Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Red Hat Software Businesses Software Linux

Red Hat to Enter the Desktop Market 250

Posted by CowboyNeal
from the hat-into-the-ring dept.
head_dunce writes "It looks like Red Hat is going to release their Global Desktop Linux in September and give Ubuntu a challenge for the Linux desktop market. Red Hat Global Desktop 'would be sold with a one-year subscription to security updates.'" It looks like another choice for the proverbial Aunt Tillie. The release is being delayed in order to provide greater media compatibility, "to permit users to view a wide range of video formats on their computers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Red Hat to Enter the Desktop Market

Comments Filter:
  • by gumpish (682245) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:27AM (#20112391) Journal

    Red Hat Global Desktop 'would be sold with a one-year subscription to security updates.'
    Hmmm, let's see... on the one hand I can start paying for updates after 12 months.... on the other hand I get free updates for 18 months (or 36 months for LTS releases).

    Maybe the execs at Red Hat need to update their hat size as whatever they're wearing appears to be cutting off circulation to their brains.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by rudegeek (966948)

      Hmmm, let's see... on the one hand I can start paying for updates after 12 months.... on the other hand I get free updates for 18 months (or 36 months for LTS releases).

      Yes, but maybe, just maybe, you'll get some form of support except packages update? You know? Ability to call call center or whatever? I was never a RH follower but I say, give them a benefit of doubt in their desktop market reapperance.

      I want to see more good offering on Linux desktop. And RH has muscle to push some changes. They have qu

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        They said security updates for one year... not support. I know some people like Redhat support... but I was no fan of it. Mind you, aside from installation support, Microsoft doesn't really do anything for their customers. Except let me see... FREE security updates for their products. hmmmm... yes I think Ubuntu does that too... free security updates. Ah well... nice try Redhat.
    • by mikael (484) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:48AM (#20112505)
      Hmmm, let's see... on the one hand I can start paying for updates after 12 months.... on the other hand I get free updates for 18 months (or 36 months for LTS releases).

      Business people like accountability, and the ability to see that a problem is under control. Being able to
      tell them that you have arranged for a field engineer scheduled to visit, or that the support team is working on the problem, is more reassuring to them than saying that that you have sent out an E-mail to a discussion group to see if anyone else has had a similar problem. To them, either you are the person to fix the problem or you can't.
      • by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Saturday August 04, 2007 @08:31AM (#20112685)
        It's from Ubuntu.

        You can pay for per-incident support from Canonical. Or you can purchase a support contract from them.

        Either way, it's as good as what Red Hat is offering ... or better. And it's already established. And it's a very popular desktop distribution.
        • HTH.

          Hope This Helps.

           
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Anonymous Coward
            I've never heard of Linux Terminal Server, but Ubuntu definitely uses "LTS" to mean "Long Term Support." From their site, "The 'LTS' version of Ubuntu receives long-term support. 3 years for desktop versions and 5 years for server versions. [ubuntu.com]"
            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by Lumpy (12016)
              Linux terminal server...

              http://www.ltsp.org/ [ltsp.org] the core project.
              http://www.k12ltsp.org/ [k12ltsp.org] a turnkey setup for schools just add crappy old throw away PC's and you have instant terminals for that one fast server.
              http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/linux _terminal_server [freesoftwaremagazine.com] TCO breakdown and executive overview of the above.

              Implimenting a Linux terminal server environment is 90000% easier than citrix or windows, and is far FAR more stable. Many schools and business use such a setup. Autozone uses Linux ter
        • by mrcparker (469158)
          I have used RHN in the past to manage a large group of servers and if the desktop support is anything like it, this will be a big win for Redhat IMHO.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Please explain why businesses use windows then. There is ZERO accountability for microsoft products, you agree to hold them harmless and agree that the software comes with no warranty or accountability when you install it.

        Are you telling me that businesspeople are not reading that and are operating under the false assumption that there is accountability with microsoft products?

        there is MORE accountability with Ubuntu than there is with windows XP or Vista. Just because most It support companies (Like Next
        • by JimDaGeek (983925) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @09:42AM (#20113137)
          There is accountability because managers and execs can bypass blame and point right to Microsoft or another vendor. If they were to do that with a Free OS like Ubuntu, the blame comes back to them for "using something that was free to try to save money". Note, I don't agree with this stupidity, but it seems pervasive in American management.

