Linux on the Desktop 444
webmaven writes "Mitch Kapor's Open Source Application Foundation just released a 34 page report on the Desktop Linux market, written by Bart Decrem, who has discussed desktop Linux previously. The OSAF is working on Chandler, which the press have generally described as an 'Outlook Killer', but it's really intended to be in a completely new application category, more similar to Lotus Agenda in some ways than what currently consider a PIM (email + contacts + appointments). The report goes into some detail about the current state of desktop Linux, trends, and various limiting factors, and concludes that while a revolution is not immediately in the wings, a trend can definitely already be discerned, and they expect adoption of desktop Linux to increase over the next few years, and identifies leverage points to accelerate the process."
Know why Linux will fail on the desktop? (Score:5, Insightful)
SP (Score:3, Insightful)
We need a revolution in usability.
-uso.
Re:SP (Score:3, Funny)
We need a revolution in usability.
Hmmm. Like OS X?
Ducks
Re:SP (Score:2)
Re:SP (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that all major OS's are gradually evolutionary growths from the 80's. None are actually "designed".
Re:Know why Linux will fail on the desktop? (Score:5, Insightful)
If Windows users don't switch to competing apps on their current OS, then how can we expect them to switch both applications and operating systems?
--Pat / zippy@cs.brandeis.edu
Re:Know why Linux will fail on the desktop? (Score:4, Insightful)
Linux on the Desktop will start in the corporate world, just like Windows did. After adoption in the corp world, the adoption at home will follow.
I have heard for years that Linux is not ready for the Desktop, the apps suck etc and every time I look at my PC and think: I wonder what their needs are?
I have used Linux exclusively on the desktop for years, currently running Gentoo, but that is not a point. My point is that most people, both at work and at home will have more then adequate number of apps available and with features that covers their use. Remember the good old 80/20 rule? 80% of the users only use 20% of the feature in any given app. This still holds water, so there is really no need for an Outlook killer, most people will have more than enough functionality with already existing apps.
I also fail to see the so called "un-polished" look or lack of interoperability, it's there, both in Gnome and KDE, and getting even more polsihed for each release. What you use is based on your perception of the available DE and Wm environments. I work for a huge company, 40000+ employees and have so far not found one single task that I or my coworkers need to perfom that could not be done under Linux, not one single!
I would really love to see the list of programs needed for Linux in order to be a valid alternative to Windows on the Desktop. As far as I know, there are none!
Re:Know why Linux will fail on the desktop? (Score:3, Insightful)
You're right. It's not the apps that are the problem. It's that most PCs come with Windows pre-installed.
Walmart selling Lindows PCs is the biggest threat to Microsoft's home market. If other stores join in, millions of ordinary users will enter the Linux world - without really knowing or caring (or needing to).
--Pat
You gave the wrong link to OSAF (Score:5, Informative)
Re:You gave the wrong link to OSAF (Score:5, Funny)
Of course this just bounces to a non-existent Yahoo group, so...
Clippie (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Clippie (Score:2)
Re:Clippie (Score:5, Insightful)
You can still choose to install the Office Assistants, but you've always been able to choose not to install them. I've never had to deal with Clippy, from Office 97 through Office XP. Of course, most people prefer to just bitch and moan rather than do something about the problem, so it's not surprising that people are still complaining about Office Assistants.
Re:Clippie (Score:3, Insightful)
choose not to install them. I've never had to deal with Clippy, from Office 97 through
Office XP. Of course, most people prefer to just bitch and moan rather than do something about
the problem, so it's not surprising that people are still complaining about Office Assistants.
Most people working in an office environment DO NOT install their own software.
Nor, initially, do they understand how to change configurations.
So
Re:Clippie (Score:3, Insightful)
No it's not. It just means that the IT department who is doing the installation should better understand what they're installing. The people you're referring to are the same people that wouldn't use the help functionality anyway, so it doesn't matter whether they have the hand-holding Office Assistant or the standard HTML help to work with. In either case, they're going to call IT.
