A contented linux user

[Joel Hammer]

 Sun, Sep 14, 2003 at 08:52:37PM +0800, Chong Yu Meng wrote:
> Actually, I have to say that in certain cases, it *is* cheaper and even 
> more stable to run Microsoft than Linux or Solaris, or any kind of UNIX. 
> It's generally easier to find a Sys Admin who is familiar with Windows 
> than someone who is familiar with UNIX. You can't swing a dead cat in a 
> roomful of technical professionals without hitting a Windows person -- 
> in fact, probably everyone in the room is a Windows person, if you live 


Just thinking about this comment.

Our very large hospital system (5 hospitals) is an all windows shop,
except for systems bought from and maintained by outside vendors, like
a pathology or radiology system. All desktop OS's and software used by
individuals is MS. I believe our servers are also MS.

What this means is that almost nobody in our very large IS dept is
really a dedicated computer person. They are mostly retreads from
various departments like nursing or radiology who wanted to do something
different, so, they become "analysts" for IS. The attitude is that almost
anybody with just an interest in computers can learn to handle MS. These
are the people we are supposed to go to for computer problems and help.

As a result, we don't do anything interesting with computers. We
never capture the efficiencies promised by computerization because our
IS people don't know or care enough to find ways to actually make our
computers improve our performance. For example, in anatomic pathology,
we generate thousands of individual, descriptive  reports each year. This is
an area where an intelligently configured computer system could save time.
However, we still have the same number of secretaries we had before
computerization, despite the fact that our work load has fallen
substantially in the last 12 years. The computers we get and install
actually slow down the work, not speed things up. It is surprising how fast
a good secretary is with a typewriter. The computers put a greater work
load on the pathologists (an expensive resource!). The IS people haven't
a clue how to find ways to make the computers actually save us work.
Furthermore, they don't care. Management also is clueless. They think
having computers which slow you down is fine.

MS software can do a lot. I am very impressed by VBA and the new
script engines in windows. (We don't have a linux option in my place.) I
recently asked IS for help with visual basic. Nobody in IS knew visual
basic. The cheap IS people we hire don't even know how to use MS
software. That's why they are cheap.

So, having cheap IS people may look good on the IS budget, but, my
experience is that cheap IS people are very expensive. But, the losses
caused by such people appear on other people's budgets.

Joel