          I cut my teeth on Red Hat and like the way it is set up. The only reason I started to use Ubuntu more is because of how vast the repository is and how well all the packages play together. With Fedora, you can add 3rd party repositories, but you will run in to conflicts. This is the only reason I dropped Fedora for Ubuntu.

          I say give Red Hat a chance and wait and see how it turns out. If they include LEGAL codecs, that could be huge. With Ubuntu to play proprietary audio/video codecs you have to use unauthorized software. To a home user this isn't a bid deal, but to companies it is a deal breaker. Most license holders won't go after Joe Linux User for using an MP3 codec. However, with a company, that could lead to some nice cash for infringement.
          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by mlts (1038732) *
            There is another reason too, and one that is a major factor of why Windows is a corporate staple: Due diligence with corporate regulations.

            Windows is certified, both in FIPS and Common Criteria. This allows corporate legal, should something happen, show the auditors, press, and possibly law enforcement (as some SOX or HIPAA violations mean prison time) documentation that every piece of the system, from the OS on up, is certified secure.

            Few operating systems have these certifications other than Windows. S
      • by Etyenne (4915) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @10:07AM (#20113295)
        According to TFA, Red Hat is targetting public administration and small business in developing countries. This is a very price-conscious market. If the only competitive advantage they have over the competition (Ubuntu, pirated Windows, etc) is that they offer some warm-and-fuzzy feeling that the product is supported by a corporation, they are doomed to fail. Canonical already offer support à la carte (you buy support only if you need it), which make Red Hat Global Desktop compulsory subscription a fairly though sell.

        Red Hat (and Novell) strategy of charging per-seat "subscription" is doomed to fail on the desktop. Really, this is paramount to the proprietary software business model of charging licensing fees per seat. And why would anybody choose to engage a recurring cost for an *operating system* is beyond me (but then, people flocked to "Software Assurance", go figure). To have any chance, they would need to charge very little for this "subscription", which raise the question of profitability. Maybe they would have a chance if they where giving away these desktop "subscriptions" to existing customers of RHEL as a perk.

        Red Hat never understood the Linux desktop market, and apparently never will. It is a good thing they dominate a profitable niche in replacing Solaris as a platform to run Oracle and other enterprise software, because they completely suck at market development. I would hate them to go away; they are very goods corporate Open-Source citizens that contributes significantly to key Open-Source project, so I hope this niche will not dry up in the near future.

        As a side note, if you think Red Hat can afford to dispatch a field engineer for desktop problem on the premise of a small business customer, your expectations need a little adjustment.
    • by squiggleslash (241428) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @08:05AM (#20112571) Homepage Journal

      That's right. We should all try to price everything identically and then somehow end up with choices of different products and services that cater to different needs despite all of that.

      Well, maybe not. Perhaps we should see what RedHat plans to produce that justifies the expense. Me, personally, I've subscribed to pay services in lieu of free services because I felt the pay service was worth spending money on, it wasn't excessively priced, and I'd rather support an organization dedicated to providing me with a service than one that ultimately is responsible only to itself, or to a myriad of advertisers with their own agendas.

      I'm not knocking Ubuntu, and without seeing RedHat's product, it's impossible for me to judge as to whether it'll be worth the money, but the notion that we can make that judgement right now purely on the basis of cost per month of service is ridiculous.

      • by kklein (900361)
        You spelled "ridiculous" correctly? 'Round here we definately spell that "rediculous." You know, because we're illiterate.
    • by morcego (260031)
      Considering the number of people using RHEL (and CentOS) on the Desktop, I think this will be well received.

      I for one use CentOS on my machines. Which is ok, since I do have to manage a lot of servers. But I also have my wife's machine to consider. And while I do want something that will be easy for her to use, I also want something as close as possible to what I use and that requires little or no maintenance.

      Maybe you don't like RedHat, or you simply don't have that many machines to administer. Maybe you s
  • More choice (Score:2, Insightful)

    by bvimo (780026)
    Another quality distro for the desktop is good news.
    • Not necessarily (Score:3, Insightful)

      by KingSkippus (799657) *

      This isn't necessarily true.