Re:Clippie (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Clippie (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it's his personality. Instead of just doing a stoopid "trick" animation every now and then, he just goes to sleep. Or something else less invasive than "I'M A CLIP!!!1 IT'S SO COOL!!!1"
Re:Clippie (Score:5, Informative)
A Swastika must point clockwise. It's supposed to represent progress, and in Nazi propaganda films, the symbol is animated and rotates clockwise too.
Wow! : ) (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, I'll go RTFA. : p
Allow me to ask.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Are there any real objective 3rd parties who investigate and report on the different aspects of linux ( ie TOC, benchmarks, etc ) who truly are impartial to either OS. It seems that anybody writing 'reports' are either slanted towards windows, or linux. I dont think i've ever read a report that says "well, linux sucks at x, and windows sucks at y as well. in summary, they both suck ( or they both rock, or whatever, etc. ) . "
Where does one find unbiased reviews and benchmarks of OS's ?
Re:Allow me to ask.. (Score:3, Insightful)
You'd have to find people that don't use computers but then, of course, their opinions probably won't be insightful.
The next best thing is to stick to people with an open bias and compare their arguments. It's a bit like reading newspapers.
TWW
Re:Allow me to ask.. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Allow me to ask.. (Score:5, Insightful)
are there any real objective and impartial 3rd parties that review or report on anything, ever?
it's a fact of life that most people competent to review items in a product class are going to be experts of some sort with products of that class, with all the built up preferences and biases that come with being an expert.
i've come to the point where i no longer look for objectivity, because it doesn't exist -- just add new information into a corpus of prior knowledge, along with whatever inherent slant it has, and base personal reasoning on that. objectivity and impartiality are best simulated with aggregation. i don't fell i can assume someone else is even capable of impartiality.
it's like the news media. i could watch cnn, or fox news, or local news, and adjust whatever they say to normalize what whichever one says based on what i know of their inherent proclivities. I could watch all of them, but that's not feasible from a time standpoint, so i take the digest form : news.google.com. Not because it's new and flashy, but because it provides aggregation. I can scan the headlines and merge them into a global sense of the prevailing attitude towards a story. I can see which outlets are sensationalizing (or alternatively, downplaying) a story, or who's not covering it at all, with a quick scan. I can then choose to read the stories from any perspective i choose (which is often not necessarily my own) because i can trivially determine which sources have what perspectives.
To me, it's the best possible feature of the www -- true impartiality of reporting because the web crawler doesn't give a shit what the inherent slant is, just what words are in the document.
as for benchmarks, they're often only marginally above statistics on the scale of truth (i.e. somewhere south of 'damn lies'), so they're *really* only useful taken as a broad average of many, many different testers and conditions.
What ever happened to the last "Outlook-killer"? (Score:2, Troll)
Re:What ever happened to the last "Outlook-killer" (Score:4, Funny)
Just take Mozilla Thunderbird and Calendar, integrate them into the kernel. Then put in a feature that allows an arbitrary host on the network run arbitrary code on your machine in the interest of letting other people invite you to meetings automatically.
That should infuse some of the old MS flavor into the dish. Should really get the punters switching to linux in droves.
Re:What ever happened to the last "Outlook-killer" (Score:2)
Re:What ever happened to the last "Outlook-killer" (Score:3, Informative)
Sure... (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, the last time we heard from this guy, he was explaining [linuxandmain.com], "My big gripe about KDE is I think it's butt-ugly. The main reason I keep using GNOME is that the icons on KDE are aesthetically offensive to me. And the letter K is kind of offensive, it's not very elegant." The new report is Slashdotted, but I'm curious to see what other letters are slowing Linux adoption on the desktop.
At any rate, at least this story should generate some life on Slashdot. I'm trying to avoid doing work, and the last five stories are still in single digits for comments, including FP! trolls.
