Study Finds Linux 'Ready For Prime-time'

An anonymous reader tipped us to a Techworld article proclaiming Linux as the next big thing ... again. A study of IT directors, VPs and CIOs has concluded that within five years the open-source OS will be running more than half of all important business applications. From the article: "In short, open source, especially Linux, is being legitimized by the major enterprise vendors, and user executives are more than happy to believe them ... Microsoft's thawing toward Linux is now easier to understand when faced with such data - even as Windows continues to grow as the other main server platform of choice."

Propaganda

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux is ready for prime time when a user doesn't need an admin to use a preloaded computer. That's still nowhere in sight, and we're not getting closer either: Many distributions remove codecs and proprietary drivers, making a useful system even less available to mere users.

SharePoint?

[baldass_newbie]

Once again, I have to ask, how well does it integrate with SharePoint [microsoft.com]?
SharePoint is going to me Microsoft's collaboration tool of choice and not only does Linux not play with it, it doesn't have a competing offering.
Heck, this is going to affect OS X as well.
(And I'm not saying SharePoint is the answer, but a lot of CIO's seem to think so. For whatever that's worth.)

Re:Propaganda

[baldass_newbie]

I would disagree. MEPIS is certainly user friendly and includes codecs if I'm not mistaken.
Slackware does too, however, some folks seem to think the Slack learning curve is steep. I would disagree, but I would not posit it as an off-the-shelf answer for most folks.

Legitimate at last

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh thank God for that! I was about to ditch Linux after 10 years of being utterly Microsoft free.
But with the blessing of these well informed and important pundits I feel the future is brighter
already!

There's something slightly sad and laughable about people who switch their minds once something is
so bloody obvious it can't be ignored any longer. Next we'll have Bush saying the war in Iraq is lost
and it was a bad idea in the first place - and everyone will applaud him for his incisive wisdom.

Why are those with the most influence always the last to know what is really going on in this world?

Re:SharePoint?

[hey]

Why the heck does Linux have to bend over backwards to support the latest Microsoft thing?
I don't see Microsoft doing the same for Linux -- they are baddies here.

How about reading the freaking article?

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't about Linux being ready for Joe Users Desktop or not, this is about Linux being used to run mission-critical businiess applications in the enterprise.

But who needs to even glance at the article if all one wants is to start a nice little flameware, he?

Re:Selfserving Article

[Umbral Blot]

"our enemies"? I find it hard to consider a corporate entity my enemy (or a friend). They aren't people, so it doesn't make perfect sense to relate to them in this way. Certainly I can relate to the members of the company, but those members are constantly changing. And if some of those members do things I disagree with it doesn't mean that everyone in that company is reprehensible, or out to get me.

Re:SharePoint?

[SQLz]

If people want to throw away TCO, security, easy of administration, power, and all the free enterprise proven software available for a glorified calendar and wiki program from Microsoft, they can go right ahead.

Re:Propaganda

[SQLz]

We have over 1000 employees and 7000 linux boxes, 1200 of which are workstations, and 4 admins. People get a 1 hour KDE training "this is how you read mail, this is how you use the internet, this is open office". Any idiot can use KDE to be productive, all the concepts are the same. You click on an icon, a program launches. If you have employees that need an admin to manage that, fire them.

Re:Selfserving Article

[aussie_a]

They aren't people

Tell that to the law.

Re:SharePoint?

[16K Ram Pack]

That's not just what he's saying. He's also saying "and where's the competitive offering".

Businesses want this. What are you going to say "no, you can't have this". Not going to work. Give them an alternative, and they might go for it.

If more zealots stopped complaining about Microsoft and started coding Sharepoint/Exchange replacements, the problem would get solved.

Re:Selfserving Article

[jb.hl.com]

The law doesn't make something so. I could legislate that a reindeer was a tree and reindeers wouldn't suddenly become trees.

Re:It's happening - slowly

[hclyff]

Bollocks! Revolution is coming, any time now! [slashdot.org]

Servers only, not on the desktop

[DaveV1.0]

The way this article is worded, it is obvious they are talking about servers. It will barely make a dent in MS's overall installed base. It might make a meaningful increase in Linux's total installed base, but I doubt it.

