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

15 points by raghava 1 year ago | 22 comments

Now that there are already so many Linux distros that offer a very good user-experience even for the most non-tech users, why is it that a large number of cost-minded SMEs/startups/mid-sized-banks (even in price sensitive markets like India/Indonesia/Vietnam/Philippines/LatAm) still _not_ using Linux on laptops despite the opportunity?

Is it lack of awareness about options? Is it plain lethargy/fear? Is it just the sweet deals offered by other ecosystems?

What could be the reason for this situation? Please share your thoughts.

Years ago, few startups in India offered a customized Linux distro targeting SMEs/startups/mid-sized-banks where most users are non-tech users. They could not grow. There are many orgs that use point-of-sale systems that run on Linux (uses a SaaS through a browser; MedPlus is an example) but many others haven't ventured to realize the enormous cost savings.

Is it sheer lethargy stopping them, or it is something else?

Please share your thoughts/comments/inputs.

yen223 1 year ago |

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.

bruce511 1 year ago | |

Much less than one month. More like one day, or even a few hours depending on your job.

Or to paraphrase an answer to the original question- because Windows is so cheap (compared to the other costs in a business) that it's simply not worth any effort at all to avoid it.

Saving $100 on the lifetime cost of a laptop, and the person who uses it, is a rounding error from 0.

Whereas every incompatibility, mitigation, driver download, print failure etc just costs time.

jklein11 1 year ago | | |

Does Microsoft really still sell Windows as a perpetual license to enterprises? I would have thought for sure that they would have found some way to sell it as a part of a bundle/subscription by now

lizzas 1 year ago | |

Plus you might use Dell and let them do all the support, warranty and accidental damage cover. Having someone pop in and fix shit is great, and Windows is just part of that world. You now focus on your core thing.

Macs or cloud workspaces are there if you need posixy environments. Linux docker is OK on Windows too.

twunde 1 year ago |

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.

giantg2 1 year ago |

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.

ensocode 1 year ago |

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 :-)

nextos 1 year ago |

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.

cdaringe 1 year ago |

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.

Spooky23 1 year ago |

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.

jpc0 1 year ago | |

> Mac captures those looking for lower TCO...

Having owned Macs and supported Macs in IT... Both Dell and HP had lower TCO and that's only more true now since I can still extend the life of the Dell/HP/Lenovo if need be with disc/ram upgrades if push come to shove.

In 5 years the Mac must be replaced...

Spooky23 1 year ago | | |

You’re either a small shop or have way too much IT labor.

The cost of the upgrade exceeds the value of the device, plus the more aggressive Windows lifecycle nonsense drives more fiddling to keep the operating systems up to date.

evanjrowley 1 year ago |

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.

austin-cheney 1 year ago |

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

ahoka 1 year ago |

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

danielscrubs 1 year ago | |

How?

inemesitaffia 1 year ago | | |

Exactly. There's an LTT video I glimpsed though that might be it

brudgers 1 year ago |

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.

PaulHoule 1 year ago |

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?

raghava 1 year ago | |

I don't think that is the case even now.

Don't know much about LatAm now but can comment on conditions in Asia.

In fact, internationalization and local language input (especially for Indic content) is much more neater and simpler in Linux as I have seen. And in India/Indonesia/Philippines especially, most SMEs/startups/mid-or-small-banks simply use English itself and get the job done. Except for some PR related stuff, all content and data that they manage is almost always in English only.

cranberryturkey 1 year ago |

It is just another competitive advantage for me I guess.