Re:Sure... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Cuteness has its place, but it's a real pain finding the right app most of the time.
actually.... (Score:5, Insightful)
So..? (Score:2, Insightful)
I mean even windows is continuing to grow ? So what's the point here ?
If linux is replacing the desktop *nix market, albeit very small (solaris, irix etc.) whats the big deal in that ?
How much M$ boxes are being replaced by linux ?
Currently linux and windows on desktop are growing at their own pace, as they don't share a common user base. And what ever common userbase they have , use dual-boot option.
Linux on the desktop... (Score:5, Informative)
We need to start new-to-computers people with non-MS operating systems. They'll be much more inclined to use anything handed to them, and they'll dislike the crashing problems, popups, and weird behaviour of Microsoft's OSes. I repair Windows machines at work for my job, and every time something goes awry, I don't think of it as normal anymore, I think of it as bloody annoying.
Being nearly Windows-free for the last three years or so has been really awesome. These things are tools, not cheap toys that break a lot.
Re:Linux on the desktop... (Score:2)
Re:Linux on the desktop... (Score:5, Insightful)
"I don't run Windows anymore unless I want to play Carmageddon II at home". I don't recall ever walking into Wal-Mart and buying a Linux game. Consumers want to be told what to buy. Such as: Get Armagetron [sourceforge.net] here! 3D! Multiplayer! New, new, new! (No, really check it out). Windows has better games because Windows games have better advertising because Windows has a bigger market share. It'll be a long time until you hear some ten-year-old say, "I had to install Linux so I could play Doom 6.66. It just isn't the same on Windows."
"at work I only get into Windows if I need to use the custom workorder system that ties into Novell and MS Access." Legacy software, hardware, and geeks will eventually fade into
"We need to start new-to-computers people with non-MS operating systems." Great idea. But have you ever looked at the books or web sites these people try to learn from? You know the ones where there is a chapter on the mouse complete with blow-by-blow steps for double clicking? Try finding something like that for any distro. Your standard Linux distro has hundreds of powerful, Ghz using, bandwidth blasting apps that new-to-computers" people can live their entire lives without using. The community is great as long as you know that hard drive storage is different than system memory. If your knowledge isn't that advanced (like 90% of users) you'll be lucky to get any help at all.
With all the incredible advances the community has contributed to Linux sometimes Windows is still necessary.
Counter point away...
Re:Linux on the desktop... (Score:2, Funny)
This sounds like a line from an A.A. meeting.
Hello, my name is Ann, and I've been Windows-free for 3 years.
Everyone: Hi, Ann!!
Re:Linux on the desktop... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Linux on the desktop... (Score:3, Funny)
We Linux/UNIX users/admins/developers don't really care right now whether you can see your devices or not. We care if the system is stable, bug free, has drivers for all the hardware, is secure and efficient. When you do things the right way the first time it always takes longer and it might even be a bit harder, but when its finished there will be no alternatives because noone else took the time to do it
Lindows has a live distribution (Score:3, Informative)
I only want Chandler on my desktop if.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I only want Chandler on my desktop if.. (Score:3, Informative)
Of Linux and Betamax... (Score:3, Interesting)
Moreso, when the competitor is a monopolistic giant of a corporation, entrenched in a significant portion of the desktop market for about 10 years now.
Let's just hope that desktop Linux doesn't suffer the same fate as Betamax in the disastrous Betamax/VHS battle. That's atleast one instance that I can recall, in which a superior product failed before a better marketed product.
Linux is still waiting in the wings (Score:3, Insightful)
That's what they said a few years ago. And that's probably what they'll be saying a few years from now. Don't get me wrong, I like Linux. But it's just not for mom and pop and I doubt it ever will be given who is working on it and what they've been doing.
Linux innovates very little except in technological areas. It's GUIs even today fall short of Windows and Mac GUIs, and several years from now I don't expect Linux will catch up. I don't see MS or Apple kicking back sipping pina coladas at the poolside.
