the system “Linux” an “error” when, of course, the notion that the system should be given an alternative name is just their own opinion. And, by definition, there can be no error to an opinion.
    • saranagati, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Actually the reason people put the GNU in there isn't because there's a few gnu applications that most distro's use or that the general compiler for linux is gcc. The reason why gnu deserves the respect is for glibc which is the libraries that virtually all applications running on linux use. Without glibc the act of creating a program to run in linux would be MUCH harder, enough so that there's no question linux would have ever got started, or continue to be developed if it were removed now.
    • Cinder6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I simply use GNU/Linux to specify that I'm talking about an entire operating system, not just the kernel. Linux is really only the name of the kernel, although this definition is pretty loose. I usually write "GNU/Linux", but I won't get all uppity if you call it plain "Linux", nor will I secretly applaud you if you tag on "GNU". I really couldn't care, and just see the GNU/ part as a clarification that we are talking about a complete OS.

      So...saying GNU/Linux might be technically wrong (due to the large number of non-GNU code now packaged with most distributions), but then again so is plain Linux, as that technically only refers to the kernel. Even more fun, we could say *nix, which is even more incorrect (in some cases), but everyone still knows what you mean. So I guess what I'm saying is get over it. We're all wrong :)
    • i440, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0“So I guess what I'm saying is get over it. We're all wrong :)”

      Thank you thank you! Finally, some sanity and unambiguous correctness on Digg. You are the best philosopher.

      Positive Digg attack!!! (: (: (:
    • BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@shrewduser

      The oblique stroke means and/or.

      GNU/Linux *very clearly* means a combination of GNU and Linux.

      On a platform which has a linux kernel and a whole bunch of GNU tools, it's not at all inaccurate to call it GNU/Linux, any more than it would be to call it a Linux/Gnome system, an i686/Linux system or a Linux system/computer.

      In future, if you meet anyone who doesn't get what "GNU/Linux" means, and think it means "GNU Linux", just point them to evening classes in the English language.
    • michaelsimms, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Personally on the whole GNU/Linux vs Linux debate, I have to say I disagree with GNU/Linux for one reason alone. RMS is all about freedom, as long as it is HIS freedom. He creates the GPL that grants me the right to do what I want with Linux as long as I dont encumber it in any way that stops it being free. And then he tries to tell me what I must call it.
      That annoys the hell ou of me, it really does. So, RMS can call it what he wants. Me, I fork GNU/Linux once an hour (or pick some random time), as his license states I can, and I call my version Linux.
      Many years ago when I started using Linux, glibc wasnt a part of Linux, nor was gcc. We used libc from - erm, not sure where but it wasnt gnu's libc. We used cc from - erm, somewhere else, but again, it wasnt gnu's. Linux probably cant be built without gnu tools any more, but it isnt inherantly part of gnu. It just happened to be intertwined.
      Fact is, that most of the GNU tools are, most of the time, used on Linux. Yet if you tried to insist that GNU was called Linux/GNU, RMS would have a fit.
    • Viliam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2If I have some GNU programs installed on my MS Windows XP operating system, should I correctly call it: "GNU/MS Windows XP"?
    • redhatcat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I didn't mean to start such an argument inadvertedly.

      The reason I call it GNU/Linux is because I'm thankful for all that GNU has given to Linux and the FOSS community. GNU gives us GPL, binutils, fileutils, GTK+, and most of those fine programs that start with 'g'.
    • GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You can build Linux with the Intel Compiler. Ok it costs money and isn't free in any sense of the word but it can still be done. There are numerous userlands out there as well. It would be a pain in the arse to do things without GNU tools (which is why OpenBSD still uses GCC) but it can be done. It would just be a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

      So really GNU is defacto vital without being dejure vital. Really if people got annoyed enough by the constant 'Linux is just a kernel' nonsense a new compiler collection could be built but really no-one is that petty.
  • Lou3000, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11I hope this means I'm getting a raise (Law Clerk at the City)
    • FallibleDragon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3No offense, but... why should you get a raise? The money should go back to the poor people who scrimped and saved to fund a government project, which immorally handed money to big corporations until now. They had no right to do that. Public money should go to open, public projects, which everyone can access and reap benefits from in years to come, including other departments, other government bodies, charities, etc.
  • psychotron, on 10/12/2007, -31/+12Eeeeew! Did you hear? It's the sound of 1000s of Linux fanboys bukkaking each other!
  • i440, on 10/12/2007, -51/+4O, Chicago
    How you can take a stand
    And throw quality out the window
    With both hand —

    The signs of the despair;
    (Of putting Linux in there)
    Recklessly, without the slightest care!
    It is indeed, quite a scare.

