Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Software Linux Business Linux

OSDL Announces Desktop Initiative 230

Posted by timothy from the pleasant-buzzing-noise dept.
rhetoric writes "Earlier today at the LinuxWorld Conference & Expo in New York, nonprofit Open Source Development Labs announced the creation of a "Desktop Linux Working Group initiative focused on greater use of Linux on desktops throughout the enterprise." A press release is available on OSDL's website, in addition to this Register article." It's all part of their non-secret plan.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OSDL Announces Desktop Initiative More

OSDL Announces Desktop Initiative

Comments Filter:

  • What exactly does this mean? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by The One KEA ( 707661 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @07:53AM (#8041812) Journal
    The Register article says that the OSDL is setting out to crate a specification for what an enterprise Linux distribution should be made up of. Yet the Register article also implies that the OSDL is not going to receive much direct user input on the spec itself. Is this going to turn out to be another UnitedLinux?

  • Perspective of a Linux neophyte (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Sarojin ( 446404 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @07:53AM (#8041815)
    I've been using Wintel for over 15 years and have just recently installed Mandrake 9 on an older P2 450. Here are a couple of points I think are worth mentioning (ubergeeks can exclude themselves from the classifications below):

    1. Linux is ready for *some* desktops only, namely ones where users won't be constantly tweaking and installing new software and hardware. You want a computer for grandma to browse the web, send email and view a few grandkid photos? Linux is great! You want to roll out corporate desktops where employees don't really need to be able to download and install the latest version of KaZaA? Linux is a godsend (provided the business software you need is supported).

    2. Linux is *not* ready for the average user desktop. The average user wants to do everything grandma wants to do, but they also want to be able to install or upgrade software and hardware *easily*. In addition, they want a fully functional GUI, with no *necessity* of dropping to a CLI for everyday tasks. They want to be able to go to a third party software/driver website, follow the 'click here for Linux version' hyperlink, download the file, then double-click to install it.

    Needless to say, as long as Linux distributions and desktop managers continue to proliferate, the average user's requirements will never be met. I say this as a *fact* not a *prescription*, so spare me the Linux-strength-in-diversity comments. I just think you can't have your cake (freedom/diversity) and eat it too (Linux on average desktop).
    • Hmmm. I semi-agree with the above, but I think that one of the strengths of Linux *is* the powerful CLI and reduced desktop functionality.

      When the Windows GUI fails to start, there's often little that can be done from the command line to help, mainly because the bastardised CP/M-clone that is DOS has been further stripped of any useful features it may have once accidentally had. Linux, OTOH, takes the "power to screw up your machine" out of the hands of the average user and puts it back in the hands of
    • You are absolutely right, sir - Linux is perfect for desktops which have a very narrow set of duties that will rarely be breached by the person using it.

      However, your comments about being able to avoid the CLI and double-click to install Linux drivers is a little bit far-fetched, IMO - no matter how useful the GUI becomes, I believe that a Linux system will always have a fully-featured CLI available for the end-user. The CLI isn't going to go away anytime soon, and I don't think I'd want to use a distro wh

      • Re:MOD PARENT UP. (Score:3, Insightful)

        by radionotme ( 742163 )
        No-one has said that the CLI has to go away. MS Windows CLI may not be as full-featured and may be hidden in the depths of the start menu now, but its never disappeared. What we need is for the CLI to not be essential, and for a GUI to be available to the end-user for most if not all tasks.
    • Needless to say, as long as Linux distributions and desktop managers continue to proliferate, the average user's requirements will never be met. I say this as a *fact* not a *prescription*, so spare me the Linux-strength-in-diversity comments. I just think you can't have your cake (freedom/diversity) and eat it too (Linux on average desktop).

      I'm sure I'm not going to be the only one to disagree with you on this point. Although I agree that the current Linux desktops may not be ready for the users you desc
    • The average user wants to do everything grandma wants to do, but they also want to be able to install or upgrade software and hardware *easily*. There are lots of package management tools out there that make installing software on most distros very easy (emerge, apt-get, red-carpet etc). Most of them have nice GUI front-ends as well, allowing you to point-click-install.

    • Re:Perspective of a Linux neophyte (Score:4, Insightful)

      by torpor ( 458 ) <ibisum.gmail@com> on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:26AM (#8041938) Homepage Journal
      Linux is ready for *some* desktops only, namely ones where users won't be constantly tweaking and installing new software and hardware.

      in other words, linux is ready for the healthier installations, and not ready for sick computer use.

      constant tweaking and installation of new hardware and software is not using a computer productively. using a computer productively means that the computer is operational, in the sense that it doesn't actually -need- anything further to be done to it in order to function as intended. it just works.

      this 'just works' state is fairly easy to get to with linux, and other open operating systems, and stay there. but i can count on one hand the # of windows users i have personally known who can point at their aging computers and say 'that system just works, so i leave it alone and just use it'.

      15 years of Windows use may have given you a neurosis, a false standard, with which you are comparing other platforms where such inflictions aren't really a priority. of -course- you can tweak and install software in linux; indefinitely in fact.

      but the point of computing, and of computer use in general is to -USE- the computer to do something, not be continuously servicing it. this is a fact that seems so simple, yet for most window-dwellers, it often appears to be inseparable from 'actual use' as a concept.

      i blame microsoft of course. tweaking and upgrading and re-installing and installing and 'software choice' is just a way of getting you locked into a constant crackhouse fit.

