Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Red Hat Develops Online Desktop

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Wed May 09, 2007 01:24 PM
from the hope-your-isp-is-reliable dept.
pete314 writes "Red Hat announced this week at their San Diego Red Hat Summit that they are planning to compete with Microsoft on the desktop by building an 'online desktop' that will integrate local data with online services. Red Hat CTO Brian Stevens argued that: 'To user the desktop metaphor is dead. We don't believe that recreating a Windows paradigm in an open source model will do anything to advance the productivity in the life of users.'"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by jaavaaguru (261551) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @01:29PM (#19055311) Homepage
    Are they really competing with Microsoft at this point? As far as I can see Google offer replacements for an increasing amount of desktop software at the moment (Word processor, Spreadsheet, Email, Calendar, Photo management, IM, and various browser integrations such as their note-taking plugin for Firefox. That's a bit more than Microsoft has to offer at the moment.
    • Google partner? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by PineHall (206441) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @02:05PM (#19056035)
      ... to have discussions with customers and partners and will tackle key technologies on a case by case basis.

      They may not end up competing with Google, rather they may end up partnering with Google. Google has a lot of the apps available right now.

    • by jbarr (2233) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @03:03PM (#19057139) Homepage
      If only they could work WITH Google to provide the offline client component.

      Google's online offerings have matured, and are quite powerful, but there's still the disconnect when going offline. Not until I can work offline and seamlessly integrate/sync when I go back online will it be really effective.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        I think it's nonsense for RedHat to say that the Windows desktop is dead. RedHat has always gone after the business server and workstation markets, and have done a great job taking down Sun while avoiding pissing off M$. The whole reason that Ubuntu has so much momentum is how they've made the desktop familiar and easy to use, and less buggy. RedHat could still hammer Ubuntu if they'd just ship a desktop focused OS and stop claiming that M$ is doing it all wrong.
  • I do like the aspect of some apps being hosted online versus locally as it frees up a portion of your HDD, but before I commit fully to this idea I have to bring into question data security and bandwidth on this one. I know there is more bandwidth to come and that is simply a matter of time, but implementing an online desktop could potentially bring some big security issues into play.
  • by Otter (3800) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @01:32PM (#19055377) Journal
    "To user the desktop metaphor is dead. We don't believe that recreating a Windows paradigm in an open source model will do anything to advance the productivity in the life of users," Stevens added.

    And therefore they're reimplementing the Windows 98 Active Desktop...?

    • by Bogtha (906264) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @01:57PM (#19055885)

      Maybe the Windows 98 Active Desktop has a chance of being successful now that always-on Internet connections are vastly more common. There was another technology built into Internet Explorer 4.0 that also died from lack of use. It was called "channels", and was very similar to RSS. Yet today, RSS and Atom are wildly popular. Sometimes the technology doesn't need to change if the world does.

      • I think that Active Desktop and Channels failed not from the lack of always-on internet, but because it was so badly implemented. Every demonstration I saw of those features looked like pre-installed crapware that was a waste of screen space.
  • by deragon (112986) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @01:35PM (#19055427) Homepage Journal
    Often I use my laptop in the subway. Guess what? No internet access. So how would I perform my work with such a paradigm? What about when you go to your country house, in the woods? To user the desktop metaphor is not dead when offline.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      While I agree, I think they know of these issues. They will probably store many of the files used to generate vital and productivity pages locally. You can save offline maybe and it will auto sync the next time you have access? Who knows... I do not, but to assume they are that shortsighted is not giving them nearly enough credit.
      • so, why store the "vital" parts of the application locally, doesn't that defeat the purpose of a network based application?

        dude.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          Not at all. It just introduces a synchronization step when you go back online. Windows does this already with its file servers - if you go offline and have some shared files open, you can still use them normally, save them, etc. But when you go online, the files get synchronized back to the server so they can be backed up, opened from other workstations, etc. It's supposed to be the best of both worlds.

        • They are going to cache files for bandwidth savings alone. They will have to have locally stored files for connectivity to these modules at the very least. Now pulling the files from a network still requires them to be somewhere and you need the software to receive and process them, no? What... You think they are going to make a 100% online OS? That is impossible as far as I can tell given our current technology.

          An online OS most likely means you have a base framework that allows you to connect and inter
    • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @01:54PM (#19055823)

      Often I use my laptop in the subway. Guess what? No internet access. So how would I perform my work with such a paradigm?