    And for the unaware:
    Should you install Linux?
    I certainly wouldn't dare!
    • shrewduser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+34why is you picture the ubuntu logo,

      all your comments seem to make you out to hate linux...

      are you just trying to be strange? like some sort of emo kid trying to eke out an identity?
    • r2d7, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20He's just pissed off they didn't use Ubuntu.

      But don't worry - a village in northern Vietnam is switching both computers to Ubuntu next week, so he'll be happy again soon.
    • timmarhy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5rofl
    • i440, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4@r2d7

      lol. (:
    • benplaut, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I said this a few weeks ago, i'll say it again. Shut the ***** up, i440, and stop being a ***** troll.

      As for now, thanks for the entertainment!
    • FallibleDragon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I hope microsoft is paying you well to spend your time here, selling your opinions to their bidding. Otherwise, you're a sad victim of corporate propaganda, who can't tell truth from lies. Might want to actually try Kubuntu for a while, see how hard people work FOR YOU (rather than for your money) and figure out what you're disrespecting.
  • surfing, on 10/12/2007, -12/+14"The city's infrastructure had historically been a multi-platform environment that included about 100 Solaris servers used to run a large number of Oracle databases and applications. As these servers neared the end of their life cycles the City of Chicago began the migration to cost-effective Red Hat solutions."

    Microsoft or even Windows isn't even mentioned in the article.
    • WhiskerTheMad, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9Neither was it mentioned in the posting. In fact, it looks like you're about the only person to bring up MS or Windows.

      So what's your point, again?
    • Trevahaha, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Surfing -
      Really good point. I assumed reading the title and snippet that it meant savings of Microsoft software, but it isn't. It's savings over Solaris software.
    • dustin551, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4"Good point iamcitizen. Although MS has a big war chest, and will no doubt be using it to pay some politicians/Governments off."

      I think it's funny that Microsoft is brought up when the article was related to their replacing Solaris with Linux. You see an article about Linux, and many just assume it was Microsoft that was replaced.
    • Anth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Indeed, a lot of people start talking about MS as if they switched computers away from Windows to linux, when it seems from the PR that it was just solaris boxes taking the hit.
    • surfing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3WhiskerTheMad, jeevesbond comment "Although MS..." about an hour before my post. I couldn't help but comment after reading the article.
  • CasualNinja, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23I am from Chicago and it is stories like these that make me proud to be a Chicagoian! Now if we could get rid of all the corruption that would help. GO CHICAGO!
    • techweenie1, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5CasualNinja...Corruption in our fine city is as much as a staple of Chicago as the Chicago Style Hot Dog and Deep Dish Pizza..and although Daley is corrupt he has improved the city by leaps and bounds, I highly doubt anyone could replace him that isn't corrupt anyway, that's the nature of politics.
    • someguyouknow, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7haha

      yea... corruption goes great with the Chicago style pizza.
      I love being a Chicagoian!!!
    • Chicagoland, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5""Corruption in our fine city is as much as a staple of Chicago as the Chicago Style Hot Dog and Deep Dish Pizza...""

      Sad but true.

      Viva la Chicago
    • nickiank, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4That sort of complacency in regards to the corruption is *exactly* why I'm leaving Chicago. I've only been here six years and that's too many to see it like this.