      The average user wants to do everything grandma wants to do, but they also want to be able to install or upgrade software and hardware *easily*.

      why should they? ubiquitous, cheap computing (s/cheap/inexpensive) means that once you've set it up and got it working, you can leave it alone and just use it.

      people are starting to see that the windows treadmill is a trap. once you get sucked into a windows way of life, upgrades and re-installs and tweaks and fixes all seem to be 'normal' ways to use the computer, but in fact this is really a detraction from the core issue of computer science, which is 'how can i use this computer to do the job in front of me?'.

      microsoft, and others in the industry who have been around long enough to have weathered countless waves of API and hardware technological changes know that computers are a constantly-changing product. its like a lump of magic matter which never maintains its state long enough for it to become a fixture.

      but this is not the linux philosophy. the linux philosophy is: get it working, and once its working, use it.
      • in other words, linux is ready for the healthier installations, and not ready for sick computer use.

        the linux philosophy is: get it working, and once its working, use it.

        Best desriptions ever, I just wished some modpoints
      • people are starting to see that the windows treadmill is a trap. once you get sucked into a windows way of life, upgrades and re-installs and tweaks and fixes all seem to be 'normal' ways to use the computer

        Whilst I agree to some point, there are still plenty of people who use Windows 95 and 98 and shouldn't be considered stuck in the "windows treadmill".

        The real treadmill is the hardware one for games. If you want to keep up with the latest and greatest games you have to fork out the cash for the faste

        • You make the case that the 'treadmill is great for games'.

          And then you conclude:

          So whilst i agree with you that there is a treadmill, it's not really as much of a trap as you make it out to be.

          Sorry, but games are a trap too. You're lured into them for the purposes of 'entertainment and fun', and end up wasting countless, countless hours playing them. And when you are finished, you have nothing to show for it except memories. Of a completely artificial reality.

          I'm not implying a value judgement he
      • i blame microsoft of course. tweaking and upgrading and re-installing and installing and 'software choice' is just a way of getting you locked into a constant crackhouse fit.

        This is absurd. I feel the need for upgrading software much, much more often on Linux than on Windows, since new versions of about all the programs I regularly use pops up every week, with improved stability, new very interesting features, etc. This is of course due to the nature of open source software.

        However, installing these upgr
        • Your talking about OSS software like say Gimp, K3b, Evolution, etc which have new features added all the time right?

          Well compare OSS where new improved versions are available for FREE as compared to commercial software on the Windows front where updates which add "new interesting features" cost actual money. Seems to me like OSS even with is sometimes difficult software updates is a Hell of a lot better of a deal.

          My last bit of advice is something you already know. Stick with software that's packaged spec

      • Re:Perspective of a Linux neophyte (Score:5, Insightful)

        by smallpaul ( 65919 ) <paul@@@prescod...net> on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @12:36PM (#8043828)

        constant tweaking and installation of new hardware and software is not using a computer productively. using a computer productively means that the computer is operational, in the sense that it doesn't actually -need- anything further to be done to it in order to function as intended. it just works.

        It is classic Linux-advocate style to redefine the user's problem to fit Linux's needs rather than the other way around. Some people like to get a new digital camera once a year. Some people like to install a new game once a month. Some people like to buy the latest and greatest MP3 players, video cards, wi-fi devices, photo printers, hand-held devices and all of it comes with software.

        People want the capabilities of their computer to expand as the industry expands and new things are invented. It's a very closed mindset that says the "computer has a use and once it is set up it is static." My uses for the computer change every day (especially as a I am a progrmmer). Why should my less technical sister be restricted from a similarly expansive view of computing? If I call her up and tell her BitTorrent or iPod is the shit, it should be easy for her to install BitTorrent or an Ipod.

        I'm not saying that Linux is intrinsically worse that windows at supporting dynamically changing systems: but for the average user today it is worse because of the driver and software support. That isn't Linux's "fault" but it is Linux's "problem". Not the user's problem. If you make it the user's problem they will stick with Windows and (frighteningly!) think of it as a more free and open system than the vision of Linux you are pushing.

      • once you get sucked into a windows way of life, upgrades and re-installs and tweaks and fixes all seem to be 'normal' ways to use the computer

        Rubbish. I installed XP Pro on my machine at home when I upgraded it last January, and it just works. I've not had to upgrade it, tweak it or re-install it once I got it how I liked it. My gf's machine (bought December 2002) came with XP Home pre-installed, and that too just works, with none of the problems you cite.

        I got it working, and now that it works, I use it
      • but this is not the linux philosophy. the linux philosophy is: get it working, and once its working, use it.

        Actually, the linux philosophy has always seemed to be more about going where you can, and not being limited by a closed OS.

        Yes, it's fine to get something working. I can get a very nice GUI running on debian/stable - resembles windows enough for the windows users to cross over and with OpenOffice/evolution/mozilla for basic document/email/browsing tasks.