      The mozilla team has already talked about Firefox 3's upcoming support for running online apps while offline, as a sort of hybrid, but still within the browser. Just do a search for "web applications offline' and you'll find dozens of articles including how-to sites from tool providers for making Web apps that will function offline right now.

      To user the desktop metaphor is not dead when offline.

      I'm not sold on Web applications. I'm not sold on a strategy of bypassing MS by building everything on top of them. I'd rather see cross platform applications with internet capabilities, or hybrid solutions, that still allow me to take advantage of the benefits of the OS. From a practical standpoint, however, my automatic bibliography formatting service allows me to automatically format bibliography references right now using Google Docs, but I can't use the same functionality in Wordpad or in MSWord for that matter; so in some ways online apps are already allowing me to bypass the limitations of Microsoft's OS.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        And Adobe's Project Apollo [com.com] and to some extent Sun's announcement of JavaFX [slashdot.org] are more the competitors in this area than MS.
      • A "web application" isn't if it does not require remote for processing and storing. It is just a local application run in a browser.

        Remove applications or web application are software where the view and maybe part of the controller is run in the browser, locally on one's computer. The model is generally run remotely on the server. For example, gmail has a nice view run locally in the browser. Google's servers store and process and retrieve your email. gmail CANNOT be run locally. You cannot send or receive
        • A "web application" isn't if it does not require remote for processing and storing. It is just a local application run in a browser.

          True, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about applications that run via a Web browser and integrate with a Web service (Google Docs), but which also run locally without Web access, albeit with some features disabled. It is important to note, we were speaking about the desktop metaphor being dead, and when your app is running locally in a browser, that does seem to be the case to a significant extent.

          For example, gmail has a nice view run locally in the browser.

          I'm afraid I have no idea what you were trying to say with that sentence. Could you

      • What bibliography formatting service are you talking about?
        • What bibliography formatting service are you talking about?

          Hmm, good question. It is an OS X system service called "BibliographyService." It may have come with BibDesk, but it does not seem to be grouped with the other services from there. It may be a stand alone service I grabbed somewhere.

    • Often I use my laptop in the subway. Guess what? No internet access.

      Actually, many of us could not work without an internet connection anyways so it is a moot point for those tied to Blackberries and live connections. Remember how many people freaked out when the Blackberry servers went down?

      I've talk to many whose company now includes a Sprint or Verizon card because they need always on connections no matter where they are with the current apps.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      No internet access while on the subway???

      But you're sitting right there, in one of the tubes!!!
  • Red Hat CTO Brian Stevens argued that: 'To user the desktop metaphor is dead. We don't believe that recreating a Windows paradigm...will do anything to advance the productivity in the life of users.'"


    Quick - someone tell Apple that they're DOOMED!
  • by wiggles (30088) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @01:45PM (#19055639)
    I mean, they do a lot of development, and they are the OSS company most trusted by Fortune 500's, but I think they lost their leadership position to Mark Shuttleworth and Ubuntu. Not trying to start a flamewar here, but they seem to be fresh out of ideas at present, and this seems to be grasping at straws.

    After dealing with their nightmarish support system this month after a bug caused me to lose connection to my SAN, and dealing with the scam that is RHCE certification (30% pass rate is BS -- they're just milking retakes at $750 a pop), I can say that Red hat is really going downhill fast. They're becoming more and more focused on the bottom line and less on the little guy who got them to where they are.
    • Yeah (Score:4, Funny)

      by crush (19364) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @02:10PM (#19056111)
      Mark Shuttleworth and Ubuntu are great. They spread non-Free firmware and drivers. Awesome. That's what I call leadership. What's this deal that Canonical is doing with Linspire, Microsoft, Dell and Novell?

      Order a free CD from Ubuntu and bin it.
    • I mean, they do a lot of development, and they are the OSS company most trusted by Fortune 500's, but I think they lost their leadership position to Mark Shuttleworth and Ubuntu. Not trying to start a flamewar here, but they seem to be fresh out of ideas at present, and this seems to be grasping at straws.

