Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit Leaves Desktop Linux Behind 212
Linux.com's Joe Barr has an interesting commentary about the recent Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit and the astounding lack of attention for desktop Linux. Now, a great deal of the monetary support driving Linux these days comes from companies with a vested interest in "big iron" but hopefully this won't completely eclipse the rest of the community. "Before I learned that the press was not welcome in any of the working-meetings at the summit on days 2 and 3, I saw and heard rumblings of discontent from more than one ordinary Linux desktop user. One example: a top-ten list of inhibitors to Linux adoption, created by a committee of foundation members, contained nothing at all relating to desktop usage. Nothing. Everything on the list was about back-room usage. Servers. Big iron."
Lack of Desktop Focus?! (Score:5, Informative)
This story is factually incorrect (Score:5, Informative)
The focus was split pretty evenly between the desktop and the server - although journalists were only invited to the first day and that session was, admittedly, weighted towards the server. However, the two all-day desktop meetings and many of the other sessions (Printing in Linux, virtualization, energy efficiency) involved significant Desktop content. I'm not sure that his claim can be substantiated.
From the conference agenda [linux-foundation.org]:
Wednesday, 9-5: Desktop Linux Architects Meeting
Re:Not Likely (Score:4, Informative)
I can run almost anything that I can on Linux on OS X, but there is a lot from OS X that I _can't_ run on Linux.
Re:Uh Oh (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Uh Oh (Score:3, Informative)
Codecs work perfectly, but the installed fonts and desktop schemes seem to change according to the preferences of the current maintainer. A workaround to this is to make a manifest of all the rpm's installed prior to upgrading to a new release, then making a manifest of the new rpm's, then doing a diff and installing the missing rpm's.
Those are minor compared to having the installed anti-virus tools on Windows slow everything down because they are are doing their full volume scans in the evening or at night. Even worse is seeing how much disk space they use up with their virus definition files - this seems to run into hundreds of megabytes now.
And with any pre-installed ISP software, you can never be quite sure what information they are sending out (CPU ID's, local username, local current user directory). Remember the reaction when Real networks was sending back the filenames of the files that users were viewing.
At least with Linux, when you set up your own connection scripts, you know exactly what information is going where.
Re:Uh Oh (Score:3, Informative)
And just WHO is this "Linux Foundation"? (Score:3, Informative)
I notice some Linux supporting companies there, but a lot of companies whose support is, at best, half-hearted.
(I'd have copied out the list, but it's all pictures of the names. Look if you care. IBM and Red Hat are there, but so is Adobe. And a bunch of companies I've never heard of, as well as many whose position on Linux I don't know.)