        However, everything has a lifetime. Wha

    • Re:Perspective of a Linux neophyte (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Apreche ( 239272 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:27AM (#8041945) Homepage Journal
      You got it all right, except for one.
      They want to be able to go to a third party software/driver website, follow the 'click here for Linux version' hyperlink, download the file, then double-click to install it.
      This is what they want to do, but it's also what they shouldn't be doing. The fact that people can do this is the reason there is so much malware out there. Linux done right will force the non geek to have a great system, somethign windows can never do.
      Linux at this point isn't any harder than windows, if you get a geek to set it up for you. What we need is a distro called grandma linux. The WM will be just a bunch of huge icons on a single desktop. One will say E-mail one will say Web Browser, one will say Word Processor, Instant Messenger, etc. Which applications these things actually launch will be decided at install time, which grandma wont do. Stability, compatibility and ease of use will be priority one. There will be also one more big button, Add more Big Buttons. It will run a custom app that will be super grpahical and pretty providing a list of installable apps.
      This is also great for the corporate desktop, because you can give the secretary just the few apps she's allowed and nothing more.

      There is no reason someone can't make this. In fact, this is the kind of thing that just isn't possible on windows, but is exactly what the world needs. You know what, I'm putting this on my CS projects queue. When I'm done with everything else I'm going to make that wm and that distro. All will be laid to burnination.
      • first off, i have no idea why in the world everyone on /. focuses on a 'grandma' ready o/s. what is the average, mean, median, mode (whatever) age of home computer user? sure _some_ folks grandma's use the computer, but they also have a grandkid around everynow and again to show them what to do. grandma isn't the target audience here for any operating system. my mother (who is _a_ grandma) had troubles installing windows ME drivers for a usb HP printer, even with HP's easy to follow (i assume) instructi

      • This is also great for the corporate desktop, because you can give the secretary just the few apps she's allowed and nothing more.

        How frustrating for hir it could become if that app selection is too small - what if s/he wants to do a small script to sort the mail, or other work-saving little things?

        "This should contribute greatly to computer literacy, especially because many of the people thus exposed will be secretaries taught by society that they are incapable of doing mathematics, and unable to imagine

    • It depends.

      1. As for Hardware, most hardware is very easy to install by now. For example to switch a NVidia Graphicscard just take out your old one and insert your new model. Done. Same with most CD-Burners, USB-Sticks, Keyboards, Digicams, and so on. Of course this depends on your own configuration a bit but you get the idea. I woulndt say its much harder than WinXP in this segment, though.

      2. In the unlikely event that a distribution like SuSE or Debian does not contain the piece of software out of box y
      • Here is a thought.

        How about the people that put out this hardware include somewhere in the hardware that is connected (Firmware, flash, whatever) a URL for the machine to follow to pick up the latest drivers / software for that hardware. If the machine has the software installed locally it uses that temporarily and the machine comes up saying:

        "You have connected new hardware to this computer, the hardware is currently usable, but may not be optimal. Do you want to connect to the internet and see if there
        • The idea is not bad, but too static. A better approach would be if there was a unique id that could be matched against a database of some kind.The database could be upgraded in an apt-get manner, and it could include the latest info about the drivers.
          I think this is somewhat where the HAL project is heading. That is, let vendors or others provide device info files that describes the devices. Such a file could perhaps include an URL.

          (Or replace the URL with an URI, perhaps that would solve it)
    • First: Your point about hardware support has valid points. Multimedia support (TV cards for example) lacks somewhat.

      BUT: You'll have to change the way you upgrade your computer and OS; hardware/drivers as well as software.

      With Linux (as a normal user) you choose a distribution. The distro maker packages software and drivers for you. So if you need new drivers for your printer, don't go to epson, go to gimp-print or to be more precise check if e.g. Mandrake offers a new version of gimp-print with better e

    • Re:Perspective of a Linux neophyte (Score:4, Interesting)

      by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @09:20AM (#8042236)
      The thing is Mac OS X is an OS grandma can use but you can also open a shell and completely ignore Aqua if you want.


      So the problem with Linux is not technical. If OS X (a BSD derivative) can have a user friendly frontend then so could Linux. That means proper attention to detail in the UI, user friendliness, hiding advanced options, extensive context sensitive help, wizards and config dialogs, plug and play on the desktop, 3D graphics support (out of the box), and consumer device support. Etc.


      Some dists get a lot of this right already (e.g. Fedora has a very nice UI without detracting from the underlying OS) so we're not far from that situation. Hopefully initiatives such as this one from OSDL will help put focus on the work that still needs to be done. It doesn't mean dumbing down Lindows style - a well designed and tolerant UI benefits everyone.


      Another major millstone for Linux is the RTFM crowd. At the moment they're acting like so much dead weight to adoption of Linux. Hopefully they'll get a clue and realise the more users the better. And that is not going to happen while a vocal minority are openly hostile to letting mere mortals use their beloved OS.

    • The average user wants to do everything grandma wants to do, but they also want to be able to install or upgrade software and hardware *easily*. In addition, they want a fully functional GUI, with no *necessity* of dropping to a CLI for everyday tasks.

      With a little qualified oversight, any of the Free n*xen make excellent home desktop machines. It should be noted that this is also true of 'doze, though more qualified oversight may be required.

      The difficulty faced by the typical end-user (your brothe

    • I agree with you in a couple respects only:

      Driver support. Only market penetration can fix this.
      One click installs: rpm's proposed to make this a reality. The reality often is that most software has to be compiled from scratch if you want the particular features you want.

      As an example, I have a particular build of unixODBC. My problem is that on my distribution, I have no idea where it's looking for it's files, because that's entirely dependent upon what someone specified in the RPM when it w

    • I'm confused. What exactly do you need to use the CLI for in a distro like Mandrake or SuSE? I'm trying to think of a common user task that doesn't have a decent X interface and I can't. What are you thinking of?

