From: "Rich Gauszka" 

some  .NET applications can supposedly run on Linux with a product
'Grasshopper'  from the Mono project. Maybe Adam can fill the details in.

http://www.theserverside.net/news/thread.tss?thread_id=34139


"Gary Britt"  wrote in
message news:45a4141a{at}w3.nls.net...
> He should have just set up a windows server running in a VM on the Linux
> servers and used the Linux servers for everything else except the
> accounting software.  Further, just because he has to put the accounting
> data on a windows server doesn't mean that has to be the server for
> everything else and the server exposed to the internet.
>
> I think the guy has a legitimate gripe, but you've got to expect this crap
> from Microsoft and Sage and Quickbooks.  Peachtree and Quickbooks aren't
> the bargains they used to be since consolidation among the suppliers has
> resulted in a substantial increase in prices.  There is an opening in this
> market for accounting software that isn't so expensive, and there are
> companies that are beginning to come out with such software.
>
> I wonder if crossover office would allow the accounting software to run?
> Do all .net applications fail to run on Linux?
>
> Gary
>
> Rich Gauszka wrote:
>> MS conspiracy or idiotic accounting vendors? I vote for the latter
>>
>> http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/archives/2007/01/accounting_vend.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  "I have two clients using multi-user network accounting
packages," the
>> reader wrote. "One uses Quickbooks, the other uses Peachtree. In both
>> cases upgrades to newer versions of each accounting package required I
>> set up either a peer system or a dedicated server with Windows, and move
>> away from the Linux servers I'd set up for both. The reason? Both Intuit
>> and Sage Software now use .NET to develop these applications, and both
>> are, according to their support staff, complying with Microsoft standards
>> for their backend database components -- components which won't work on
>> non-Microsoft network servers."
>>
>>
>>
>> The reader first became aware of the problem when Intuit's sunset
>> policies forced one of his customers to upgrade their version of
>> Quickbooks. "One client had been using Quickbooks Pro 2003 for 5 users
>> when they started having problems with database corruption," the reader
>> wrote. "When I called tech support for them, I was told
Intuit no longer
>> supports QB Pro 2003. In order to get the accounting database back up, my
>> client would have to upgrade to QB Pro 2006. Initially I didn't see a
>> problem with this. Their 2003 worked fine with the data on the Linux
>> server (SUSE 9.3). However, when I started installing 2006, I saw the new
>> requirements on the side of the box stating the data now had to reside on
>> a Windows server, either a peer-to-peer arrangement, or a dedicated
>> Windows 2003 Server system. In this case, I had to install the software
>> on the newest system and reconfigure the network mappings accordingly."
>>
>>
>>
>> Another of the reader's customers was using Sage's Peachtree.
"The client
>> was told by Peachtree that the new payroll software wouldn't work with
>> Peachtree Complete Accounting 2004," the reader wrote. " So, they
>> purchased the upgrade to 2007. Again, the previous version had no
>> problems with the data on their Linux server (SUSE 9.1), but now require
>> a Windows server, either peer-to-peer or a dedicated Windows server 2003.
>> It also uses .NET technology and must install server components on the
>> machine where the data will reside. This client had to purchase a new
>> system -- it was less expensive to buy a new system than to buy a copy of
>> Windows XP Pro and have me install and configure it on the Linux box. And
>> since the Linux box's major purpose was to provide file services for
>> their accounting package and documents, there really isn't a reason to
>> maintain two servers."
>>
>>
>>
>> The upshot is the reader's clients first had to upgrade their accounting
>> package and then had to spend extra money to continue using it.
"In both
>> cases the software developers are forcing my clients to use server
>> software we had decided would be unnecessary and would add to their
>> costs," the reader wrote. "In both cases my clients had
to pay additional
>> billable hours to my company to handle the additional time spent to setup
>> and configure new servers and either remove or re-task the perfectly good
>> Linux servers. Both companies needed little maintenance on the Linux
>> server boxes. Further, the servers didn't need the additional
>> expenditures for security software for virus and spyware attacks. So, in
>> addition to needing these new systems, they need to acquire, install,
>> configure, and maintain security software, and maintenance will go up as
>> Windows requires more maintenance than does the Linux OS. This means more
>> billable hours for me, but unhappy clients."
>>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5