I am going to make a bold statement, something sure to rankle the hairs on the backs of some necks. Okay, here goes, "Windows XP already is the best desktop operating by far." And Windows 2000 Server, while not as good as the newer Novell products, has become very respectable, very solid and very worthwhile. In fact, if Windows 2000 stays on this path, it may become the best server operating system of all.
My opinion is based upon 25 years of experience using RSTS/E, RSX, RT11, OpenVMS, CP/M, DOS, Mac OS 6-10, Unix, Linux, FreeBSD, Windows 3.1 - XP, and a few home-grown, self-written operating systems as well. I currently manage over a thousand servers, workstations and laptops.
My group has found that, when managed by competent professionals, Windows XP and 2000 server are exceptionally stable and provides a very high return-on-investment. Much higher, by the way, than most other non-mainframe operating systems, including Unix and Linux. (A mainframe still often provides a higher return for various reasons).
For the workstation, XP easily provides the top return-on-investment over a five year period, even with Microsoft's ^&%^^%^ new licensing program.
And no, I am not a Microsoft fan. I am an IT executive who understands that it's the products and services that are important, not the name of the company which produces them, nor the personality of that company's CEO or managers, nor the entertainment value of their lawsuits. I look at the overall return-on-investment of any product, comparing multiple vendors and solutions, and come to the correct decision. Microsoft products have a very low cost-per-person-hour (support person), which gives them a high return. The cost is low, of course, if your staff is intelligent, well-trained and does their job (of course, that's also true of other operating systems and applications as well - if the staff is competent support costs tend to be low.)
Some people have said, well, user's prefer non-Microsoft solutions. This is, of course, hogwash. A few years ago we decided to retire our old Macintosh computer systems. These wonderful machines had served us well for over ten years, but it was time (especially with the year-2000 problems approaching) to replace them.
We performed an in-depth analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each operating system available at the time (1998). We heavily involved the users in the process of choosing our operating system, office suite and various applications packages. Hands down (over 90%) chose Windows over all of the options available at the time. We finally decided upon Windows NT because it was (and still is) a superior operating system from all points of view.
One thing to remember, however, is the user is the corporation. An operating system has to satisfy the requirements of the corporation. The users themselves come after that - they are just one part of the corporation. After all, if we just focused on user needs we'd wind up installed video games and such on every workstation...
Return-on-investment, ease of support, ease of installation, security ... these are all far, far, far more important than the end-user. Why? An operating system (and other computer products) are designed for and intended for and purchased by companies who are attempting to improve their productivity or solve other business issues.
The important question in end-user's minds is not "do I have the most incredible operating system?" The question on their minds is "is my paycheck bigger?", "am I getting my job done?", and "is the computer getting in my way?". Operating systems like XP and 2000 don't require huge MIS support groups because they pretty much maintain themselves (as long as proper support is done regularly). They don't break, they are secure as long as you keep them up-to-patch (easy with the proper tools and planning by a competent computer staff), and they perform well.
In my experience (and you are a young pup in comparison) Linux, Unix, and the like require far larger support groups to maintain, because they are so geeky and technical. Computer geeks (and I am one, by the way) love these other operating systems because they love that kind of thing. I've found in my experience that users don't ... because they couldn't care less.
I am a techie at heart, and personally I love Unix, Linux, FreeBSD, and especially the older, superior operating systems like OpenVMS and RSTS. There is little more satisfying than spending all night writing that device driver to control a home weather station or whatever.
But as far as a business OS? I'll take Windows 2000 and XP any day of the week.
Unless otherwise noted, all photos and text is Copyright © Richard G Lowe, Jr.