  • The biggest obstacle is IT support departments (Score:3, Funny)

    by GonzoDave ( 743486 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @07:54AM (#8041818)
    Getting the office running on Linux might actually require work.

  • Server sales counting as desktop sales? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gmania ( 687303 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @07:57AM (#8041830)
    From the article:
    According to market research firm IDC, paid shipments of Linux rose to 2.8 percent of desktop operating systems in 2002, up from 1.7 percent two years earlier. In 2004, it is expected to surpass the total new product shipments for the Mac OS.

    For some reason this doesn't quite match my own subjective perceptions. I know a lot of Mac buyers, a lot of linux users, but not that many linux desktop OS buyers. Isn't the majority of Linux sales directed to the server market? Or they mixing the figures as they go along? Pity there is no link provided for the research.
    • Something else to note is that OSDL is targetting the corporate desktop. Sure, you don't know a lot of friends who are buying Linux desktops, but then there aren't that many businesses (outside print/design/media businesses) that are buying Macs - meanwhile there _are_ more businesses deploying Linux across their desktops. You eefectively have a very niche sample if you just run on perception.

      Jedidiah.

  • Thats evolution (Score:4, Funny)

    by gowen ( 141411 ) <gwowen@gmail.com> on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @07:57AM (#8041831) Homepage Journal
    Linux : going from competing [gnome.org] desktops [kde.org] to competing [infoworld.com] desktop [osdl.org] initiatives [stockhouse.com]...

  • I wonder if they will be working with freedesktop.org? it might be a good idea. ... or maybe not.
    • From the article:
      The overall working group objectives have been developed by an exploratory committee with representatives from freedesktop.org, HP, IBM, Intel, Novell, OSDL, Red Hat and Sun Microsystems.
      That'll be a yes.

  • Linux on the desktop (Score:5, Informative)

    by sql*kitten ( 1359 ) * on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:01AM (#8041844)
    Sun recently sent me a CD with their Java Desktop [sun.com] on it, which for anyone who doesn't know, is a slickly-packaged Linux distro with a very user friendly interface, Sun's excellent StarOffice suite, Mozilla, etc etc. I've been having a play with it (I use StarOffice on Windows anyway) and I'm quite impressed. It's all nicely integrated with a mostly consistent look and feel, for the end user there's no messing around, anyone who's familiar with Windows and MS Office could pick this up in a day and be productive. As an old-skool Unix user, I'd personally prefer a NeXTSTEP or IRIX desktop, but as a normal Windows user, JDS is impressive.

    That's the way to do Linux on the desktop - it has to be as near as possible seamless. Someone who knows what they're doing has to sit down and make it all work. Bundling together a package here and a package there as Red hat does just isn't going to cut it. If the objective is to actually get Linux on the desktop, then OSDN should throw its lot in with Sun. But it looks like this "initiative" is just bandwagoneering.
    • ...If the objective is to actually get Linux on the desktop, then OSDN should throw its lot in with Sun.

      From the article:

      The overall working group objectives have been developed by an exploratory committee with representatives from freedesktop.org, HP, IBM, Intel, Novell, OSDL, Red Hat and Sun Microsystems.
      It seems like they have.

  • Business desktop vs Home desktop (Score:5, Informative)

    by tr0llb4rt0 ( 742153 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:02AM (#8041850) Homepage
    Linux is ready for the business desktop.

    Until the hardware manufacturers put as much effort into Linux drivers as they do for Windows drivers then home Linux desktop pc's will be restricted to the geek community.

    That and the old old topic of gaming support. :-D
    • I think the only think that wasn't helpful in the run for the desktop were the various desktop initiatives: wasted money. Put 30 million in Wine, switch RedHat to KDE, help to improve various tools like Hbasic and we will enter the destop soon.
    • With winex and a plethora of linux ports, linux has better gaming support than the mac. You never hear people say "oh, macs are nice, but they're just not desktop machines." Using lack of games as excuse for claiming linux isn't ready for the desktop is just that, an excuse, and a poor one at it.

      I agree about the driver thing, in specific situations. If you buy new hardware with linux preinstalled, like most businesses would, this is just not an issue. For home users though, this is a problem. Having said
  • The big problem isn't that Linux is particularly bad or anything, it's that many, many people already have Windows. As bad as Windows might be, it's really annoying and fear-inducing for bosses to imagine taking down all their machines and installing a different O/S on them. The meeting should be on how to get people to switch o/s's, not how to implement linux. Once people aren't scared to switch an o/s, then all will be well.

  • Too Little Too Late? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by turgid ( 580780 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:14AM (#8041898) Journal
    This JDS [sun.com] from Sun has quite a head start. How can they compete?
    • How can they compete?

      Why compete? Creating standards is about co-operation, not competition.
      • Er, um, but, well, if someone already has deployed many units first, and some shambling comittee tries to come up with a "standard" which won't be here until manyana, whose system is going to become the de facto standard?

        Horse bolts, stable door closes or something.

