Migrating from Microsoft Windows to SUSE LINUX on

Migrating from Microsoft Windows to SUSE LINUX on the Desktop Jens Bornschein Project Lead Linux, Mahle Group, Stuttgart jens. bornschein@mahle. com Dr. Markus Tesmer Manager Professional Services, SUSE LINUX, Berlin markus. tesmer@suse. com Marek Chroust Senior Systems Engineer, Novell, Munich mchroust@novell. com

The one Net vision 2 © March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

The one Net vision 3 © March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Agenda Mahle Group – who we are Why starting a Linux desktop related project – or how the project was initiated Project scope – or how to define the important and necessary project steps Project pilot – and some interesting highlights SUSE Linux desktop – what is it Project results – or how happy the users have been Next steps Q&A 4 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

MAHLE Group – who we are

MAHLE Group For 80 years MAHLE has numbered among the leading international manufacturers of highquality components for the automotive and engine industry. Pathbreaking innovations have made MAHLE a reliable and successful partner to its customers. Today the MAHLE Group supplies an extensive range of high-quality components and systems to the best known manufacturers of internal combustion engines throughout the world. Our wide product range is divided into the following business units: MAHLE is globally represented with 65 locations in Europe, America, and Asia. In addition to that numerous partnerships and licensees in all continents manufacture according with MAHLE know-how. 30, 000 employees are committed to fulfilling the high requirements on development competence, quality, reliable delivery and thus ensure the good and trustworthy relationship with our customers and suppliers. The central research and development department in Stuttgart services and supports the development of all three product groups through comprehensive scientific fundamental research. Other regional development centers are located in Detroit, São Paulo and Tokyo. These allow MAHLE to offer close and individualized service to our customers on other continents. The MAHLE Stiftung (foundation), as principal shareholder of the MAHLE Group, supports according to the wishes of the founders - numerous non-profit objectives, such as environmental projects and the Filderklinik. 6 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

MAHLE Group – Production Portfolio 7 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

MAHLE Group - Production Locations 8 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

MAHLE Group - Annual Report 2002 Sales (billion EUR) 3. 1 Manufacturing Locations 55 Headcount 29, 000 Pistons and Engine Components Filter Systems Valve Train Systems Sales (billion EUR) 1. 4 1. 3 0. 4 Manufacturing Locations 22 17 16 16, 000 7, 000 6, 000 The Business Sectors Headcount 9 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Why starting a Linux project?

Current situation @ Mahle Group Current desktop standards: H ardware is almost standardized D esktop standard = Windows NT 4. 0 workstation O ffice standard = Microsoft office 97 M ore than 600 different business applications in 3 categories N early 150 applications are Windows based only (i. e. Access databases, Mind. Manager, etc. ) Although desktop hardware is standardized – software applications are only for i. e. SAP, MS Office, Lotus Notes The different country organizations choose their software standards Huge variety of software solutions for similar business cases 11 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Current situation @ Mahle Group ctd. Issues with current situation: • Support for Desktop OS is discontinued by end of 2004 • • No more security updates for the OS The desktops will be “opened” for security holes (like viruses and trojan horses) Support for applications running on Windows NT 4. 0 becomes less • • No support for USB No software standards for all applications due to local responsibilities • Licensing costs for Mahle Group are not optimal due to local responsibilities • 12 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Conclusion of current situation Conclusion of this situation: • New desktop OS standard has to be defined • New office standard has to be defined, including replacement/upgrade of current Microsoft Access applications • All current business application has to be checked for support of the new OS standard • Current critical business application has to be considered and verified Requirements: L icensing costs must be lower D ue to higher software standards the servicing costs for applications must be lower and the service quality must be higher 13 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Project scope

Solution scenarios Which possibilities are available on the market? There are 4 possible scenarios for Mahle Group: 1) Linux Desktop with Open Source Software (i. e. Open. Office) 2) Microsoft only environment with Windows XP and Office XP 3) Thin Client environment on a Microsoft only environment with Citrix Terminal Server 4) Linux Desktop with Microsoft Office XP and Citrix Terminal Server environment • 15 remark: Mahle Group is already using Citrix Meta. Frame XP Terminal Server Farm for some applications Mahle Group started with the 1) using a Linux Desktop with Open Source Software as much as possible. Because of its attraction and large public © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc. interest and awareness in Germany and Europe. So, the scope has been minimized to only one solution scenario during this time.