I think alot of great work has been done in Linux and I'm a Linux user myself, but not as my primary desktop. Linux is an OS made for geeks by geeks that love to push the geek envelope. That's great stuff in and of itself, but it's not going to put Linux in the mainstream.
And does it want to be mainstream? Do Linux users want it to be mainstream? For the most part, I think not. When asking a technical question in Linux circles, the responses you get range from apathetic to offensive. RTFM! NEWB! It's pretty rare you actually get someone with a little compassion that has felt your pain and is willing to help you out.
Everything about Linux (and Unix in general) seems to be as if it is some kind of rite of passage. You must fight the bear without weapons, then you must walk the fire barefooted and then you must master Unix! It is that final task at which the brave warrior often stumbles...
Re:Linux is still waiting in the wings (Score:5, Informative)
Not many have said as much in as few words.
"It's GUIs even today fall short of Windows and Mac GUIs"
I find KDE desktop behavior to be vastly superior to that provided by Windows. Try opening a full screen browser and a smaller window over it. Now try to navigate in the browser _without obscuring the smaller window_. This is but one example, and maybe it can even be done in Windows, but I've never seen it, heard of it or stumbled across it drunk.
"It's pretty rare you actually get someone with a little compassion that has felt your pain and is willing to help you out."
You aren't looking for help in the right places then. I've never been flamed while (groups.)googling. Or are you looking for a live hand-holder on IRC and/or simply can't/won't actually read any documentation?
"Everything about Linux (and Unix in general) seems to be as if it is some kind of rite of passage."
What can I say but that yes, it basically treats you like a fscking adult who has some grasp of fundamental computing principles. Some of us find that incredibly refreshing. Actually though, this is what distributions are for IMNSHO. RedHat and Mandrake or whatever for grandma and Debian and Slackware (or roll-your-own for crying out loud) for people who want more control and less automated hand-holding.
Argh, it's the same thing, over and over and over and over....
Re:Linux is still waiting in the wings (Score:3, Funny)
- RTFM
- if you don't get it, you don't understand computers enough
- distro zealotry is alive and well
Oh yeah, once again I remember why Linux isn't big on the desktop yet.
Re:Linux is still waiting in the wings (Score:3, Insightful)
"they expect adoption of desktop Linux to increase over the next few years"
That's what they said a few years ago. And that's probably what they'll be saying a few years from now. Don't get me wrong, I like Linux. But it's just not for mom and pop and I doubt it ever will be given who is working on it and what they've been doing.
Have you ever heard of the term "Strategic Advantage"? When we get Mom and Pop to use Lindows, we get o
Re:Linux is still waiting in the wings (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what they said a few years ago. And that's probably what they'll be saying a few years from now. Don't get me wrong, I like Linux. But it's just not for mom and pop and I doubt it ever will be given who is working on it and what they've been doing.
You've nailed it here. It's not that Linux can't compete with Windows in areas like ease of use and prettiness. It's that the people doing the grunt work on the OS don't care (or at least haven't cared until recently) about those things. This has been a real problem.
Fortunately (for me, if nobody else), I am a bit more optimistic than you are. Even 3 years ago I would have never even considered running Linux on my home machine - I would have literally laughed if you'd suggested it. Not because I thought Linux was a bad OS, but because I saw it as kludgy, crotchety, cranky, geeky, difficult to use, difficult to look at, impossible to set up, and a bear to run. Today, I am running that same Linux on two PC's in my home and I am looking forward to the day that I can ditch Windows completely.
Linux has come a long way in the past few years in the desktop area. Yes, I still had to buy my Linux for Dummies to get everything working right, and I've read more than my share of how-to's, usenet postings and other helpful articles around the net to get me out of jams. This is very different from Windows XP, which more or less works right and looks nice out of the box for 99% of people, with no configuration whatsoever. But it's at least at the point now that I can do it, which, as someone with very little technical knowledge (software-wise) and an attention span of a gnat, is a major milestone to me. It will only continue to get better, especially now that the focus is clearly shifting to desktop users (the server stuff seems pretty well in hand).