    • alright. No Sun bashing intended but somehow I just dont get why the JDS is perceived as such a revolutionary thing. Itsnice and all but I guess there isnt much what I cant do with a stock Slack9.1 and Dropline-Gnome [dropline.net], or name your favourite Distro (Debian, Mandrake or even Xandros etc.) I really dont get why its such a big thing. Just because its SUN and they signed a deal with Walmart? Come on. I personally dont even like the implementation too much. Many different Widgetsets, a substandard OpenOffice.org
      • I like Slackware too, but when I'm CEO of my own multi-million $ international corporation, I'll be looking for something cheaper to install on all my desktops and better integrated (for my non-IT geek staff to use) rather than the hackers' favourite distro(TM) + random bleeding edge untested and not particularly well integrated desktop environment. That's what I like to do in my spare time at home.

  • Skiing (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mr_Silver ( 213637 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:15AM (#8041899)
    I've been skiing now for 5 years. Last year I decided to try Snowboarding for a bit.

    (Mods: this is on topic - bear with me)

    So off I went to France. It was beautiful, perfect snow, lovely mountains, perfect pistes. I put on my snowboard and started to learn.

    The problem I came across was that I couldn't do anything I wanted to. I could see where I wanted to go (I wanted to hit the slopes dammit!) but I completely lacked the skill required to get there.

    After half a day, I'm ashamed to say I gave up. I was only there for 3 days and i'd wasted some of that precious time getting absolutely nowhere. So I put on my ski's, hit the reds and blacks and had a fantastic 2.5 days.

    Linux is like that for me. I like it, I want to use it, the problem is that I think of it as a tool to do something else and I just end up getting frustrated because i can't do the boring things really quickly because i'm too ingraned in the Windows way of doing it.

    I can change the display resolution quickly in Windows. I have to faff about in Linux. I can install items in Windows with a few point and clicks. Everything i've tried to install under Linux has botched up through my own general incompetance. The very basic of things takes 5 times as long and I get frustrated and eventually switch back to Windows (I still can't dial up under Linux, it refuses to recognise my external Hayes modem and KPPP dies horribly with some error message - the Gnome one hangs on startup).

    Whilst Linux on the desktop might not be totally there, it's biggest problem is not that, but of people like me who don't have the patience to learn how to do the things (that they can do really quickly under Windows) differently.

    • Even More Frustrating (Score:5, Interesting)

      by occamboy ( 583175 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:43AM (#8042008)
      Your analogy is dead on, Mr. Silver.

      But it's worse:

      The vast bulk of the Linux world doesn't even recognize the truth of what you're saying. Whenever someone complains about Linux useability, they are told that "all you need to do is [poorly-documented two hours of time-suck here], and anyway you're just a M$ troll you swine".

      The genius of M$ is that they recognize when things are hard to use, and they make 'em easier. Ten years ago they could see that their screen font rendering sucked - so they made them unsuck. I certainly have issues with M$ - sometimes they dumb things down too much, and they often are untruthful. But, let's face facts, even Windows 95 was a far more useable system for 95+% of computer users than is any current Linux distribution that I've tried.

      The sad thing is that there's a lot of room for improvement on Windows. Linux can, in theory, win the battle for the desktop. But if folks don't recognize how terribly deficient it is in day-to-day usability, there's not a prayer for it.
      • I disagree that the bulk of the linux world ignores usability. The first step in most open source projects is to get something out there that works. The second step is to get in as many useful features as possible. The third step is sometimes usability. Many many projects work on usability once they have something useful in the wild. Even the linux kernel has a nice menu system with good documentation to assist in configuring. Mozilla, OpenOffice, GNOME, and KDE have been focusing primarily on usabili

    • Re:Skiing (Score:3, Informative)

      by makapuf ( 412290 )
      use last mandrake (some other distro have, I'm sure, about the same level of polish) :

      You can change the display resolution quickly in Windows. : ctrl-alt-+/- on X, and next version with the xrandr extension (i think), will have a control panel for it in main desktops.

      I can install items in Windows with a few point and clicks. : on mandrake, you signle clic on one item, dependencies are automatically resolved and the thing is installed. You just have to enter the root password.
      For your modem, I don't kn

      • Re:Skiing (Score:3, Informative)

        by TheSunborn ( 68004 )
        But the problem with ctrl-alt +/- is that you only switch between predefined resolutions/coler-depths. And most users don't even know how to predifine theese. It took me over a year to find out how to remove all the 8/16 bit versions of all my resolutions. Now atleast I can just switch between resolutions widtout worry that it might only be 8/16 bit depth.

        Martin Tilsted
      • ctrl-alt-+/- changes the resolution, but not the "size" of the desktop; effectively, it zooms you in or out. That's absolutely not what the majority of people would expect or want to happen.

        Yes, you can argue that that's because the majority of people are used to the way that Windows (and MacOS/OSX?) does it, but that's not the point. That's a niggling little irritation to some of us, but to people trying to come from Windows it's a show stopper. For them, it seems as though you have to choose your resolut
    • I've been skateboarding for years....but then I decided to try skiing.

      (ditto your post).

      I've been almost linux for the past 5 years, and I have no idea how to do even "simple" things in windows now. (I recall staring, embarrassed, at my mom's winXP and not knowing how to change the dial-up phone number to a new ISP.)

      It's about getting used to things.

