About the features of the introduction of open source software in small business
Good afternoon, dear community!
There are a large number of small and “small but proud” organizations that, for all their simplicity, are forced to use a certain IT infrastructure. I want to share with you some conclusions on the introduction of free software (OSS) and Linux in them, which I made for myself based on many years of positive experience in this field.
')
Usually the state of things that existed initially was characterized by the following:
1. Organizations with the number of computers from 1 to 50 preferred to use proprietary solutions for the OS of one well-known transatlantic office.
2. There was always no money to buy licenses. Prefer to use the "pirate".
3. There was always no money for a sane administrator, and the strategy was set by a “confident user of windows”, part-time sysadmin / IT director, or, alternatively, an outsourcing company with a similar focus (sell the software and then configure it).
4. Nobody especially considered the final cost of service, the main thing was “to work”.
5. Reputational risks, idle time due to epidemics / breakdowns were taken into account only after the incident occurred.
6. Costly iron, as a rule, was not purchased, also for reasons of economy. As a rule, the server is a regular PC.
However, life does not stand still and the crisis of 2008, the dominance of viruses (for the very proprietary software), the fight against piracy, the increasing role of information systems, and the "feeling of patriotism" makes many "peasants" make some conclusions, namely:
1. For the organization of work in most organizations only a few types of programs are required:
The most recent example is 1C 8.3 and their native Linux client.
2. The use of open source software saves from checks, viruses and waste of extra money.
3. Given the lack of initial licensing payments, as well as the minimum cost of protecting and maintaining a system built on open source software, the rule “while it works — don’t touch it” is more preferable than the rule “without a system administrator, nothing works”.
4. Working with open source software in the long run eliminates the need to make your expenses the income of Microsoft and any service organizations. It allows you to invest in your own development, while not breaking the law.
We have built many heterogeneous systems with a bias in open source software where this is acceptable, and I want to draw attention to the fact that it is not difficult at all. Moreover, those small business owners who were given a choice of 3 options:
In most cases, choose option 3 (the use of open source software), at the same cost of the work on the setting. And only the lack of skills to work with open source software, laziness, prejudice and lack of information from the "home-grown system administrators" deprives them of this very 3 options. Yes, today the limitation of using open source software is the average "sysadmin" who does not know how to tune and therefore prefers not to use open source software.
I argue that today the creation of a sustainable and reliable IT system, built with ubiquitous use of open source software, which works out of the box, is not difficult for a typical "home-grown sysadmin." Many people are willing to go this way if there is specific information about possible free alternatives, instructions for installing them, responsibility for using unlicensed software, and no material interest in purchasing, i.e. collusion with the seller of software / hardware (which is an important factor in Russian realities).
In most cases, the choice of proprietary software is often done either because of the prejudices grafted by the “free Windows” school years, or under the influence of the hardware vendor, or by advertising, especially free seminars (with certificates, bonuses) by vendors with a clear goal. to incline your choice towards your product.
Below is a list of the software that I can recommend to use almost out of the box for building IT systems of small organizations for those system administrators who look to the future.
The main goals that the server part of the IT system solves:
As you can see, most server services can be built on open source software out of the box using GUI / WEB interfaces (without laborious actions on the command line) and only for Windows-dependent software does it make sense to start a Windows terminal server that doesn’t infect or break stopping the life of the company. Savings on licenses and increased security is evident.
The main goals that the client part of the IT system solves:
Thus, all the tasks of the client part of the IT system of a small organization almost completely solve the popular distributions of Ubuntu, LinuxMint, Fedora, and openSUSE. Almost all of the listed software is either included in their composition or installed through the package manager from the repositories (for free).
Subjectively: while the least movements have to be done in LinuxMint distributions with traditional and customary DEs like gnome2 / mate. This is a more familiar environment for both Windows XP users and most Linux users.
I would be glad if you describe your experience in introducing open source software and the difficulties that you encounter on this thorny path. If this topic is interesting to you, then in the following posts I will reveal the subtleties of interest to you with specific examples.
There are a large number of small and “small but proud” organizations that, for all their simplicity, are forced to use a certain IT infrastructure. I want to share with you some conclusions on the introduction of free software (OSS) and Linux in them, which I made for myself based on many years of positive experience in this field.
')
The cast of a typical customer
Usually the state of things that existed initially was characterized by the following:
1. Organizations with the number of computers from 1 to 50 preferred to use proprietary solutions for the OS of one well-known transatlantic office.
2. There was always no money to buy licenses. Prefer to use the "pirate".
3. There was always no money for a sane administrator, and the strategy was set by a “confident user of windows”, part-time sysadmin / IT director, or, alternatively, an outsourcing company with a similar focus (sell the software and then configure it).