Install apt-get (which is an application whose importance I don't think has been fully realized yet) and Linux is nearly as easy to use as Windows. In fact, with apt-get in some ways it's easier - download and setup wrapped into one, no worries about missing dependencies, and if you want an app you just pick it from the list (in Synaptic, if you have it installed) and apt-get goes out and gets everything you need. apt-get with the Synaptic graphical interface really needs to be installed and configured by default in every Linux distro. This is the kind of thing desktop users need and expect, and it's the kind of thing Linux developers are finally picking up on.
Aesthetically, I think you pick your poison, really, and at this point it's up to the distro makers how aesthetically pleasing they can/want to make their interface. Red Hat, I think, is doing a really good job of it - everything in RH9 looks consistent and professional, at least to the level of Windows 2000. No, it's not at the eye candy level of XP or the insane Mac OSX (which I honestly find distracting after an hour or so of use - it's too much), but it's fine, and it's not far behind. Other distro makers are making a go of it, but I haven't seen anyone else really integrate the look as well as Red Hat yet. They will all get there eventually, though.
I'm not worried, and in fact I'm confident that with all this attention now being paid to desktop Linux, it'll catch up fast. The developers just need to give desktop ease of use and interface issues some attention, and they are.
What Linux does need is more professional graphic designers and interface designers donating their time - development is still dominated by programmers and programmers alone are not going to build a desktop OS to truly compete with Windows. Real attention is going to need to be paid to integrating the interface both functionally and visually, and it's going to need to be paid by those that know what they're doing in those areas. But we're getting there... KDE and Gnome have both come a long way recently along with Linux itself, and hairy but important issues like font rendering are in the process of being worked out as well. All of these are things that need to be done to attract desktop users, and they are now finally getting done.
My beef (Score:5, Insightful)
Really my main beef with linux is how hard it is to set the thing up when you haven't gone through the process in the last six months. I generally forget what the config file is named that I'm interested in, or where it happens to be located. Frankly, any setting that most users will have to change at some point in their life should be easily accessible through the GUI menu system.
I will admit that it is a heck of a lot better than it used to be, but I still have to do a bit of googling to get my linux system usable. Windows on the other hand, you can go to the control panel and what you want to change will likely be in there somewhere, unless it's application specific, and you don't have to read any manuals or docs to figure out how to configure your system - it's intuitive.
Re:My beef (Score:3, Insightful)
Photoshop on Linux? (Score:3, Interesting)
The pdf states that "...one of the studios commissioned an open source company to make Adome Photoshop run under Linux. Thanks to the open source development process, all Linux users can now run Photoshop on their desktop"
Anyone have any info on this? Photoshop is one of the last things keeping our web designer under the giant Windows thumb so I'd love to get more details. The Adobe site only mentions Linux in relation to the PDF reader, all other references I could find were about the crossover plugin.
And no, please don't extol the virtues of the Gimp - I've tried that...
Re:Photoshop on Linux? (Score:4, Informative)
I still think you're missing the boat with Gimp, but that is another story. To answer your question, you're looking for Crossover Office 2.0. This version adds support for Photoshop version 7.0 and earlier. The review I read said performance and installation (of both Crossover and photoshop) were not problems.
My review: (Score:2, Funny)
Document:
Slashdot:
Bottom Line:
Here we go again... (Score:2)
Linux will never be "ready" for the desktop. Neither will Solaris, AIX, IRIX, *BSD, or HP-UX. *nix is for servers and hackers, not Joe Sixpack and his PC. To succeed on the desktop, you need a UI designed for the LEAST computer-literate people out there, it has to support ANY hardware they can throw at it, installing/removing software has to be easy, etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Besides, if Linux did gain wide acceptance as a desktop OS, we would all lose our elite status and have to go back to VMS.