    • Re:Skiing (Score:3, Informative)

      by WindBourne ( 631190 )
      Yeah, I totally understand. I have been helping my father move to linux and he always ends up back in windows (partially due to my brother trying to push him there). Part of the problem is configuration, but the other part is the apps. I have finally moved him the lotus suite to OpenOffice, but he still uses Lotus Organizer and Quicken. I thought that GnuCash was work for Quicken, but no. Interestingly now, he is considering moving to Outlook for Organizer and Money for Quicken.

      The frustruating thing to me
      • On a side note, it is possible that my brother may finally stop his actions.

        He was trying to get ahead in his company (A defense company) so was learning MS as that was what they ran. I kept trying to get him to learn Unix/Linux as I told him that they company would have no choice but to change (security is a big issue).

        Apparently 3 months ago, they announced that they were now looking for Linux staff to move all that they had, to MS. They have already put a freeze on moving anybody up via the MS avenue

  • Keep in Mind (Score:5, Informative)

    by tres3 ( 594716 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:16AM (#8041903) Homepage
    The thing to keep in mind here is that they are most likely shooting for a corporate desktop where the secretaries will have a very limited portfolio of applications. They just need things like email, web, word processing, and a spreadsheet. Linux is an ideal client for that!

    1. It doesn't catch all of the M$ viruses out there.

    2. If it does catch a virus it will only blow away the user's account and not the whole computer.

    3. User email accounts can be time limited to only send x messages per minute. This will further retard the proliferation of nasty email attached worms. (IP_TABLES LIMIT)

    4. Software that is installed in a user's account runs with limited priviledges and is not going to muck up anything outside of the user's account. (It is also out of the reach of other users)

    5. The installation and applications can be custom tailored to an organization so that there is no super-corporation dictating that ALL computers will have Winblows Media Slayer installed.

    6. Trivial little things, like having the default search page be an internal corporate server, can be setup in a CD image so that everything is the way the corporation doing the deploying wants it and not the way some license agreement with Redmond mandates.

    7. Documents will automatically be protected from other users by being protected in seperate home directories.

    8. Usage of company computers would be limited to those people that have accounts on the computers.

    9. ... etc. etc. etc.

    • the secretaries will have a very limited portfolio of applications. They just need things like email, web, word processing, and a spreadsheet

      Add an X server to that list and you've got a suitable desktop for a developer too. The desktop system processor can handle all the local GUI intensive stuff like spreadsheets, a central server can handle compiling.

      Problem is, your average developer is too addicted to his winamp, icq, etc etc...

    • Re:Keep in Mind (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      "1. It doesn't catch all of the M$ viruses out there."

      A properly configured Windows environment won't either.

      "2. If it does catch a virus it will only blow away the user's account and not the whole computer."

      Again, set up your user accounts properly, remove "Everyone/Full Control" from the drive root (among other things) and you can kiss good-bye to these sorts of issues.

      "3. User email accounts can be time limited to only send x messages per minute. This will further retard the proliferation of

  • Mac SE/30 (Score:3, Informative)

    by Graymalkin ( 13732 ) * on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:25AM (#8041935)
    Finally, OSDL already has working groups and specifications for Linux in data centers and in carrier grade facilities. It makes a lot of sense to get a specification for desktop systems as well. Thus far the only specifications Linux has had to brag about in Enterprise space is its comformance with the Open Group's Unix specifications. Meeting technical guidelines is great but that doesn't really demonstrate the practical ability of Linux in any environment.

    A smart specification and reference implementation will let just about anybody with the know-how build Enterprise grade Linux systems. As such just about anyone will be able to compete in the business, not just the kids with big brand names.

  • Desktop Idea (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Linus Sixpack ( 709619 )
    X has a big advantage of having a number of virtual desktops. Why dont distros agree to have #5 given over to documenation & monitoring. (#5 is alive) & #6 given over to Distro Specific features.

    Assuming they have 6 desktops (I know you can have more) 4 would be for the user, 1 for monitoring, 1 for exceptions and warnings & 7 to reset the mouse & keyboard.

    ls
    • Dude! Why'd you have to bring Johnny 5 into this? I know that Indian CS has been news lately but going all the way back to Short Circuit? It's too much;-p

    • It could just start one X session for the login then another one for a user, when you come back to login and someone else logs in, start a second X session, then switch with crtl-shift F8 or something...Would be nice to have that in the more user oriented distros !
      • when you come back to login and someone else logs in, start a second X session,

        Already included in KDE3. When the screensaver locks, you can either type in the password of the currently logged-in user, or click the button to start a new, conncurrent session.

        'Course, as with many nifty-neato-new features, it takes some twiddling to get the configuration right, which is exactly the point of this article.

  • Progress (Score:4, Interesting)

    by sokk ( 691010 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:39AM (#8041992)
    Linux is getting closer to the easy desktop. I think it's ready as a base-system; but what gives the guys in Redmond the upperhand is the application portfolio that have been added to the Windows OS over the years. The day we get native versions of Photoshop, Dreamweaver and the other major apps on Linux - it'll be very hard to resist it. We also need Outlook/Exchange-killers. Evolution is great; but we still have a way to go.

    I still haven't recommended Linux on the desktop for any friends of mine, because I know who'll get the call when they can't install their new webcam etc. (You guessed right, me). It won't be long before they ask me I hope; when they see my slick desktop -- and how well everything works. Then I'll help them.

    We have KDE 3.2, Gnome 2.6 and kernel 2.6 lurking. We see more and more user friendly distros; and a rise in live-cds.