Definition steps Define a pilot group which is representative regarding the applications and which is willing to work with a Linux desktop for a special amount of time Analyze all necessary applications which this group is using today and define a migration strategy Define the appropriate hardware & software requirements for this group Define the parallel usage of services, i. e. e. Directory authentication File & Print using Net. Ware office document standard together with the rest of Mahle Group (interoperability) Define a lab scenario for automatic OS deployment and software distribution and patch management Keep the people productive ! ! ! 16 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Pilot group & Application analysis The pilot group has been chosen from the SAP support team which is using a limited variety of applications The group consisted of 19 members All applications at Mahle Group has been defined in 3 categories: 1) no alternative on Linux, i. e. MS Access databases 2) only executable with Windows emulator WINE, i. e. Lotus Notes Flow. Charter 7 (process management) PC-Bib (electronic dictionary) 3) Linux alternative available, i. e. Open. Office as MS office replacement Citrix ICA client Gzip as Win. Zip replacement i. Q CAQ (Computer Aided Quality management system) 17 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Application list Categories: 1 - no alternative, 2 – with emulator, 3 – alternative available 18 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

HW requirements The specified minimum requirements for a graphical based desktop is: • Pentium Processor • 64 MB RAM • 300 MB hard disk During tests the best results has been made with: • Pentium Processor III with 500 MHz and above • 256 MB RAM Network card with network boot capabilities for automatically OS deployment 2 nd hard disk for the Linux partition, so the participants could boot in their well known Windows NT 4 environment in urgent cases 19 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Lab scenario – The Desktop The defined desktop: SUSE LINUX Desktop as the base OS KDE as the graphical environment Open. Office as the standard office application Crossover Office for special purposes Other applications pre-installed 20 Authentication only against e. Directory (except of local admin and emergency user) Additional local rights for users for the print environment (i. e. Installation of a CUPS based printer) Automount of user home directory via NFS based on the user information from e. Directory Split of the user home directory in user specific and system specific part (balancing the amount of data between local hard disk and file-server according to usage) © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Lab scenario – The Services The defined services: SUSE LINUX Enterprise Server as DNS/DHCP File-Server for Home Directories via NFS mount RSync for the Desktop Imaging process The imaging process: PXE boot of a workstation A Mini-Linux kernel is transferred via TFTP and executed Checking for current Linux installation If yes, normal boot If no, install the current Linux installation The boot process: Checking via DHCP broadcast if workstation already registered If yes, then assign the IP address via LDAP from e. Directory If no, register the new workstation via LDAP in e. Directory 21 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Lab scenario – The Services ctd. The defined services: Current e. Directory on Net. Ware as the repository of Unix based informations Schema extensions necessary Console. One not flexible enough ==> usage of Open Source Tool GQ-LDAP Net. Ware 5. 1 as File-Server A self-implemented shell-script using NCP-Mount A second authentication required : -( not user friendly But a robust method Alternative with NFS didn't work with Net. Ware 5. 1 – should work with Net. Ware 6. x Net. Ware 5. 1 as Print-Server with NDPS printer must be defined as LPR printer on Net. Ware 5. 1 The queues can be accessed via a Unix print server With Net. Ware 6. x IPP can be used ==> no Unix print server necessary 22 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Lab environment MAHLE LAN NDS Server DNS Server VLAN 10. 200. 116. 0 Windows + Linux VLAN 10. 200. 16. 0 Windows Bau C Smartserver DNS DHCP NFS TFTP RSYNC Referenz PC Linux Smartclient Linux Windows Test PC Linux EG 23 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc. Smartclient 2 Linux 1. OG 2. OG 3. OG