      Oh well, I guess this article points to some semblance of a high note I can remember from my time here.
    • compu73rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Chicago just wouldn't be the same without all the corruption. It's what makes us Chicago! CORRUPTION FTW! :)
    • ryan4477, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1i love chicago...the band.
  • pman201, on 10/12/2007, -16/+4i give the above poster 1 up just because his poem is awesome
  • anastrophe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13this is idiotic:
    "Impressive results were immediately noted by the City Clerk's office responsible for the City Stickers program. Sun Solaris benchmarked at 50 268 transactions per minute while the HP DL580 G2 with Red Hat Enterprise Linux benchmarked at over 149 500 transactions per minute. "

    exsqueeze me, the performance difference is due to the newer, way way way faster hardware, not to the OS in use, ya nimrods. the Sun E6500 could hold up to 30 processors and 60gigs of ram - but the max UltraSparc processors speed was 464Mhz (and i'd bet they were running slower version for that matter). the HP DL580 G2 holds up to four xeon 3Ghz cpus, and 32G of ram. The E6500 is a beast, the size of a typical colo cabinet. The HP is 4U high. there's no comparison.
    • DigitalDud, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It looks like Solaris got better performance given the hardware.
    • FallibleDragon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think they probably mean that the results of the upgrade project in general are impressive. They probably don't care much whether it was the hardware or the software that did it. But, presumably it's a combination of both. They probably made a few fixes or additions to their servers that demand more processing power, too.
  • byronm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Wow.. so the fact that hardware is a commodity these days and the market has driven down prices across the board has nothing to do with it but replacing a free os with another free os saved 75%.

    hey, its cool but it is what it is.

    but good to see a city saving its tax dollars and spending them wisely!
    • Nick22, on 10/12/2007, -16/+3windows isnt free buddy
    • anastrophe, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8nick22, read the freaking article. they weren't using windows, ya nimrod.
    • jsleno, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@byronm

      I'm sure that when the city purchased the Sun boxes that they were charged for the OS. They upgraded from ancient to modern hardware, yes. That accounted for a lot of their speed gains. But they definitely did not replace a "free OS" with "another free OS." That is what accounted for their cost savings.
    • FallibleDragon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Umm... one of the major benefits of Linux is that it makes Operating Systems a commodity. So, you're right, but lose the bias.
  • spankee666, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Rembember:
    Gnu early and Gnu often.
  • Protoman, on 10/12/2007, -19/+5Anyone else notice how every "pro-linux" comment got dugg up while anything with windows being a good os got dugg down?

    Chicago probably feels like they are sticking it to the man right now.

    Personally, I'd rather see Microsoft destroy everything then to one day have linux as the top OS. (Which would never happen btw).

    Linux is a disease.
    • jsleno, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3If Linux is a disease, you better get your flu shots right now!
    • NicP, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14yeah because free software and consumer choice is an awful thing to have...

      :/
    • hchaudh1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Welcome to Digg. I bet this moron has never even heard of /. Its the instant gratification of Digg that draws idiots like him to Digg.
    • Protoman, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Digg? Sorry, never heard of it.

      Never knew you Linux types were so defensive.

      Touchy, touchy.
  • MrSpontaneous, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This is great news! Hopefully we'll see further positive proof of open source/*nix advantages in the civic community.
  • s14sh3r, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4Linux is for people who know computers. Office workers don't know computers, they know how to sit and type in the same thing every day. Now, they'll be lost and have to call tech all the time.

    It's kind of like cars. I know cars. I know how they work in infinite detail. I can work on cars. I've owned several high-maintenance cars that the ordinary person couldn't keep running. Linux is like that. If you like "getting under the hood" then Linux is for you. If you just want to get on a computer and play games and surf the web, stick with Windows.
    • OroCHU, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9No, the office workers will still sit and type the same thing everyday, Red Hat's default install is still graphical so they just need to click a slightly different thingie (unless tech support made their own installer to make everything look the same anyhow). Red Hat is pretty much made for mundane office work. Surfing the web is mundane, so use Linux for that too. If you want to get under the hood, there's distros for that too (LFS, Gentoo, Slackware, Arch...)
    • NicP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8once setup correctly linux is lower maintenance than windows, there are far fewer crashes, no virus or spyware checking software is needed etc.