    Still, when I hear people get viruses and such I can't help myself but comment it with a little: "Nope, no viruses. I use Linux."

    In the end: It's hard to beat free :)

  • IBM - already doing it (Score:5, Informative)

    by GomezAdams ( 679726 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @08:48AM (#8042024)
    We're already moving all of our internal desktop users to Linux over the next two years. There will still be dual boot for those that need it but most corporate desktop users not needing another operatng system will run pure Linux for the daily chores of email and document exchange. All my product support work is done in Java, PERL, and scripting so I can be 100% Linux for all my activities now. The default window manager will be Gnome but you can use others as your taste dictates. Most interprise applications have already been ported and the rest will be. The elephant is not only dancing but leading the parade.
  • I don't understand. What exactly is it about Linux on the desktop (say KDE/GNOME) that is too difficult for the average user? They have some sort of menu from which they can launch applications, they have file managers, they can print files. What's missing?

    • Re:What's missing? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by IamTheRealMike ( 537420 ) * on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @09:48AM (#8042360)
      Here's a few items from a private "Linux TODO list" that me and some friends maintain :

      • Easy software installation. People do not want to spend an hour installing a program. Apt/yum/emerge et al are not full solutions:
        • There are not and never will be any repositories that contain all the software you want in an up to date fashion. Mixing repositories leads to big issues, see OpenCarpet.org which immediately wanted to upgrade my copy of Frozen Bubble 1.0 to Frozen Bubble 1.0 thanks to metadata mismatches.
        • There is no standard for desktop integration - why should users have to type a cryptic command in order to install software? Why not just click the icon in the webpage?
        • The status quo is that packagers don't notify software maintainers when their software is packaged, so frequently there is no way to find out what random permutation on the softwares name your repository uses short of grepping/searching the full list. Worse, some packagers choose to split things into different sized pieces, for instance on Debian to get a full Wine setup you need not just "wine" but also "wine-tools".

      • Multimedia support is still weak. Today I wanted to watch the trailer for the Runaway Jury, but unfortunately Apple have monopolised the market on film trailers (I heard they pay or give free/ultra cheap hosting in order to make people use QuickTime) and, surprise, their website doesn't work well on Linux. There is no real standard location for browser plugins, nor is there any readily accepted implementation for embedding playback engines into the browser. You have to grep the page sources for the URL to the .mov, and even then it doesn't work as neither mplayer nor xine understand the MOV reference types (a proprietary form of redirect, in effect). So I can't watch the trailer.

      • We need to be able to run peoples existing games, applications etc nearly flawlessly. Wine has to get a lot better first. Recently Jeremy White of CodeWeavers set an interesting challenge - given how far Wine has come in the past few years, he thinks it might be possible to have 95% of Windows apps roughly functional by the end of 2005.

      That's just a random subset of things that we need in order to provide a quality desktop that most non-trivial/non-grandma users do. There are a million and one other things we need as well.

      In short while a huge amount has been accomplished, there's still a huge pile left to do. Still, it's not as hopeless as it looks - the distance Linux has come since I started using it only 2 years ago is incredible. Beautiful fonts, cleaned up desktops, hugely improved artwork, maturing applications and powerful media players are just a few of the achievements I can think of.

      • Multimedia support is still weak. Today I wanted to watch the trailer for the Runaway Jury, but unfortunately Apple have monopolised the market on film trailers (I heard they pay or give free/ultra cheap hosting in order to make people use QuickTime) and, surprise, their website doesn't work well on Linux. There is no real standard location for browser plugins, nor is there any readily accepted implementation for embedding playback engines into the browser. You have to grep the page sources for the URL to t

    • Windows does a pretty good job of making general computer tasks easy to do. What drive me nuts, as a developer, is that they take this same dumbing down restrictive philosphy to their development tools. I really find that much of dev studio just gets in my way and slows me down. Linux has just the opposite problem. Everything is designed with the developer as the target user (not intentionally mind you). This results in all of us loving Linux, because it works naturally for "us". The problem with this i

  • Eazel Nautilus (Score:2, Interesting)

    by l0wland ( 463243 )
    Is this the same that Eazel tried with Nautilus? Unfortunately, they failed [com.com].

    So far, the Linux community exists modtly out of tech-people. When you look at Apple Computer, they have a separate division that purely focusses on human interface design.

    Won't it be possible for people like that to spend some time on a better enduser-experience? Can GUI-development be organised in the same way as Linux' kernel-development is?

  • What Linux is still to give me (Score:3, Interesting)

    by fluor2 ( 242824 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @09:00AM (#8042093)
    1. An active-directory similar interface for distributing software packages. E.g. right-click on a group called "Mozilla 1.5", and then just add a computer into this group. This will make the computer install Mozilla 1.5.. All other software should be compatible with this "style", like we have with MSI on Windows. We have RPM on Linux, and that should be okay to use here. Thus we need to have computers as a member of this active directory-thing... And some Domain Admin accounts that are automatically applied to computer domain members. etc. I guess I could go on and on about all Group Policy features of Active Directory. :)

    2. Desktop... that actually gives me good control. Also, X crashes much too often. (Linux geeks seem to laught about that Windows has to reboot often, but I hear my users often complain that they feel their computer crashed, even if just X crashes. And I do agree, not much use in a GUI when it crashes, and the time to restart X seem to match the time to restart a normal Windows XP computer..). Also, Desktop and icons must be files, and not stupid complex data-files, which is pretty hard to modify.