Re:Here we go again... (Score:4, Insightful)
I do agree with your analysis of the state of the Linux UI, but Apple has demostrated that you can put an effective and attractive GUI on a unix machine.
Re:Here we go again... (Score:2)
Error, here. (Score:2)
Better or easier have nothing to do with anything.
Network marketing is everything. Absolutely everything.
In the end, nothing else matters.
I wish it weren't so, but it is.
Re:Here we go again... (Score:2)
But who's desktop do you want Linux on? (Score:3, Interesting)
No-one's actually defined who's desktop they want to aim at.
Now, if it's the corporate desktop then distributions should concentrate on a small number of bullet-proof applications included on the CD's. They should be set up so that they're designed to be "plug-and-play" when it comes to setting them up for a specific task and they should only allow the admin to change the look and feel etc. After all, it's an interchangeable office tool like a desklamp. Or it should be.
If it's the desktop of Aunty May then they should target with a few, easily used and bullet proof set of applications and a desktop which is very simple to use and only does a few things but does them extremely well.
If the desktop is for the computer hobbyist then they need a core set of programs which are bullet proof and a desktop which is customisable etc. In addition to this a lot of optional toys should be available.
Now, which of these "desktops" do you want to conquer?
In my opinion, for the last two, Apple have got the right mix with MacOS X, so Linux distributions could do worse than following Apple's ideas on combing novice usability with UNIX nutter complexity.
No operating system I've seen does the "desklamp" type interchangable desktop system all that well other than maybe Sun's SunRays and other thin clients, but they rely upon server CPU to run the applications.
Did we already forget... (Score:2)
Nothing new (Score:5, Funny)
Nothing new. I've had Linux on my desktop for years.
One of these days maybe I'll open the box and install it.
Re:Nothing new (Score:2)
I used to have a Microsoft Windows CD. I haven't seen it for years and have no idea where it is.
Linux on the Desktop (Score:3, Informative)
It is *ready*. It is usable. Even my wife gets it when she sits down at my machine. The only caveat is minor installations for the browser (Flash mainly).
I'm an avid Gnome user - but applications such as K3B for burning, Gaim, even Grip are easy enough to use for an average user.
The article did a fantastic job by going into details by category, and then summing up the good and the bad, and I like the smilies.
Works for me... (Score:2)
Sure, if Linux was no longer 'sexy' I might have to give up playing some new releases (UT2k3 for example, or NWN) but I could live with that - the Quake engines were opened up way before Linux was a buzzword and they are still fun to play. There might have been more GPL game development too that way.
So in the long run all of the
What does this title do to RMS's blood pressure? (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, he can get a bit annoying with the whole GNU/lunix thing, but even the most resolutely ignorant commentator should be able to distinguish between KDE/GNOME, and the linux kernel running under it. Normally it wouldn't bother me, but they are primarily talking about the desktops here.
If you think this is splitting hairs, how many reviewers do you think would know how to tell the difference between KDE 3.1.0 running on top of linux and the same desktop running on top of BSD?
At work maybe, but not likely at home (Score:3, Interesting)
Linux needs better support for hot-plugged devices, a better GUI, easier configuration, a cleaner file system, and better applications.
By far, the majority of home computer users care about ease of use and simplicity rather than configurablity. They want applications and hardware that are easy to install and use. This is something that GNU/Linux with XFree86 does not have. And, it will have to change before Desktop Linux is common in the home.
Check my journal for further thoughts on this.
A Linux Newbie's Perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
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).
Re:A Linux Newbie's Perspective (Score:3, Interesting)
I've not seen any credible evidence to back this up. I agree with your two numbered points; however, this addendum is from the perspective of a self-admitted 15-year
Re:A Linux Newbie's Perspective (Score:5, Interesting)
Keep in mind that you're evaluating a primarily server-oriented distro there. If you want to see how well a linux desktop can work, you really need to check out one of the desktop-oriented distros, like Knoppix, possibly Mandrake, or maybe even Lindows.
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!