Only when the Linux developers and community take the desktop seriously and start to make Linux more accessable to Joe Average Luser will Linux gain an appreciable market share.

Re:Selfserving Article

[theCoder]

We often speak of whole countries as "our enemies", so why not companies? IMHO, it makes more sense to speak of a company as an enemy than a specific member of that company. After all, individual to individual, members of the groups are not really enemies. Enemies want to destroy each other. Bill Gates isn't my enemy -- I don't (really) want to destroy him. Neither is Steve Ballmer. Or any other Microsoft employee. Microsoft the company isn't an enemy of me the individual, and the Linux community isn't an enemy to individual Microsoft employees (neither group wants to destroy the individuals of the other group). Individuals in either group may consider the other group as a whole as enemies, as the OP considered Microsoft an enemy and how people like Bill Gates consider the Linux community an enemy. Also as a whole, Microsoft is an enemy of the Linux community, as a whole.

Groups of people, like companies or countries, can very easily be enemies, even if individual members of each group don't necessarily consider each other enemies.

Re:Study find that

[Znork]

"They're barely computer literate as it is,"

All the more reason to put them on Linux.

Really, the barely computer literate arent a problem, and they become far easier to support on Linux. It's the 'think they know what they're doing' people who are a pain as they'll be upset when they cant break their systems in the same way they used to.

Of course, they'd come complaining to you when they borked their system in XP too, so as a supporting relative you're almost always better off with the family on Linux (with the possible exception being when you have a competent Windows admin in the family who'll be doing the support (lucky guy...)).

Re:And so, we learn studies mean nothing...

[Anonymous Coward]

The only reason you'd ever need to replace the kernel is for better hardware support or for specific features built into the kernel like firewalling, SMBFS, NFS, etc.

Or because some major flaws have found their way into the kernel resulting in the maintainers to strongly advice everyone to upgrade asap. As it has happened several times in the past now, even in the current (2.6) kernel tree. Now read back to "active development in the kernel" and you can see a big obstacle for mission critical systems.

Re:Selfserving Article

[Dutch_Cap]

The whole committee or just the chairman?

Re:Propaganda

[robzon]

Answer is easy: complain to dell about lack of Linux drivers.
Believe me, Free Software developers really would love to support every hardware possible, but how are they supposed to do so without cooperation from hardware manufacturers? It's still amazing how much hardware is supported despite the lack of interest of most hardware vendors.

The problem is...

[Tony]

There's many IT support staff who can't administer Unix systems and therefore they can't administer Linux.

The problem is, they can't really administer MS-Windows boxes, either.

A basic understanding of computers would give any decent admin the ability to administer a Unix system (whether it's Linux, *BSD, OpenSolaris, or any of 'em). They might have to spend a week or two installing and learning their way around the system, and to grok the Unix Way, but they could do it.

Too many MS-Windows admins learn by rote, and not by concept. Many can set up DHCP, for instance, but not have a clue what DHCP really does, other than hand out IP addresses.

Oh, well. The same is true of some Linux people I know-- they couldn't handle an MS-Windows system, because they lack fundamentals.

Re:SharePoint?

[melonman]

If people want to throw away TCO, security, easy of administration, power, and all the free enterprise proven software available

Um, Sharepoint is aimed at business users, and most of them don't have a linux-aware workforce, so it's hardly a case of throwing away Linux benefits, more not throwing away Windows-based skills.

for a glorified calendar and wiki program from Microsoft

I take it you haven't used Sharepoint? I'm an all-Linux web app designer, but, having done some consultancy work on Sharepoint, I have to say that duplicating Sharepoint's functionality from scratch wouldn't be a lot of fun. It's not so much what it does as the way it integrates with desktop apps. You edit your remote Sharepoint templates directly with FrontPage. You can synch Outlook address books. You can delegate responsibility for different parts of your intranet in a very flexible way. And, if you want something exotic, you can write it in XSLT and/or assorted MS programming languages.

