▲ 518 ▼ Would you agree? (programming.dev) submitted 3 years ago by TechCodecPawx@programming.dev to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev 106 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] Unforeseen@sh.itjust.works -15 points 3 years ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 23 points 3 years ago There's probably one computer at most per employee, but each employee already has a non Windows cell phone. Most servers run Linux. Then there's Linux in a bunch of small devices as well. Windows is a small part of that pie and only getting smaller. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Asudox@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago (2 children) Windows Server for usage in actual servers? Those companies must be retarded to the core. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] alcasa@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) Windows Server is rather common in large enterprise software. All the stuff you pray you never have to interface with permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Asudox@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) It sure is convenient. You get a user friendly GUI. But the stability, the resource intensity and the spyware. It's really a retarded decision to build your servers on Windows Server. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 1 point 3 years ago Yes, but some software, and it's usually a financial application, requires a Windows Server. I've seen it more than once, as I had to set up the machine, I was dying inside, but there was just no alternative that the accounting could use. permalink fedilink source parent [–] LinuxSBC@lemm.ee 2 points 3 years ago It's really common. The IT people know how to use Windows, and they need Active Directory to manage their Windows devices, so they just use Windows Server. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 23 points 3 years ago There's probably one computer at most per employee, but each employee already has a non Windows cell phone. Most servers run Linux. Then there's Linux in a bunch of small devices as well. Windows is a small part of that pie and only getting smaller. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Asudox@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago (2 children) Windows Server for usage in actual servers? Those companies must be retarded to the core. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] alcasa@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) Windows Server is rather common in large enterprise software. All the stuff you pray you never have to interface with permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Asudox@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) It sure is convenient. You get a user friendly GUI. But the stability, the resource intensity and the spyware. It's really a retarded decision to build your servers on Windows Server. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 1 point 3 years ago Yes, but some software, and it's usually a financial application, requires a Windows Server. I've seen it more than once, as I had to set up the machine, I was dying inside, but there was just no alternative that the accounting could use. permalink fedilink source parent [–] LinuxSBC@lemm.ee 2 points 3 years ago It's really common. The IT people know how to use Windows, and they need Active Directory to manage their Windows devices, so they just use Windows Server. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] alcasa@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) Windows Server is rather common in large enterprise software. All the stuff you pray you never have to interface with permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Asudox@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) It sure is convenient. You get a user friendly GUI. But the stability, the resource intensity and the spyware. It's really a retarded decision to build your servers on Windows Server. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 1 point 3 years ago Yes, but some software, and it's usually a financial application, requires a Windows Server. I've seen it more than once, as I had to set up the machine, I was dying inside, but there was just no alternative that the accounting could use. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Asudox@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) It sure is convenient. You get a user friendly GUI. But the stability, the resource intensity and the spyware. It's really a retarded decision to build your servers on Windows Server. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 1 point 3 years ago Yes, but some software, and it's usually a financial application, requires a Windows Server. I've seen it more than once, as I had to set up the machine, I was dying inside, but there was just no alternative that the accounting could use. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] msage@programming.dev 1 point 3 years ago Yes, but some software, and it's usually a financial application, requires a Windows Server. I've seen it more than once, as I had to set up the machine, I was dying inside, but there was just no alternative that the accounting could use. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LinuxSBC@lemm.ee 2 points 3 years ago It's really common. The IT people know how to use Windows, and they need Active Directory to manage their Windows devices, so they just use Windows Server. permalink fedilink source parent