      If someone wants to uninstall and install programs and stuff, and fiddle with multiple monitors or start installing more peripherals then linux is often more difficult, but given that office workers wont be doing that, linux is the perfect option.
    • hchaudh1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4No its not. Ever seen people manning cash registers. They probably don't know much about the OS running on those machines, but they do their jobs just fine. An OS is just a lorified hardware manager. Its the programs that matter.
    • HMTKSteve, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4With a little bit of work on a "theme" you can make Linux look and feel just like Windows... Well, except for the random crashes and Spy Ware...

    • KevinWPeters, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@s14sh3r: "Linux is for people who know computers. Office workers don't know computers, they know how to sit and type in the same thing every day. Now, they'll be lost and have to call tech all the time."

      I call ***** on this. I have a 10 year old and a 6 year old who have been switching between Windows and Linux their entire lives and they still prefer the Linux system. The "ONLY" time they boot Windows is when one of the shockwave games they want to play won't load. Then they just usually say "***** it" and go to a different site.

      "It's kind of like cars. I know cars. I know how they work in infinite detail. I can work on cars. I've owned several high-maintenance cars that the ordinary person couldn't keep running. Linux is like that. If you like "getting under the hood" then Linux is for you. If you just want to get on a computer and play games and surf the web, stick with Windows."

      Kinda like you've got to know how to work on a car to drive one? Another ***** remark. When a car is running right, you don't have to know ***** about it to drive it. When Linux is set up right, you don't have to know ***** about it to run it. When both break down, if you don't know anything about it, you take it to someone that does and you get it fixed.
    • nicstevens42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You know 15 years ago people in some city offices were logging in to some sort of mainframe to use the apps to do their jobs. They didnt know how the mainframe worked any more than they would need to know how linux works.

      If I had people working for me in an office I would not want them surfing the net, reading their e-mail, getting stock quotes or instant messaging Mark Foley. I'd want them doing their job.

      I would want them to know the applications they need to do their jobs not how to use Windows, Linux, or OS/390 effectively. That is the job of IT and not the corporate end user.
  • drjekelmrhyde, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4hope this catch on in every major city b/c it will make M$ work harder and release products cheaper
    • Avalontor, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Microsoft was never mentioned but Solaris was.
  • NeilM, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6This here is a success story!
  • steveoa3d, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I work in State Government and we get killed on the Windows boxes. I asked a IT person why we don't use Linux and she bit my head off with a snotty "Whos gonna support that !" I was like what support to you need, install it and it works ? We use a web-browser to get our stuff from the intranet and MS Office to create stuff, why the hell do we need windows, Firefox and Open Office will do the job just fine !

    I asked her also whats the most common call for them to fix and she refused to tell me, I'm sure it's re-imaging after virus's or spyware. I know how to fix that problem !

  • lukematthews, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Now all they need to do is replace the BEA weblogic server with JBoss and they'll be set.
  • chitown, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I live in and sell IT services in Chicago, this is a historic news for Linux - yes. But in reading you will see that they went from Solaris to Linux vs. Microsoft to Linux. Not sure why there are all of these anti MS comments.

    The City still uses MS as the desktop OS, Office Suite, Exchange etc. The system that runs Linux is the LOB side application. Transactional apps have have always run better on UNIX, Linux and mini's this really isn't a an upset for Microsoft.
  • johnstar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5why redhat?
    • Anth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6As mentioned in the PR, it seems likely because Oracle certified RH to run as the OS under an oracle DB server.
    • timmarhy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1most likely they use ES server and support.

      personally for the same price i could hire a small army of freebsd hackers and i'd get better results, but government is a strange beast.
  • CiRu5, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Yeah but there TCO went way up because of the loss in kickback revenue from MS
  • omababy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Linux FTW...

