• Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Same at my company.

      My favorite bit was when the Microsoft rep sent a PDF explaining how much the company would save from tech support to the CFO, bypassing the CTO they were communicating with.

      And the CFO shared the whole thing publicly for the entire company to laugh at.

    • blackstrat@lemmy.fwgx.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Blame their DoH for killing FF deployment in the enterprise. Companies don’t like not being in charge of their DNS traffic. DoT is better from corporate POV as that can all be blocked or redirected based on the port, not so much DoH which uses the same port as normal web traffic.

  • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s simple, cost. Supporting multiple DE’s is expensive. And provides little or no benefit to the company.

    It may work at a small company with tech savvy users (like the ones commenting here). But ultimately at a normal large business, is nothing but a hassle that at best makes a few employees happy.

      • NateNate60@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yes because developers don’t call tech support when they’ve accidentally deleted the Outlook icon from their desktop.

    • Hestia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Those few employees are probably going to all be developers, and despite there being a bunch of mathematics and engineering involved, being a developer is very much a creative process. Similarly, I wouldn’t begrudge a digital artist for wanting to use a Mac to do their work.

      If a developer is asking for a thing, they’re not asking for it because they’ve suddenly developed a nervous tic. There’s typically a reason behind it. Maybe its because they want to learn that thing to stay relevant, or explore it’s feasibility, or maybe it’s to support another project.

      I used to get the old “we don’t support thing because nobody uses thing” a lot. The problem with that thinking is that unless support for whatever thing immaculates out of nowhere it’ll just never happen. And that’s a tough sell for a developer who needs to stay relevant.

      I remember in like 2019 I asked for my company to host git repos on the corporate network, and I got a hard no. Same line, there wasn’t a need, nobody uses git. I was astounded. I thought my request was pretty benign and would just sail right through because by that point it was almost an industry standard to use git. I vented about it to some devs in another department and learned that they had a system with local admin attached to the corporate network that somehow IT didn’t know about. They were using that to host their repos.

      I guess what I’m trying to say is that if keeping employees happy is too expensive, then you gotta at least be aware of the potential costs of unhappy employees.

      • lud@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        learned that they had a system with local admin attached to the corporate network that somehow IT didn’t know about. They were using that to host their repos.

        That’s called shadow IT and is a huge security risk.

      • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        My last employer had several thousand employees. Some of the IT guys knew Linux, but it wasn’t anywhere in the organization. I managed to convince them to let me install Linux on my desktop. They said sure, with the provision that I was not allowed to have a single issue. If I had an issue, they’d format it back. It was a fantastic last 8-9 years at work, as far as computer use went.

        • 0x4E4F@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          My usual reply to said employees is “if you know how to install and configure a Linux distro, you probably also know how to solve your own problems”. Everything else is pretty much deployed over AD, so if you can get to the point where you need admin creds to hook to the DCs, then do whatever you like.

          Eventually, all of them failed to even get close to being a part of the AD DC and that is where the story ended.

  • Cyborganism@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I was thinking about this the other day. Windows 11 is starting to roll out on company laptops and I would love it if we had the choice to install Linux. But I think there are some challenges to that.

    Most large companies control what employees are allowed to install on their machines for security reasons. We wouldn’t want any spyware or ransomware or any kind of malware getting installed inadvertently. Most places will use software allow lists through applications like the Software Center and use software detection programs to monitor if any non compliant software is installed.

    There’s also permission management through group policies on Windows to manage which kind of user can do what on their system.

    Finally, I hate to say it, but most companies use the whole Microsoft Office 365 eco system with Microsoft One Drive and SharePoint. I know we can use the web version for some of the apps, but for practicality’s sake, it’s best to have an installed version. And the cloud sync feature of One Drive is also very important for automatically backing up important work. I doubt they would let that go.

    I would love to hear if anyone can offer solutions to these problems.