      As an extreme example, look at all the choices in Microsoft's lineup. I've said it before on here, but as "the computer guy" that my friends and family turn to for advice, I wanted to kill them when they had out two versions named Windows 2000 and Windows Millennium Edition. Sure, I know the difference, but I'm paid good money to know these things. I had friends who were actually considering "upgrading" from Windows 2000 to Windows ME until I told them what a hideous idea th

      • by init100 (915886)

        I hope and think that it will be Ubuntu. It's a lot more intuitive to use than RedHat

        Ubuntu, a lot more intuitive? Did you even try any recent Red Hat system, especially Fedora 7? It is very similar to what I have seen and read about Ubuntu 7.04, so I don't know what is so much intuitive about Ubuntu.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by marcello_dl (667940)
      And both ubuntu and red hat desktop linux having no pact with microsoft is good news too.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by free space (13714)
      [rant]

      The last desktop version I used for RedHat was 8.0
      It was horrible. While SuSE and Mandrake were becoming more and more desktop friendly, RedHat was still stuck in the late 90's era look and feel.

      The problem? RedHat was the defacto Linux standard and every Linux advocate I know recommended it instead of the more friendly options. I believe this drove a lot of potential Linux users away and gave the idea that Linux was ugly and unusable.

      [/rant]

      I haven't used later versions of RH or Fedora so all this mi
  • They better hurry (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dybdahl (80720) <(kd.lhadbyd) (ta) (ofni)> on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:35AM (#20112413) Homepage Journal
    It seems Ubuntu is capturing all attention right now:

    http://google.com/trends?q=suse%2Cfedora%2Cubuntu% 2Cgentoo%2Credhat&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0 [google.com]
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Of course it doesn't help with the Apple-like secrecy the company seems to be putting around the product (an attempt to try and drum up interest?). I work with their products everyday, and this is the first I have even heard of this. Their own web site only seems to have a single press release from back in May (http://www.redhat.com/about/news/prarchive/2007/ g lobal_desktop.html). For an open source company, no alphas, no betas, no hints as to what sets it apart from their new Red Hat 5 Linux Desktop (ht
      • Amazingly, not only is TFA very scarce on information, it misses the most critical issue. Here is the actual reason for the delay [desktoplinux.com]:

        Red Hat confirmed on Aug. 3 that it would be delaying the release of the newest member of its desktop Linux family, Red Hat Global Desktop, because the company is seeking to provide certain multimedia codecs. Sources close to Red Hat said obtaining some of these codecs was dependent on Red Hat coming to an agreement with Microsoft.

        In other words, Red Hat wants to legally includ

    • by nahdude812 (88157) *
      That's an interesting chart. Here is another interesting chart [google.com] comparing Microsoft vs Ubuntu. I don't want to read too much into it, but there is a decided decline in Microsoft which is inverse to the rise of Ubuntu.
    • by KwKSilver (857599)
      Ubuntu doesn't have the hammer-lock now that it did in January. PCLinux O/S and Sabayon have been pushing hard in Distrowatch rankings, for what its worth. Even more interesting is that plain old "boring" Debian is in the top 5 or 10 and has been for the last year. Perhaps stability counts? What a thought.

      Mind you I'm not knocking any of them & have tried everything in the top 10 but Mandriva, OpenSuSE, and Fedora. All the ones I've tried have worked reasonably well to very well on my h/w. Somehow
    • by teebob21 (947095)
      Unfortunately, while Ubuntu enjoys more attention than other distros, Linux interest overall is on the decline:

      http://google.com/trends?q=suse%2Cfedora%2Cubuntu% 2Credhat%2Clinux&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0 [google.com]
  • RedHat Panic (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:35AM (#20112415)
    This has "OMG Ubunutu is getting so much press, we need some of that action quick or they'll own the market!" panic written all over it.
  • Wake Us Up When... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Redhat, when you actually sit down and do the real work to bring Linux up to the level of commercial desktops and not just another halfassed repackaging of your existing Linux distro people will actually give a damn.

    Here you go Redhat:

    http://www.fayerwayer.com/archivo/2005/03/tiger_sc reen.jpg [fayerwayer.com]

    * Perfect desktop acceleration right out of the box with the user having to touch NOTHING to get it to work

    * Application packages in /Applications or something similar

    * Full drag and drop application installation and r
    • by hey (83763)
      That would be good stuff to have but the typical office worker doesn't need all that.
      Things like maintenance are more important in an office.
    • by MrHanky (141717) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @08:20AM (#20112629) Homepage Journal
      Application folders and "drag and drop installation" won't work on Linux, as you can't know which libraries are installed on the computer, and in which version. Say you want to install the Kword 2.0 beta. This depends on the kdelibs 4.0 (beta) and the Koffice libs. With an app folder approach, the Kword 2.0 beta would have to package those libraries as well. And so would all the other apps depending on those libraries. Or, of course, they could all be one huge package with lots of stuff you don't need.

