I prefer Linux as well just to get the same tools and architecture like you said. But at work everything corporate is configured for mac by default. So running Linux is a battle to having to keep up with VPN and other stuff they have.
All that Corporate IT stuff can work on Linux, we just have to start demanding Linux for them to put in the effort. Macs used to be in the same position, Corporate IT only knew how to manage Windows so that's what everyone got. Eventually the ability to use a Mac became enough of a recruitment draw that they had to make it work. The same thing can happen with Linux.
As one example, on Linux most developer tools don't obey the system proxy configuration, each tool has its own archaic configuration for that. So we end up with a lengthy list of how to configure each tool for our MITM proxy. Sure, MITM proxies aren't ideal anyway but we're unfortunately stuck with this.
Many security tools have a Linux version but omit the GUI component where users can do stuff like request exceptions. Another big thing for developers because they often need that.
WiFi certificate auto provisioning is missing from the MDM tool we use. So it has to be all scripted. On windows and Mac we just click a box to turn it on. And this works differently on different distros.
So yeah as someone who builds Linux management I can imagine some companies don't bother.
I guess it depends on the kind of "Linux" you want. Corporate IT will probably roll out RHEL or similar to the desktops, take away your root access, and install a virus scanner too.
I worked at a bring your own distro place before, ISO certified. I don’t exactly recall what we had to install for compliance but one of them was Clam AV. So it’s possible.
I recall Arch, Ubuntu, Debian and Fedora being used. Relatively small shop though, like 40 devs.
Ironically we were contracting with ASML at the time and ended up having to work on Windows machines using Remote Desktop 99% of the time.
RHEL is very popular on servers but not on desktops. Which is in part due to Red Hat themselves, they don't really do much to promote it for this usecase. Personally (as an admin) I don't mind because it's such a closed ecosystem anyway. They're always rent seeking which Canonical does a lot less. Canonical is always trying to sell us landscape though, but we never went for it because it doesn't solve any of the issues we have with the existing tooling.
Latest Fedora versions can also be regarded as a more modern, faster moving RHEL. Granted it doesn't come with a support agreement or the ability to get one (I just am guessing) so it may not tick all the checkboxes for corporate use.
Well it's ubuntu that the developers are asking for, and that is much better supported by our corporate tooling.
Personally I wouldn't touch redhat with a 10 foot pole after what they pulled with centos, however if my work did want to I'd make an effort on their behalf. They don't seem to though.