Sure, you can achieve a similar goal using wikis, and I've written a few bespoke systems to do this stuff too. But the big hurdle is always separating Windows power users from their Windows apps. Either you end up wasting a huge amount of time trying to make your web app look like Word, or you never get most of your staff on board. Normal people look at mark-up languages and say "Oh, yes, that's what I/my parents used to do in Wordstar in the 1980s".

By using Sharepoint you have a much better chance to get everyone to use the intranet, and that, more than enabling technology, is what makes intranets useful. Don't get me wrong, I think mark-up is wonderful, but it's naïve to assume that non-specialists can be bothered to learn it if there's a point and click alternative that does what they want.

Re:Propaganda

[0racle]

It's called working off-hours. Learn how to administer a network.

Close, but not yet...

[gentlemen_loser]

For purposes of this post, I am going to ignore the implications of MS FUD in TFA, and specifically address whether or not (IMHO) Linux is ready for the desktop. Additionally, let me preface this by saying that I have used Linux as my sole desktop for PCs since 1994, but roughly two years ago switched to OS X on a Powerbook G4.

I recently tried to install Linux (specifically Ubuntu) on my Powerbook. To be fair, the live CD worked flawlessly and I was really impressed. Additionally, AirPort Extreme drivers are not working for PPC Linux, BUT I do not hold any distribution at fault for that because there are legal issues related to the open source version of the driver.

The installation went smoothly until I got to the Yaboot install - which failed. After considerable poking around, I read that there is a new bug in Yaboot when dealing with ATA drives. After several hours of manually editing the conf file - I finally figured out a manual workaround that solved the problem. However, I was frusturated by the whole process. Some time ago, I tried Yellow Dog (4.1, i think) - which installed flawlessly using Yaboot. This tells me that the new ATA bug was introduced recently. In the time since I first tried YD to the time I tried Ubuntu - I expected progress - not regression. While someone with time and experience can work through these problems, how can anyone expect Joe-six-pack to be impressed and not pissed when he tries it? One of the major Mac rags just ran an article about multi-desktop Macs and included mention of Linux. Each time someone with a Powerbook (or some other Mac with an ATA drive) attempts to install Ubuntu (or even openSuse for that matter), they will run across such bug and be soured.

The community as a whole needs a better way to deal with (read prevent) issues like the one I just encountered. While I understand how and why said bug occured, and how to work around it, someone trying to install Linux for the first time will run across it, get pissed, tell their friends Linux sucks, and get on with their lives. I firmly know that Linux has a better (read more stable) kernel than MS, and that all of the components necessary for Linux to be a prime candidate for the desktop are in place. Additionally, I believe that open-source is a better route. BUT, until the community gets its shit together and makes a distribution that works - Linux on the desktop will continue to be an uphill battle.

Re:I wonder.

[rbanffy]

First, we compare how you install a program in that paragon of user-friendlyness, Windows:

1- Find out what program you need (for, say, download illegal movies)
2- Google for it
3- Find a legitimate site to download it without spyware
4- Download the program to the desktop
5- Run it with admin privileges so it can wreak havoc on your system as it wants
6- Do the Next-Next-Finish dance

Now, let's compare it to the MacOS X way of doing:

1- Find out what program you need (for, say, download illegal movies)
2- Google for it
3- Find the site for downloading it (little risk of spyware)
4- Download the .dmg to the desktop
5- Open the .dmg
6- Drag the program to the Applications folder

And then, let's compare it with the Debian/Ubuntu way:

1- Start Aptitude (from the System/Administration menu)
2- Search for the keywords
3- Choose between the search hits
4- Select them for installation
5- Press Apply.

Now, let's compare what to do to keep your programs up-to-date

On Windows:

1- Check regularly all web-sites for all programs you installed and see if there is a new version
2- Repeat steps 4 through 6
3- It is possible to have to uninstall the previous version before doing step 2. Most probably you will find it out too late, anyway.