      There is another approach, of course, which is that of Apple: You know mostly which libraries are installed on the system, since they are all part of the OS, but when there is an application depending on a newer version of the libraries, you have to pay Apple for a newer version of the whole OS as well. This is easy enough if you have a monopoly on that particular platform, but then you also have a proprietary platform. Red Hat doesn't have that privilege.

      What you want is obviously a Mac. Then get a Mac.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ciroknight (601098)
        "Application folders and "drag and drop installation" won't work on Linux..."

        I think what you meant to say was "that won't work across Linux OSes." It'd work perfectly fine for one distro, or one distro-family based on one common repository that is in lock-step for API/ABI compatibility. It'd work perfectly fine in the Ubuntu family of OSes, for example, but take that same package and try to install it on, let's say Red Hat, and it all goes out the window.

        Believe it or not, we've already solved this p
        • by MrHanky (141717)
          You're right re: app folders, of course, but only technically. There's also the social question of how this would be supported by the community. With my Kword 2.0 beta example, it wouldn't be worth it, since none of the libraries it depends on would be supported by the distro. That's also why such programs aren't distributed as app folders in OS X, and why the people who like the unixy side of OS X ported apt-get (fink) to it: it's much more practical for modular and interdependent programs.

          That said, there
    • There are self-contained application packages like the DMGs in OS X for Linux, it's called Klik.
    • Perfect desktop acceleration right out of the box with the user having to touch NOTHING to get it to work

      That's easy only if you sell hardware.

      OS X level or font rendering support right out of the box

      TrueType was developed by Apple and Microsoft, and some methods of the technology are patented. Would Apple license these patents to just anyone?

      IB equivalent

      You don't mean International Baccalaureate. It took me a few dead-end searches to realize you meant Interface Builder. Would it be a good idea to start from Glade [gnome.org]?

      Complete set of iApp replacements - same visual polish and features sets as Apple has

      Including iTunes? Its user interface is design patented. Specifically, the playback controls of Lsongs [wikipedia.org] had to move to the bottom to work around this patent. And i

      • by init100 (915886)

        Including iTunes? Its user interface is design patented. Specifically, the playback controls of Lsongs had to move to the bottom to work around this patent.

        Then I wonder what Apple would say about Songbird [wikipedia.org]. It is extremely similar to iTunes interface-wise.

  • CentOS (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dkleinsc (563838) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:36AM (#20112421) Homepage
    And how long before CentOS creates a perfect replica thanks to the GPL?
    • Re:CentOS (Score:5, Insightful)

      by lordtoran (1063300) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @08:19AM (#20112623) Homepage
      These "clones" don't threaten Red Hat's business, because they don't come with these all-in-one support options that businesses love. Plus they have to contribute modified code back, so it's even a kind of win-win situation.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Pharmboy (216950)
      And how long before RedHat back pedals and screws us, like they did those of us who bought support contracts for RH9? Sorry, we have several servers with paid support that just got stranded, and then given the choice of paying 5 times more, or using Fedora, which isn't ready and had spotty support after a year.

      No, I think not RedHat. I got to explain to the owner why you left me high and dry once. Never again. I will keep using CentOS because I was weened on RH, gladly paying for the box set of every ma
      • I could have posted this word for word. The RH9 fiasco still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I too bought a support contract for RH9, fairly shortly before that whole support/licensing debacle was foisted on us.

        And this new version: you buy it and then get support for just one year? Gee, thanks, Red Hat! I'm really happy that you're there to give us a linux distro that works very well on the desktop and has support! We can't get that anywhere else...