    "Lets talk when linux loses market share to windows" ROFL...
  • Fatality, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4They actually SAVED money by switching to Red Hat? The alternative must've been horribly expensive if they actually purchased Red Hat.
    • DigitalDud, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I'm sure Mayor Daley has cronies working at Red Hat or something.
  • DigitalDud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I don't see how you can switch from a bunch of old Solaris machines without seeing a huge improvement.
  • yaosio, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Save 85% on OS costs, gained 300% on all other costs!
  • maleko42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5A couple of points here:

    1) They went from Solaris to Linux
    2) They when from End of Life Solaris boxes to current generation HP multicore boxes.
    3) They say that support was a major issue as the reason for the transition. So much for who's going to support Linux.
    4) It's unclear as to whether the benchmarks were against the EOL Solaris boxes vs the RHEL HP boxes or current generation Sun multicore boxes.

    5) No I don't work for Sun or Red Hat. Have worked with both OS's. Like both OS's. And I'm sure that Chicago made the right decision. I realize that Red Hat made the press release so it's going to be slanted in their favor. And you can't give all the details in a press release.
  • KentuckyRedNeck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Good, now with all the extra money, the city can install
    more surveillance cameras, hire more lawyers to
    dis-arm the non-criminals and generally oppress the
    populace that resides in the city limits.

    Good to be the king, aint it Mr.Daley??
  • BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Every time I see some local authority or govt. agency adopting GNU/Linux because they want to protect their resources - ie: skimp on stuff - I see a future blow to the reputation of GNU/Linux in large scale projects.

    Let's face it, authorities bugger things up and then blame it on whoever and whatever they can. I wonder how long it will take the UK's NHS to slate SuSE GNU/Linux to excuse its own failings, or local authorities in the USA/Europe clawing back their credibility after wasting money, screwing up projects and under-resourcing their IT depts with "you get what you pay for and windows is best, everyone knows that, aw, we made a mistake trying to save money - vote for us again".
    • GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Lets be fair. After the iSoft fiasco its unlikely anyone will blame Linux. The people running the NHS have been shown to be incompetant and Linux is being brought in because of price, they gave £4.2B to idiots so have little left to bring the NHS out of the 5th century BC.

      Anyway its another screwup from NL which so justifies Browns continual penny pinching. The fact the Tories can find £21B worth of inefficiency in the way tax is collected says it all about this government.

      The blame will be left directly at the feet of our socialist dictators and hopefully we will see them removed at the next election and then hard working people won't see their money wasted on nonsenses like iSoft.
  • ryan4477, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2linux is great, redhat is OK. w00t chicago (the city this time, not the band) for using linux!
  • HMTKSteve, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It is funny how "giving away" software is considered bad by MS when they themselves gained market dominance by using that very same strategy.

    Internet Explorer anyone?
  • truck87bp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1 It would have been nice also to see how much money was donated to the Linux community by Chicago for the savings they reaped.
    The gesture of knowing, would also lend a pointer in the direction of the everyday Linux user that has not made a donation. It's called, "Good Faith".
    I am still a windows user but I will probably switch in the near future to a Linux flavor and plan on Donating to the Linux system that I finally choose.
  • featherston, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I hope more do this. It makes so much sense.
  • ThinkFr33ly, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1For those of you who either won't or can't read the article, they moved from Solaris to Redhat, not from Windows.

    In addition, the initial migration costs are typically small compared with the total cost of ownership over the life of the product.
    • GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Which of course explains entirely why IBM are once again the big dogs when their main war cry has been to move towards Linux/Java systems with open standards so that future migration costs are much lower. If migration costs were so insignificant then IBM wouldn't be kicking everyones rear on this sort of point.

      Reality is no-one buys the propaganda from MS.
  • DuraznosTJ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Now, if they could either a.) stop charging for tools and/or b.) stop redoing their tolls every year.

    Congrats on the migration!
  • shoez, on 10/12/2007, -3/+085% of what? That is a pretty lame headline.
  • thedreaming1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Bill Gates must be pissed! I'm glad he lost another city! Let them fall like dominoes! Let the world be Microsoft free!
    • GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Bill Gates lost nothing except maybe an opportunity. Its Sun Microsystems who have once again lost market share to Linux here.
  • chapium, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2If its for a server running a database, why not go with Linux? Running windows with MS Office is well worth the money, but if you are paying oracle for a database, it might as well be on a cheap, stable server OS.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.