4. Nobody especially considered the final cost of service, the main thing was “to work”.
5. Reputational risks, idle time due to epidemics / breakdowns were taken into account only after the incident occurred.
6. Costly iron, as a rule, was not purchased, also for reasons of economy. As a rule, the server is a regular PC.
However, life does not stand still and the crisis of 2008, the dominance of viruses (for the very proprietary software), the fight against piracy, the increasing role of information systems, and the "feeling of patriotism" makes many "peasants" make some conclusions, namely:
1. For the organization of work in most organizations only a few types of programs are required:
- Browser
- Text editor
- Spreadsheets
- Presentation Editor
- Graphics editor
- Accounting software
The most recent example is 1C 8.3 and their native Linux client.
2. The use of open source software saves from checks, viruses and waste of extra money.
3. Given the lack of initial licensing payments, as well as the minimum cost of protecting and maintaining a system built on open source software, the rule “while it works — don’t touch it” is more preferable than the rule “without a system administrator, nothing works”.
4. Working with open source software in the long run eliminates the need to make your expenses the income of Microsoft and any service organizations. It allows you to invest in your own development, while not breaking the law.
Observations on the results of implementations
We have built many heterogeneous systems with a bias in open source software where this is acceptable, and I want to draw attention to the fact that it is not difficult at all. Moreover, those small business owners who were given a choice of 3 options:
- buy license
- use pirate
- use open source software
In most cases, choose option 3 (the use of open source software), at the same cost of the work on the setting. And only the lack of skills to work with open source software, laziness, prejudice and lack of information from the "home-grown system administrators" deprives them of this very 3 options. Yes, today the limitation of using open source software is the average "sysadmin" who does not know how to tune and therefore prefers not to use open source software.
I argue that today the creation of a sustainable and reliable IT system, built with ubiquitous use of open source software, which works out of the box, is not difficult for a typical "home-grown sysadmin." Many people are willing to go this way if there is specific information about possible free alternatives, instructions for installing them, responsibility for using unlicensed software, and no material interest in purchasing, i.e. collusion with the seller of software / hardware (which is an important factor in Russian realities).
In most cases, the choice of proprietary software is often done either because of the prejudices grafted by the “free Windows” school years, or under the influence of the hardware vendor, or by advertising, especially free seminars (with certificates, bonuses) by vendors with a clear goal. to incline your choice towards your product.
SPO for use in the corporate segment
Below is a list of the software that I can recommend to use almost out of the box for building IT systems of small organizations for those system administrators who look to the future.
The main goals that the server part of the IT system solves:
- Providing access to the organization to the Internet, with the ability to control access
( Zentyal , ClearOS ) - Providing access from outside via VPN
( OpenVPN as part of the same Zentyal , ClearOS ) - Providing collaboration with corporate mail
( Zarafa , Zimbra , Zentyal , ClearOS ) - Ensuring the work of corporate messenger
( OpenFire , eJabberd ) - Ensuring data storage with rights according to departmental hierarchy
( Samba version 3 or 4 as part of ClearOS , Zentyal ) - Providing corporate IP telephony
( FreePBX ) - Ensuring the work of a corporate terminal environment for accounting and document flow
(Traditional Windows Server, but with AD in the form of Samba 3 or 4) - Ensuring the virtualization of all functionality to simplify the migration with iron upgrades and redundancy
( XCP , Proxmox , Centos + KVM + libvirt ) - Providing redundancy of all the above functionality
( mdadm , lvm )
As you can see, most server services can be built on open source software out of the box using GUI / WEB interfaces (without laborious actions on the command line) and only for Windows-dependent software does it make sense to start a Windows terminal server that doesn’t infect or break stopping the life of the company. Savings on licenses and increased security is evident.
The main goals that the client part of the IT system solves:
- Providing access to the Internet browser with support for flash and java
( Firefox , Chromuim , Opera , Midori ) - Operation of office software such as doc, xls, ppt, pdf
( Libreoffice , Openoffice ) - Providing VOIP telephony
( linphone , skype ) - Providing printing and printer drivers
( cups , hplip ) - Providing access to shared resources
( Samba , Windows balls, FTP , ssh ) - Providing access to flash drives, disks and media content on them
- Ensuring recording CD, DVD data discs
( Brasero ) - Ensuring the work of graphic editors
( Gimp ) - Ensuring the work of various photo viewers, audio and video players
( vlc , audacios , smplayer , totem , gthumb ) - Providing access to a Windows terminal via RDP for working with Windows-dependent software
( rdesktop , remmina , freerdp ) - Providing sysadmin access to remote control for user assistance and settings
( vino , vnc , webmin )
Thus, all the tasks of the client part of the IT system of a small organization almost completely solve the popular distributions of Ubuntu, LinuxMint, Fedora, and openSUSE. Almost all of the listed software is either included in their composition or installed through the package manager from the repositories (for free).
Subjectively: while the least movements have to be done in LinuxMint distributions with traditional and customary DEs like gnome2 / mate. This is a more familiar environment for both Windows XP users and most Linux users.
I would be glad if you describe your experience in introducing open source software and the difficulties that you encounter on this thorny path. If this topic is interesting to you, then in the following posts I will reveal the subtleties of interest to you with specific examples.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/212969/
All Articles