Project pilot

“Starting shot” Automatic installation of all participating workstations with some manual adjustments Bootloader configuration, because of different Windows partitioning Monitor selection in SAX 2 Lotus Notes configuration of IDs and files Short training of all participants on using KDE Training on Open. Office not executed due to time issues Training and Support team consisted of 2 people The pilot phase was 4 weeks (November 1 st until 30 th, 2003) 25 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Some technical issues Performance of Open. Office was BAD, even with the appropriate hardware Conversion of MS office format into Open. Office format is sometimes very different and confuses users Using of macros and large spreadsheets caused 'headaches' for the users and the support team Citrix ICA client didn't recognize the standard printer from KDE ==> use YAST to change the default system printer One application didn't recognize the numeric keyboard The key assignments for 3270 terminal emulation didn't work with the German keyboard ==> manual development of key assignments A lot of questions has been answered during the whole phase. The users has been productive like with a Windows NT 4 environment. This was key during the whole pilot! 26 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Results: Questionnaire A standardized questionnaire before the pilot phase has been prepared in order to get all the results and feelings from all participants. This questionnaire has been divided in 4 areas: 1) Hardware & Performance 2) Graphical Interface 3) Open. Office usability 4) Overall impression and improvements 27 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

SUSE LINUX Desktop

SUSE LINUX Desktop The SUSE LINUX Enterprise Platform • Maintenance: • Auto. Build: • Quality long life platform one common source base Assurance: SUSE tested packages • Software Selection: matches customers' needs • Configuration: 29 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc. reasonable presets reflect SUSE experience

SUSE LINUX Desktop The User's Perspective • Integration • Choice: in given infrastructure Ximian Desktop and KDE • Professional • SAP Fonts GUI • Kiosk protects from making mistakes • Open. Office. org Suite for sophisticated text processing, spreadsheet and presentations • KMail, Mozilla, Evolution: Internet standards and virus immunity 30 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

SUSE LINUX Desktop The Administrator's Perspective • • automated, manual, local and remote installation tools • KDE and Ximian Technology • Maintenance • Support • Auto. Ya. ST and Ya. ST Online Update • KDE Desktop Sharing Framework (VNC) • 31 Kiosk Mode for desktop lock down easy connection to mainframes & application servers (e. g. SAP or 3270 / 5250) © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

SUSE LINUX Desktop The Executive's Perspective • SLD is the leading Linux enterprise desktop • World class stability and reliability as typical for Linux operating systems • reduces license costs, e. g. no Client Access Licenses are necessary 32 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

SUSE LINUX Desktop The ISV's Perspective • Cross Platform Development • Migration • SLD Software Development Kit • Cross 33 facilitated by standardized target platform Platform Development via QT © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

SUSE LINUX Desktop References • Mahle • City 34 of Munich of Schwaebisch Hall © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

SUSE LINUX Desktop Usability Study • KDE/Linux compared to Microsoft Windows XP • http: //www. linux-usability. de/download/ linux_usability_report_en. pdf • usability of both systems judged to be nearly equal • time required to complete a task with KDE in average only slightly behind XP • majority of test participants enjoyed working with the Linux system 35 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

SUSE LINUX Desktop Roadmap • Kernel 2. 6 • Enhanced Device Support • Enhanced Novell Integration • Kiosk 36 GUI Configurator © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Project results