      I'm not sure how you measure this... If you just went by /. stories and such you'd definitely think that Linux == Ubuntu. However, in the revenue generating department, large-ish companies, Ubuntu has a l
    • by kripkenstein (913150) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @02:40PM (#19056675) Homepage

      I mean, they do a lot of development, and they are the OSS company most trusted by Fortune 500's, but I think they lost their leadership position to Mark Shuttleworth and Ubuntu.
      You're joking, right? I mean, I'm using Ubuntu right now to post this, but Ubuntu are still getting action mostly with enthusiasts like me (and perhaps you). Corporate/enterprise users are virtually all using Red Hat, and Red Hat give them an excellent product (with a quite recent release full of new features).
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      They are shaping themselves to be exactly what their customers (Fortune 500s and the like) expect them to be. They've found their target niche and are adapting to it.

      Even if we don't use their distribution, we still benefit from their effort (lots of OSS development going on at RH), so what's the problem?
    • I really think that the 30% pass rate is BS.

      I recently took my RHCE for RHEL5. Passed the first time. I went to the ER the night before for pneumonia, and was totally doped up on cough syrup with Codeine and other goodies. I really thought that I failed it, but, surprisingly enough, I didn't.

      What I don't like about the RHCE is how you can't even talk about what's on the test, even with the guys who you're testing with. It seems a little odd that to protect the test/certification for future test takers,
  • by JCOTTON (775912) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @01:45PM (#19055653) Homepage Journal
    Red Hat CTO Brian Stevens argued that: 'To user the desktop metaphor is dead.

    I love it (ironic) when some CIO or other bigwig perports to talk for me. Actually, not only is the desktop still not "dead", but on my desktop is a Mainframe running COBOL/CICS/DB2. Still not dead. Not by a long shot.

    Hello, world.

  • 'To user the desktop metaphor is dead. We don't believe that recreating a Windows paradigm in an open source model will do anything to advance the productivity in the life of users.'


    But, then why are try to recreate what has been the Windows paradigm since Microsoft started pushing .NET as the key platform in Windows for exactly the kind of desktop/online integration that you are talking about?
      • Surely you mean since Sun started pushing Java as the key platform for exactly that kind of desktop/online integration?


        No, I wouldn't say that it has been the key Windows paradigm since that. I meant exactly what I said.

  • by Wesley Felter (138342) <wesley@felter.org> on Wednesday May 09 2007, @01:47PM (#19055689) Homepage
    Storing your own data locally on your own computer and manipulating it with local apps may be "old thinking", but at least it puts you in control. Just when a critical mass of free (as in freedom) software is emerging, Red Hat is talking about services. I suspect it's impossible to make these services free as in freedom.
    • Using Linux puts you in control, too. That hasn't helped us much.

      Manual transmissions put you in more control of your car, but automatic transmissions outsell manual transmissions in the U.S. by huge margin. Many cars don't even have manual as an option.

      Remember, as sad as it seems to us, we're living in a world where people think "just reboot" is an acceptible solution to problems with your computer.

      So I agree with your sentiment, and I think most will agree with your sentiment, but I also think most peo
  • Yet Another Attempt (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Coryoth (254751) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @01:48PM (#19055715) Homepage Journal
    The network desktop has been tried many times in the past, by Microsoft (badly) with "ActiveDesktop" and in theory with XAML and .NET, and by Sun in various forms. All the efforts I've seen so far just don't cut it. That doesn't mean it isn't a good idea -- I think there's real promise in a distributed approach to the desktop -- just that it is hard to execute well. Stumbling blocks in the past have included: a lack of real network transparency (the "online" aspect was a thin veneer rather than being truly transparent); lack of sufficient bandwidth (all the "online" stuff was pitifully slow, and ignored); and security, security, security.

    To succeed you need a system that doesn't view the network as a bolted on thing, but integrates it at the core; Plan9 comes to mind on that front. At least X11 has network transparency, but it needs to be more efficient (think NX), and have far better security built in to really work for this. Bandwidth will slowly but surely fix itself. That leaves security -- and there's a lot required to make that happen. It is an ambitious and worthy goal, but in this case it is possibly a case of biting off more than you can chew: if it isn't transparent, efficient and secure, it isn't going anywhere, and fulfilling those requirements would require vast architectural changes.
  • Linux has a reasonably big marketshare in the server market share [ Netcraft Survey [netcraft.com]]. However it is still waiting for the day when it will be accepted in the Home PC market as a strong competitor for the Windows family of OSes. I am a strong fan of Linux and I have been trying to promote Linux in my market but people still refuse to accept it open heartedly. In spite of detailed explanations and demos people are hesitant. I even offer free linux installation assistance [zyxware.com] for people who already own computers. P
  • Are they the new Yggdrasil?
  • by HW_Hack (1031622) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @02:13PM (#19056177)
    This is absolutely the right step for our increasingly connected world - but the devil is in the details as usual.

