Tattersalls dumps Linux 'complexity' for Microsoft

Well, I don't know, but I bet Wagg-Ed does, and this ZD article proves it.

Some Australian company is going to phase out the use of 4 linux distros over the next 6 years. A six-year plan in corporate IT is a mere pipe dream, a fantasy, an ignorable "architecture objective". Until some drone with a charge number shows up, the average corporate IT worker and/or manager can Safely Ignore crapola like this.

But the general public doesn't know that, and C-level shaved "alpha" apes don't know this, so a misleading headline can work wonders. Right, astro-turfers and shillers?

Also, the "complexity" in the title refers to the IT mess created my merging 4 different Linux networks together, not from Linux itself.

What I can't uinderstand for the life of me though, is why standardize on Windows which is (a) sub-par and (b) all their IT folk now know Linux. Somehow though I predict that they won't pass the Alpha stage on this project.

I thought it was more an issue they had with licenses... ?

Upon re-reading that "article", I'd have to say that not only does it have a misleading headline, it's the worst gibberish I've ever read, in that I could almost understand it. Really good gibberish can't be understood at all, silly ZD.

Gambling organisations like Tatt's have been consistently getting good results (high reliability, low maintenance) out of Linux over the years, & have in places been early adopters.

So this looks like a setup of some kind. Guessing that "complexity" was someone's key excuse-word, since in Real Life(tm) setting up complex systems using Linux is worlds easier than the exact same systems under 'Doze.

> setting up complex systems using Linux is worlds easier than the exact same systems under 'Doze.

Unless they are streamlining their entire operation and removing complexity, which is what it sounds like they are doing.

They could streamline on Linux as well, but Windows might have some advantages for them. It might be easier to hire Windows developers, they might have faster turnaround with something like .Net. I don't know. It seems like the kind of organization that might be more concerned with fast time to market and gizmos than with reliability.