Results: Questionnaire A standardized questionnaire before the pilot phase has been prepared in order to get all the results and feelings from all participants. This questionnaire has been divided in 4 areas: 1) Hardware & Performance 2) Graphical Interface 3) Open. Office usability 4) Overall impression and improvements 38 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Questionnaire: 1) HW & Performance More than 50% have never worked with Linux before 37% said, the performance of Linux is worse than with MS Windows NT 4. 0 Only 2 applications seemed to run faster on Linux (Host Emulation and Citrix Terminal Server access) Nearly 50% said, application performance on Linux is equal to MS Windows NT 4. 0 BUT 42% said, Open. Office is too slow in comparison to MS Office on MS Windows NT 4. 0 The impression of better overall performance is STRONG HARDWARE DEPENDENT!!! Don't believe, you can spend less money on Hardware with a Graphical Linux Desktop environment. 39 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Questionnaire: 2) Graphical Interface Less than 15% had OS abends Less than 5% had issues with the rights management !!! Nearly 75% said: the accessibility of applications on Linux is similar or easier the usability of KDE in comparison to Windows is similar or easier Configuration of personal settings (i. e. Screensaver, Fonts, Display options) on Linux is similar or easier More than 50% said, the usability of Konqueror as File Manager is more complicated than MS Windows Explorer Nearly 60% were happy using virtual desktops!!! All participants liked the Desktop design (very = 26%) well Only 10% were unhappy with description of application icons With a short introduction in using Linux/KDE the users were able to work easily. The KDE Desktop is intuitive. 40 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Questionnaire: 3) Open. Office Usability More than 50% never attended an Office training (including MS Office)!!! More than 75% used Open. Office word processing and spreadsheet Nearly 50% said, the Open. Office usability is more complicated than MS Office!!! More than 42% had NO issues and 21% only few issues opening existing MS Office formatted documents Only 16% were happy with the conversion results of MS Office formatted documents in Open. Office More than 60% would work with Open. Office instead of MS Office The other 40% need following improvements: Performance Training Default format should be MS Office format (==> Ximian Desktop 2) Better Fonts (==> Ximian Desktop 2) What does Open. Office offer more, something you are missing in MS Office? PDF export File backup 41 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Questionnaire: 4) Overall Impression What did you like most? Virtual desktops KDE Desktop Icon design What did you like least? Citrix Terminal server authentication Separate e. Directory authentication during mount process Lack of support of MS office macros Attachement integration inside Lotus Notes client No clipboard support of all graphic formats Which Windows application did you miss most? PDA synchronization with Lotus Notes Citrix session shadowing Using the Hardcopy button 42 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Questionnaire: 4) Overall Impression ctd. More than 68% enjoyed working with Linux More than 92% would need only 1 month to become as comfortable as with MS Windows NT 4. 0 More than 68% said, the overall usability of Linux/KDE was easier than with MS Windows NT 4. 0 For nearly 58% the overall impression of Linux didn't change after the pilot BUT for the other 42% the overall impression became BETTER after the pilot 43 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Migration scenarios A “Big Bang” migration is not appropriate due to lack of availability and support of all applications on Linux Realtime training efforts for all users A smooth migration in 3 steps is better: Step 1: Migration of all users with standard applications which are all available through Citrix Terminal Server ➔ Users getting familiar with a Linux desktop ➔ No additional HW costs using exisitng HW ➔ No Windows Licensing costs for new HW Step 2: Office migration to Open. Office All MS Access, VBA apps, MS Office macros and templates will be replaced and migrated ➔ All desktops (Linux and Windows) and Citrix Terminal Server will be migrated to Open. Office ➔ The Exchange of all Office documents is then standardized ➔ 44 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Migration scenarios ctd. A smooth migration in 3 steps is better: Step 3: Replacement/ Migration of all other applications ➔ All other applications will be replaced or migrated ➔ All desktops will be migrated to Linux Desktop ➔ ➔ If necessary, special application remain in Citrix Terminal Server environment MS Windows and MS Office Licensing costs are cut down During all 3 steps the migrated users will be trained on the new Desktop environment No need to train all users at one time!!! 45 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Migration barriers For Mahle Group there are different migration barriers today: Application barriers: Corporate reporting application “Insight” is Windows based only SAP Business. Warehouse Office integration for MS Office ONLY Large amount of used MS Access and MS Excel VBA and macro scripting databases and documents Legal / Cost barriers: The SCO lawsuit is ongoing with unkown results Probable Linux licensing costs Novell/SUSE indemnification program is helping customers out of that issue ➔ 46 Migration costs not estimated Management of Linux Desktops needs more staff due to lack of automated management tools © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Next steps

Next steps Summary of the whole project Presentation to CIO Consideration of a Microsoft strategy Defining a Linux Strategy together with Novell during a Linux Discovery Workshop In June 2004 the IT decision board will make a decision 48 © December 11, 2003 Novell Inc. March 9, 2004 Novell Inc.

Q&A

General Disclaimer This document is not to be construed as a promise by any participating company to develop, deliver, or market a product. Novell, Inc. , makes no representations or warranties with respect to the contents of this document, and specifically disclaims any express or implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose. Further, Novell, Inc. , reserves the right to revise this document and to make changes to its content, at any time, without obligation to notify any person or entity of such revisions or changes. All Novell marks referenced in this presentation are trademarks or registered trademarks of Novell, Inc. in the United States and other countries. All third-party trademarks are the property of their respective owners. No part of this work may be practiced, performed, copied, distributed, revised, modified, translated, abridged, condensed, expanded, collected, or adapted without the prior written consent of Novell, Inc. Any use or exploitation of this work without authorization could subject the perpetrator to criminal and civil liability.