        Thanks, but Ubuntu has everything I need now, a

  • by jonwil (467024) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:38AM (#20112427)
    A linux distro where I can download an ISO and install from that ISO and get a version of ffmpeg and friend that doesn't have 90% of the media formats disabled.
    • by siride (974284) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:42AM (#20112455)
      Talk to the patent owners or the legal system, not the distros. They're just doing what they have to do.
    • by BlueParrot (965239) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @08:52AM (#20112817)

      A linux distro where I can download an ISO and install from that ISO and get a version of ffmpeg and friend that doesn't have 90% of the media formats disabled.
      Ubuntu Feisty Fawn gets pretty much as close as is possible within legal limits. From the documentation:

      Click Applications Add/Remove. In the top right, change the setting to All available applications. Then select Other in the left panel and then select the Ubuntu restricted extras package. Click OK.
      This will install a whole lot of crap that is restricted by software patents (mp3 support etc ), or stuff that isn't completely free ( like Flash and Sun Java ). Unfortunately it isn't possible for the distros to have this installed by default because the US patent and copyright system is completely broken.
    • I know I'm being pedantic, but Gentoo's patch-on-the-fly system and friendliness towards ebuilds of questionable legality does technically allow you to install an uncrippled VLC or FFMpeg or mplayer or LAME at any time. Just set "dvd ffmpeg mp3 lame" in your USE flags and your system will build libdvdcss into VLC and liblame into FFMpeg.

      Of course, Gentoo is a very complex, advanced system, but for those who know what they're doing, it's a pleasant alternative to sitting on a Debian or Fedora box and searchi
  • I wonder what the last 8 years have been?
  • The irony (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sarathmenon (751376) <srmNO@SPAMsarathmenon.com> on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:42AM (#20112449) Homepage Journal
    Alan Cox and the other big shots at Redhat have in the past repeatedly said that they will not add support for mp3, or any other patended technology into Redhat. It all started with 8.0, and RH's policy has been AFAIK to tell the user that so-and-so will never be supported until the patent expires. Its sad to see such a good ideaology been tossed aside because of market pressure.

    Whatever, I am not one to complain, but given the way Bluecurve was thrust upon users, and the way that they crippled kde so that gnome looks better (I dont want to start a holy flame war, but this *was* the state of things 5-6 years ago), I doubt whether they will make any serious dent in the market. But this is free software, the more people focussing on an area usually only brings the better - atleast its going to be code that others can use too.

    • by westlake (615356)
      Its sad to see such a good ideology been tossed aside because of market pressure.

      Explain to me again how the bazaar [the marketplace, market values] came to symbolize Linux and the cathedral [political correctness, ideological purity] Windows.

  • by HangingChad (677530) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:42AM (#20112451) Homepage

    The release is being delayed in order to provide greater media compatibility

    As much as I like Ubuntu, getting some of the media types working was a royal pain. The average user would have difficulty and they certainly don't understand the legal reasons for the exclusion.

    Proprietary file formats are from the devil.

  • Uh oh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DogDude (805747) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:46AM (#20112481) Homepage
    This isn't a good sign. They just got finished dumping their desktop version, and now they're making another one? Sounds like their management is starting to flounder. Either they're a desktop software company, or they're not. They've already left the market, and only a few years later, they're re-inventing the wheel to get back in? That's crazy. It reminds me of Sun "The network is the computer. No it's not." Microsystems.
    • by swillden (191260) *

      They've already left the market, and only a few years later, they're re-inventing the wheel to get back in? That's crazy

      I disagree. The market for desktop Linux has changed dramatically in those few years, in several ways. First, the desktop tools have continued to improve, both in terms of the desktop environments and in the quality and selection of desktop applications available. Second, hardware compatibility is much better, and with Dell beginning to push hardware vendors to provide good drivers promises to continue improving even faster. Third, Ubuntu has proven that there is money to be made in desktop Linux now

  • Excellent News (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ratboy666 (104074) <fred_weigel@NoSPaM.hotmail.com> on Saturday August 04, 2007 @07:47AM (#20112495) Homepage Journal
    This will be accepted as a "tier 1" supported platform by ATI, nVidia, and other "binary only" vendors immediately.

    Basing on Redhat/Fedora/RHEL means a lot of stabilty. Having "legal" video support in a different branch means that Fedora can pursue the free software goal without being distracted by critics calling for non-free features. "Fedora sucks - it doesn't do MP3 and DVD out of the box" goes away (hopefully). The answer becomes "If you want non-free, go Global".