    • I've not had X crash in a very long while (I can't remember offhand when the last time I had X die). I use X every day, I play games on the machine, I do development. I'm not just writing the odd letter in OpenOffice. X11R6 as XFree86 has been very stable on my current system (a P4 with a GeForce4 and the nVidia drivers).

      I think X crashing has the same root cause as Win32 crashing (since Win2K) - bad hardware and/or bad drivers. Every time I've had a Windows crash/hang since using Win2K and WinXP has been
    • 1. opencarpet (if you wannt to do it in graphical mode) or cron job running apt-get (auto-mode)

      just create and add apt repository on server, and there it is

      2.a X crashes??? well maybe if you have some weird hardware, on my ATI and NVidia cards X is running perfectly.

      2.b XML files are far easier to work with than small independent files. Just remember: XML is your friend,... XML is your friend,... XML is your friend,... XML is your friend,... XML is your friend,...

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:What Linux is still to give me (Score:4, Informative)

      by IamTheRealMike ( 537420 ) * on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @09:56AM (#8042420)
      Also, X crashes much too often

      I'd consider crashing at all a serious problem, aking to a kernel panic in terms of badness. Fortunately X is pretty stable. Crashes in it are normally XVideo related in my experience.

      Also, Desktop and icons must be files, and not stupid complex data-files, which is pretty hard to modify.

      At least in Gnome 2.4 the "virtual" icons on the desktop are overlayed by the file manager and do not actually exist on the filing system (home, start here etc). The desktop is then made up from the files in ~/Desktop

    • I have to agree with others here that "X crashing" is not a problem. I have not seen X or a window manager crash in years.

      Window managers crashing typically cause you to log out, or cause all the window borders and possibly other pieces of the interface to disappear.

      In my experience, X crashing usually means the screen locks up. NVidea drivers about 3 years ago did this quite a bit, but I have not seen it since then. Contrary to popular belief here, an X crash really can lock your machine. First of all th
  • See press release [osdl.org]

    "The Open Source Development Labs (OSDL), [...], today announced that Trolltech has joined OSDL and will participate in the Lab's new Desktop Linux Working Group."

  • Don't make "Windows replacement", just replace it (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mm0mm ( 687212 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @09:33AM (#8042300)
    From the Register:
    OSDL says it isn't out to create a Microsoft Windows replacement.

    ... meaning, no pop-ups, no more browser hijack? (I sure will miss 'em)

    I don't get it. though there are some things for ODSL/Linux vendors to learn from Windows, there are very many things that they would NOT want to learn or copy from design of the monopoly OS to replace it. Desktop Linux should not become a Widows replacement for god's sake.

    Linux is superior to Windows in many aspects, while Windows has some advantages in desktop use over Linux. For business computing, security can be the primary concern. I don't say either OS is more secure than the other, but the history shows that Windows is more likely to become a target of vulnerability attacks by hackers/ spammer/ ad agencies, and that some attack attempts successfully created mess. Even though there are far more applications available in the market, Windows wouldn't be a choice of OS if I were to make decisions.

    Let's face it, how difficult would it be for a person of "computer literate" (according to his/her resume) to learn how to maneuver KDE/Gnome? I don't think it would take a year. If applications are network-installed, employees on the terminal system won't have to worry about installation of application. Let the IT dept. take care of it.

    If you have hundreds of Windows apps to run, use wine, codeweaver(also wine), or vmware. Running Windows on vmware/virtual PC gives you access to Windows apps and ease of security control under Linux at the same time. It's certainly better than getting hacked and filling your monitor with a bunch of pop up ads and crap because you are using Windows, or Windows replacement.

    Don't make a replacement for the 'every-user-has-root-access-by-default' OS. Just let people learn and replace.

  • Industrial use (Score:2, Insightful)

    by resprung ( 410576 )
    To create a world-class desktop, an overhead vantage point is needed. I guess this'll be a stretch for the development model of free software.

    Windows and Mac heads are used to a VERY strong cross-application cut and paste.

    Windows has often - (no sarcasm) - exceeded expectations in this area by allowing all kinds of data to be intelligently moved from one app to another.

    It's something designers rely on and use all the time.

  • A boost to Freedesktop.org (Score:4, Interesting)

    by InodoroPereyra ( 514794 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @11:07AM (#8043006)
    If anything, this is about OSDL sponsoring Freedesktop.org [freedesktop.org]

    This working group is also supported by OSDL's Linux User Advisory Council, which is comprised of senior IT executives from global 500 companies. The overall working group objectives have been developed by an exploratory committee with representatives from freedesktop.org, HP, IBM, Intel, Novell, OSDL, Red Hat and Sun Microsystems.

    Note that the only non-profit member of the committee is precisely freedsktop.org - For those who don't know, freedsktop.org is (in a nutshell) a common effort by the GNOME and KDE developers to develop standards to let Linux Desktop Enviroments coo- and interoperate. Things like a universal protocol for the system tray, etc.

    It just makes sense to see OSDL and their corporate partners sponsor Freedesktop.org, it is a win-win investement for everyone involved ... and I would much rather see the big corps interested on GNU/Linux support Interoperability and Standards than adopt one particular technology as a "de facto standard". Way to go !

Slashdot Top Deals

If you want to put yourself on the map, publish your own map.

Close