
“When you start work at Google, you get to choose whether you want a Mac, Windows, or Linux computer,” writes Scott Knaster, Mac Team Technical Writer at Google, offering some interesting insight into working life at Google, not to mention lunch at Apple.
It strikes me that the fact that this level of choice is so unusual is a fundamental reason why Linux is struggling to make an impact on the desktop.
There are other factors of course (such as application availability) but the fact is that for many businesses, Windows continues to be the desktop operating system of choice simply because it is currently the desktop operating system of choice.
For many uses Windows may well be the best solution, but its difficult to think of another business asset for which managers would not even consider an alternative when it comes to renewal time.
In this regard businesses are doing themselves a disservice. I am not suggesting that Linux is a better option, but I am once again arguing that businesses owe it to themselves to consider the desktop requirements of their users before making a sweeping decision about desktop requirements.
Do you really need Windows and or Office to do your job? Would a Mac in fact be the better option? Or Linux? Or a centrally-managed thin client running Google Apps Premier?
Of course with increased choice comes an increased management overhead, although it is potentially possible that might be balanced out by software and hardware savings related to only giving users what they need rather than top spec PCs required to run software features they will never use.
I’d be interested to know what methods Google has adopted to get around this issue.