    I hate the name, though. Indeed, Global will be a competitor to Ubuntu, but I would much rather have a "hat" name. From the summary, I would recommend Tilley.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by ScrewMaster (602015)
      Well, here are some possible alternates:

      Bonnet Linux
      Hood Linux
      Cap Linux
      Balmoral Linux
      Nightcap Linux
      Yamulke Linux
      Beaver Linux (Slashdot favorite)
      Deerstalker Linux
      Porkpie Linux
      Tophat Linux
      Beret Linux
      Bowler Linux
      Derby Linux
      Headgear Linux
      Cummerbund Linux
      Beanie Linux
      Homburg Linux
      Pointy Linux
      Slouchhat Linux
      Trilby Linux
      Bandana Linux
      Visor Linux
      Skullcap Linux
      Space Helmet Linux
      Gas Mask Linux
      Beehive Linux
      Newport Linux
      Helmet Linux
      Tricorne Linux
      Hardhat Linux
  • It contains 1 sentence from the story and a big page of other stuff.
  • Deja Vu (Score:3, Insightful)

    by spiritraveller (641174) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @08:14AM (#20112603)
    I seem to recall Red Hat already being in the desktop market at one point.

    Didn't they basically throw it away already?

    Isn't the reason why Ubuntu was able to take the lead was because Red Hat left a huge gaping hole in the category of "Most Popular Desktop Linux Distro?"
    • by BCW2 (168187)
      Threw it away after RH9 and put most of it in Fedora. It always seemed that Fedora was lacking some things to me. Maybe this is a step back in a way but it should be a good thing.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Etyenne (4915)
      The reasons Ubuntu came to dominate the market is multi-folds.

      First, they pionneered three keys Linux distributions improvements: single ISO installer, clean desktop and LiveCD.

      People seem to have forgotten that, but back when Ubuntu 4.10 came out, you needed to download *5* ISO to install Fedora (I think you could have gotten away with three if you did the minimal install, but whatever). This was an absolutely horrible experience for Linux first-timer and an important barrier to adoption.

      You also have to
  • YALD (Score:4, Insightful)

    by wwmedia (950346) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @08:27AM (#20112671)
    we dont need Yet Another Linux Distro, there are plenty already! we need them developers join a bigger project like Ubuntu and Suse and not reinvent the wheel over and over
    • by kjart (941720)

      Something tells me that Red Hat isn't going to suddenly start working on Ubuntu and/or Suse.

  • by Iloinen Lohikrme (880747) on Saturday August 04, 2007 @08:29AM (#20112681)

    What is the news here? Red Hat is in the desktop market already, thought their offering is more geared or at least branded for the enterprise use: Red Hat Enteprise Linux 5 Desktop [redhat.com]. It seems that they are just going to brand their Enterprise Desktop, add some multimedia and maybe a new colorful GNOME theme and call it Global Desktop Linux. Whoah!

    The real news in here I would say is that Red Hat is gearing towards other than corporate customers. The question is, is this a defensive maneuver against Canonical or does Red Hat see that the consumer desktop linux market could be opening up? Or is it both? Could be both.

    The second question, if they are not doing this purely for playing defense, is how serious they are? Are they so serious that they will maybe make a new multimedia player for Linux, or will they bundle in example iTunes or Real with it, or are they just going to hack up the usual suspects. I really would hope that they have something new to offer, as basically the situation is that multimedia support works but is not plea sent. Peasent here means the same as user experience with iTunes and in less extend Windows Media is.

  • Dell's Ubuntu laptop deal showed that Microsoft Vista at $50 (according to engadget [engadget.com]), but Red Hat's Enterprise desktop varies from $80 to $339 [redhat.com] which isn't exactly cheaper for Aunt Tillie. Note that Canonical support [canonical.com] is cheaper for 9x5 ($250) but they also offer 24x7 support ($900).

    But is Red Hat trying to follow in Microsoft's steps confusing users with 4 desktop package options? Although Canonical is catching up with Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Edubuntu, Gobuntu, Ubuntu Studio, and Ubuntu Media Center.

  • Curious that Red Hat here is seen as apparently "challenging Ubuntu". Red Hat's market would be the enterprise: small or large (as the article even says) -- something that Ubuntu has not exactly come close to penetrating. With regard to Linux, SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop is the main Linux desktop solution that is taken more seriously. They have many thousands of deployments in pretty big enterprises (HSBC, Wal-Mart, etc).

    Ubuntu has more than enough people in its online vocal community, but let us not
  • by Anonymous Coward
    for one linux to rule them all and in the darkness bind them

Can't open /usr/fortunes. Lid stuck on cookie jar.

Working...