    The desktop isn't dead but its damn stale - what I would envision is a bi-modal operation: if you have wired or wireless access your "desktop" seamlessly includes your "on-line" resources - applications - data files - links - IM buddies - etc. all integrated into your applications - disk volumes, When offline you would have what you have right now. Of course you would need a method to mark certian files as bi-modal so they would reside in a file cache and be available offline - the OS would handle file sync'ing etc. Or a thumb drive could be a file cache

    On the flip side where the desktop is really dead (as in "Dead to You" ) --- I could see you carrying a USB thumb drive that launches a mini-linux session and then you connect to the "server in the sky" to access all your docs - email - applications - etc.

    Both ideas are step in the right direction for Linux ... just doing "XP the right way" is not a path to success for Linux. The Linux industry is very nimble compared to Microsloth ... lets see what this baby can really do !

  • by evought (709897) <evought@@@pobox...com> on Wednesday May 09 2007, @02:14PM (#19056197) Homepage Journal
    I have no interest whatsoever.

    When I was actively doing business travel, online collaborative apps were a supplement to applications on the desktop, given that the online apps were trustworthy (controlled by my own business). I never had any desire to get rid of local applications, especially since I had to be able to do office work, development and other tasks on the go, with no network access, expensive network access, insecure network access, or unreliable network access. If the "network applications" are downloadable and cached for off-line use, then you have nothing new, that's just semi-automated deployment and update. When it comes to that, externally controlled auto-update is a bad thing in many environments. I want to control when I upgrade, after I know the update is not going to break something. I don't want to log on, find out I can't access an old file, and have no way to restore the previous version of the application. Web services are continuously in beta.

    Currently, I have absolutely no need for remote apps. I do all of my work locally and live rurally. Why would I want my applications and/or data externally controlled and unaccessible if I don't have a connection? I have full-featured applications (which would take considerable time to download). I pay for them once (if I have to at all). I have low latency. I can pick and choose which applications I use. I can have multiple versions installed if I need to for compatibility reasons. I control encryption and backups when I need it. What advantage does a "network desktop" get me?

    Why bother?
  • by MatrixCubed (583402) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @02:17PM (#19056249) Homepage
    FTFA: "The Linux desktop market has been limited to single function devices such as cash registers and applications in emerging markets." I've heard this term 'emerging markets' for so long now, you'd think they'd have emerged by now...
  • by Colin Smith (2679) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @02:22PM (#19056339)
    The network is the machine.

    Yeah, I know Sun came up with that one a decade or so ago, and they were spot on, but it wasn't quite there.

    The real winners will be the ones who can come up with transparent computing. By that, I mean if the machine is standalone it uses local resources, disk, cpu etc. If it's plugged into a network it automatically makes use of the best available hardware on the LAN.

    It's all so manual at the moment.
  • by devnullkac (223246) on Wednesday May 09 2007, @02:24PM (#19056367) Homepage

    If the desktop metaphor is dead, why is its replacement called the "online desktop"?

  • Wouldn't the real killer be Wi-Fi operators providing PXE? Suddenly, online desktops become truly viable.

    Until then, it'll be something that someone uses rarely because there isn't much point in it.
  • Hybrid approach (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I've always thought rather than having local OR remote, a hybrid approach would be nice. Something like the way exchange works. You have the desktop client; but if you are away you can log into the web client. The data is available in both places. It would seem to me that such a concept could be used for other things.

    I suppose it would require implementing clients twice. I think though, that I would prefer a more accessible system with fewer features rather than a new Office sweet every few years (or w
    • We've been hearing that the desktop's dead as long as there have been PC's.

      Yes, particularly from Unix types who do not understand that people will route their data on a Sneakernet in order to circumvent an inflexible mainframe culture. The typical Linux distro (or all of them) do not understand the Personal Computer or its culture, and often the most intelligent thing they have to say about it is patently untrue (that PCs cause trojans and viruses) ignoring the whole NeXT/OS X experience.

      So at least Apple