On a Macintosh:

1- Check regularly all web-sites for all programs you installed and see if there is a new version
2- Repeat steps 4 through 6
3- There may still be some application files under "Library", but Mac users don't care.

On Ubuntu:

1- You just press a button and enter your password when prompted

As you see, Linux still has a very long way to beat the ease of use of Windows.

Re:I wonder.

[physicsnick]

Here's what happens when I right-click on a .deb in Kubuntu Edgy:

http://img503.imageshack.us/my.php?image=installde bxj7.png [imageshack.us]

I am so fucking sick of people complaining about how difficult things are to install in Linux. It always starts with something like:

"Well my friend said Slackware was good, but when I tried to install Apache..."
"Have you even TRIED to install something on Red Hat 6?"
"I downloaded this thing called a 'source tarball' and it couldn't even install it!"
"'Console'? Why do I have to speak computer-language? I thought you said Gentoo was new!"

For Christ's sake people, choose the distribution that is appropriate for your uses, and start sentences with "How do I" instead of "Linux needs to learn". If you're an idiot migrating from Windows, you should use Kubuntu, and not jump the bridge like Parent here when something isn't exactly the same.

Re:Selfserving Article

[Cyclops]

I presume you're confusing all variants of the GNU/Linux operating system with the Linux kernel, in detriment of all the good folks work, in favor of a select few kernel developers.

As long as you continue to confuse a kernel with a full operating system, then you don't even hold a credible opinion either on the matter of the adoption of Free Software: you don't even know what you're talking about!

What is holding back the adoption of Free Software is pure and simply the concertated actions [auckland.ac.nz] of companies like Microsoft, trying to hold on to their monopolies and power over all subjects, or users if you prefer...

I'm sorry, but this isn't the rosy world you seem to live in. They *are* out to get us.

In the paper I linked, it is described how Microsoft recommends hardware makers to not disclose any information of their hardware, because other people might make other drivers...

Rehash of Desiderata: a pratical application

[mysticgoat]

Bill Gates isn't my enemy -- I don't (really) want to destroy him. Neither is Steve Ballmer.

<rant class="awful" title="Final Sanctimony Of 2006" style="presentation: preachy;">

Recognizing both of these guys as enemies is better than regarding them in any other way. Bill Gates' public history is littered with debris of the destruction he has caused to people who were his allies and partners: I would risk the safety of things I hold dear if I regarded him as anything other than an enemy. From statements in the public record, there is no doubt that if Steve Ballmer knew me personally, he would be threatening to "fucking kill" me.

Slashdot is full of people who want to emulate one or the other of these guys. They've got a word for people who see the world the way parent post describes it: suckers.

Enemies want to destroy each other.... I don't (really) want to destroy him.

Ah-hah! There is the problem; a simple but very basic mistake in how one should interpret reality.

It isn't about you all the time, you know. Do you really think that if you decided that Gretchen will be your lover, all of a sudden she will enthusiastically come to your bed? You actually have less say in who shall be your enemy than you do in who might become your lover. Failure to recognize that the other person has a lot to say about either relationship is not a good basis for one's view of the world.

No, Grasshopper, in this life you do not get to choose your enemies. You get to choose what principles will guide your behavior. You will then find that your enemies will choose you. If you are resourceful, careful, attentive, and very, very lucky, you may be able to choose your battles. But not your enemies; they will choose you.

Now enmity is another thing entirely. Avoid it, along with hatred, hostility, and all those associated feelings. Treat your enemies dispassionately, even in the midst of battle. For unless you are actually involved in hand to hand combat, there is no place for the intense concentration and focus, the tunnel vision and imperviousness to pain and injury, that are the hallmark of these emotions.

Invest your passionate energies in your friendships and loves; don't waste them on your enemies.

</rant>

Desiderata [uiuc.edu]

Re:Propaganda

[Brandybuck]

Back when I was with a Solaris shop, complete newbies could start being productive with godawful CDE in only a couple of days. The idea that people need gooey flashy hardware accelerated desktops with animated paperclips in order to be productive is an absurd myth.