from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why aren't cost-minded SME/startups using Linux on laptops even now?

by raghava on 12/14/24, 3:18 PM with 22 comments

• by yen223 on 12/15/24, 1:39 AM

  The cost of using Windows over Linux per device is significantly less than one month's salary for an engineer.

  Even if you are cost sensitive, the OS is not at the top of expenses you need to worry about.

• by twunde on 12/15/24, 12:48 AM

  https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2024/04/germa... discusses some places that are moving to Linux and some places where migrations have been reverted. But from personal experience the main issues are in order:

  - Is all your software supported on Linux? Are you sure? Do all the features work or are any missing/broken? Have you tested this or are you relying on Sales or docs that are likely wrong? What happens if one piece of software drops Linux support?

  - Does using Linux block any future planned projects or make future projects much more complex?

  - You now need to spend time with every new hire training folks on the new OS, as well as retraining existing staff.

  - Are you going to piss off a lot of staff because you've made their life harder?

  - For compliance/security requirements, do you have everything necessary to easily explain to auditors that these computers have the equivalent security (antivirus, monitoring, mdm all with metrics, dashboards and logs)?

  Essentially this boils down to a lot of work, which impacts the future flexibility and the morale of the company in order to save a relatively small amount of money. Often times your spending more money on supporting Linux than you're actually saving.

  ChromeOS is a modified version of this argument. ChromeOS comes with a strong security and compliance story, and has easy built in management. There's been some adoption in call centers but primarily it's used in schools by students because the school has been given a grant so gets them for free. Even with all that, very free businesses are adopting ChromeOS because a) some workflow they use isn't supported and b) Windows is not significantly more expensive.

• by giantg2 on 12/14/24, 3:52 PM

  My view is that Windows is most prevalent because it's the targeted system for most software. Want support for some third party software? Easier and usually more options on Windows. Need corporate Spyware? It's generally easier to control windows, or at least there are more options. I would also guess the overall per unit cost for corporate laptops with Linux is not substantially lower than Windows when going through typically corporate suppliers.

• by ensocode on 12/19/24, 8:24 AM

  From 10 years experience:

  - users have to adapt to UX they do not know

  - software compatibility is still a sword of damocles

  - ... especially Office compatibility - exchanging docs with partners, clients - this gets better when using cloud office apps.

  - HW: there seems to be more configuration effort for some standard things (camera, docking stations)

  - some issues appear on linux clients only (Citrix, MS Teams), frustration

  I think its much saver to stay on Windows and as others mentioned, the cost advantage is not that big.

  - still worth it? Sure :-)

• by nextos on 12/14/24, 7:56 PM

  Local momentum I guess. Lots of non-tech SMEs in the UK use Ubuntu since the 2010s.

  Another factor is Office interop, especially Excel. Office 365 has simplified that, but it's still far from perfect.

  Personally, I think non-tech SMEs are still not aware of the major advantage offered by Linux, declarative state-less configuration à la NixOS.

  A friendly Ubuntu-like distro grounded on NixOS ideas that lowered the barrier of entry would be really interesting.

• by cdaringe on 12/14/24, 9:13 PM

  Surely the IT industry heavily caters to the big two. Config, monitoring, compliance, etc all presumably have turnkey/off the shelf plans/products/capabilities. If you’re nit paying, you’re bootstrapping your own IT, thus must _really_ want *nix. I can’t imagine that most entrepreneurs giving this more than seconds to minutes of thought.

• by Spooky23 on 12/15/24, 2:30 AM

  There’s a bunch of Windows alternatives. The Android or iOS captures the simple use cases. Mac captures those looking for lower TCO and fancy stuff.

  A lot of people still like Windows as well. Microsoft allows a grey market to thrive for cost conscious customers. You can buy legit windows licenses for $20.

• by evanjrowley on 12/15/24, 4:05 AM

  The startup where I work let's you use Linux laptops as long as they can install Microsoft InTune on it. In practice, that means some developers/engineers use Ubuntu.

• by austin-cheney on 12/16/24, 1:19 AM

  I am trying to figure out gaming on cutting edge hardware with Arch. It is absolutely possible but certainly not for the timid.

• by ahoka on 12/14/24, 4:38 PM

  You can buy a Windows 11 Pro license for for as cheap as 1€.

• by brudgers on 12/14/24, 6:45 PM

  or it is something else?

  It is something elses: a decision not worth optimizing for first cost of hardware and the uncertainties of external support costs and a limited pool of qualified candidates for in-house support of desktop systems.

  And of course the need to retrain employees who already know how to use commercial operating systems.

  The arguments for desktop Linux in business are just arguments. There's not a strong business case in most cases. The people running companies are not any dumber than average. Good luck.

• by PaulHoule on 12/14/24, 3:25 PM

  I remember having this conversation with venture capitalists in Sao Paulo Brazil around the year 2000 about Linux vs Windows and the #1 objection I heard was that Windows was better about internationalization and particularly providing local language documentation.

  Is that still the case?

• by cranberryturkey on 12/14/24, 3:43 PM

  It is just another competitive advantage for me I guess.