Even though I don't agree with everything you say, you deserve your insightful mods for this point alone. Linux is, and has been, ready for Gramma for quite some time, and I have the experience to prove it.
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.
Here, I think we're seeing your bias from having been exposed to a server-oriented distro. The more desktop-oriented distros have solved both of these problems to a much higher degree than RH has. Or needs to - the servers actually benefit from the CLI, as it makes mass, remote administration much easier in general.
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 one is still a valid point. On the other hand, as more corporate desktops and grandmas get Linux installed for them, the more "click here to install the Linux version" links we'll see. This one will be solved before too much longer.
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.
Here I really disagree with you. Spare me the "fact" claim about what is, honestly, just your opinion. The real issue here is not "strength-in-diversity" - that's just a fringe benefit for those of us who aren't average users. The real issue is the openness of things like file formats. When you use MSOFfice, you're dealing with a vendor who wants to shut out the competition (and this is true even with proprietary software vendors who don't have a monopoly). When you're dealing with FLOSS, you're dealing with people who want to maximize interoperability. Thus, Gnome and KDE get closer and closer, day by day, and it becomes less important all the time which (if either) you use.
Of course, we're not there yet, and time could prove you right, but I seriously tend to doubt that you are. This is a whole new ballgame, played by different rules, and assumptions based on the old rules are quite likely to be wrong.
You need to focus on sales (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft didn't get to market dominance by ignoring their customers. The problem they have had in the past has been a pit bull aggression toward their competitors. This often left the customer with half finished products, but their early focus was to move the product closer to what the customer wanted at all times. Their focus has changed now that they dominate the market, but their competitive drive still remains on steroids.
Compare that to a Linux vendor who was supposed to speak at our company today. They set up two consecutive meetings with our company and a LUG to show how their software would not only provide a good user experience, but would also convince skeptical IT personnel that their product was a ready replacement or alternative to Windows.
They decided to 'no-show'. And they did it without providing adequate notice. Through their actions, they have told both organizations they scheduled meetings with that the customer is not important.
I know that things go afoul and that sometimes a scheduled event must be cancelled. But if Microsoft had scheduled the meeting where they thought they could have an opportunity to get to a competitors customer, they would have shipped a sales representative with a 102 degree Fahrenheit fever rather than 'no-show'.
That is why they dominate the desktop market, and probably will for years to come.
Linux is not ready for the desktop. (Score:3, Insightful)
What most people don't get... (Score:4, Interesting)
Every so often, another 10 or 12 M$ users get fed up an try Linux. Two or three stick with it. Every now and again a few hundred people buy a Lindows-based cheap PC from Walmart.com. [walmart.com]. Most of those keep using it because it's simple and runs pretty good. Every now and then one of us geeks gets fed up, decides to try Linux, needs the skills for our jos, etc... and we're hooked. The rest is history.
The whole Open Source community is a different way of thinking. It's a whole new world that takes some getting used to. Once on board, however, a small percentage of the "users" become the "contributors". With more contributors, more problems get fixed, more features get added, more things are moved to the new environment.
As more people move to the new environment, more commercial vendors of those really cool apps decide it's worth the cost to port their apps. From Games to server-side to productivity, more new commercial apps are deciding to join the fray.
As this "war of attrition" continues, we slowly reach the point refered to as "critical mass". That is where the percentage of users is high enough, the ease of use is good enough, and the level of "public expertise" is great enough that the Joe Sixpacks out their don't see a difference and start choosing Linux on purpose (or maybe just gets it because it's already loaded on the PC he wants and "oh, this one IS cheaper isn't it...")
At that point, M$ quickly loses it's $ and becomes the fringe radical OS, much like what happened to OS/2 and nearly happened to Mac/OS.
Something that is free (as in freedom), almost free (as in I didn't have to pay --much-- for it), and has a huge following that is constantly improving it will continue to increase in market share until it is the dominant player.
In the long term (that may be a few or many years) the only people not adopting OSS will be the dinosaurs that refuse to change and have a rabid, unexplainable attachment to the M$ OS.
As far as being a "threat to the software market", markets change over time. If a large group of people are willing to build, for free, the commodity pieces, then there is no market to sustain those software makers.
In a "for instance": Netscape went out of business (yea, I know, AOL bought them... they still went out of business!!!) because M$ decided to offer their new, buggy browser for free. Now, M$ is going to go out of business because the public has decided to offer their new, not quite as shiney, OS for free.
In the same vain, Oracle has, arguably, the best RDMS on the market, AND IT RUNS ON LINUX. None of the OSS dbms packages can really compete on their scale... yet. It is realy only a matter of time before the scalability, stability, and breadth of services of one or more of these OSS dbmss catch up or even pass Oracle. It will still take a while after that point for widespread adoption to kick in. I don't see that happening for another 7 to 15 years.
M$, however, only has about 2 to 4 years left in their profit cycle... and they know it. That's why they are getting soooo nasty. Linux has already passed them up on general stability and scalability. It's really only the flashy stuff that remains to be polished.
Yea, OSS will take over the market, with only a few niches left for commercial apps. The app vendors that don't port will go quicker because non-ported specialty apps give a valid target for the OSS crowd. (Take not Sdobe, Autodesk, Intuit, Macromedia etc...) A popular movement, like OSS, is like a train: get on board and enjoy the ride or stand in the way and get squished...
'nuff said...
Commodification? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm pretty sure this isn't a word.
Re:Commodification? (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictio
One entry found for commodify.
Main Entry: commodify
Pronunciation: k&-'mä-d&-"fI
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -fied; -fying
Date: 1982
: to turn (as an intrinsic value or a work of art) into a commodity
- commodification
Well (Score:5, Interesting)
Now if their competition somehow cuts costs using Linux and outmaneuvers them they will be answer to their share holders. But if they can somehow leverage proprietary software to make their business work more efficiently then it is still possible Linux might not become the dominant OS.
Speaking from experience I serious doubt proprietary software can be as dynamic and efficient as OSS. But I will give them the benefit of the doubt.
Listen up folks. Proprietary software NEEDS all the help it can get. Because we all know software doesn't build itself.
Re:Leverage (Score:4, Insightful)
Linux isn't ready for the desktop but there are people out there willing to attempt to get it as close as they can.
"An Outlook Killer" is something that apparently people feel is necessary but what I feel is necessary is an IE browser (no, no matter what anyone says Mozilla doesn't perform anything close to how IE does, and yes, I have used both (Mozilla in Windows and Linux, and IE on Windows)).
No IRIX workstation was ready for the desktop as what we consider it today, believe me.
Windows and apparently MacOSX are ruling the desktop and will most likely continue to do so.
We are seeing movement towards Linux on the desktop but it's still got a LONG way to go. I guess as people become more and more concerned with getting it there, the timeframe will continue to shrink.
Just my worthless
Re:Leverage (Score:3, Insightful)
if you mean a single browser then yes...Mozilla 1.5 will be that....it is called firebird.
Re:Leverage (Score:3, Interesting)
Openoffice has a little ways to go before that happens but I did have one instance where someone asked me if I knew of a replacement of MS office. Apparently
Re:Leverage (Score:4, Funny)
And that's a bad thing?
Re:Leverage (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Leverage (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Leverage (Score:2)
Re:Leverage (Score:2)
Re:Leverage (Score:2)
Re:Leverage (Score:3, Insightful)
For me it's the exact opposite. WinXP seems like an utter mess that is coated with "eyecandy" that I can't imagine anyone enjoying or tolerating longer than a week willingly. Mac OS X with aqua looks nice for a while but no thanks, I just want a nice and clean desktop. I think GNOME does a very good job at this and KDE ain't bad either.
Seems to
Re:Leverage (Score:2)
Re:Outlook (Score:5, Funny)
Are you sure you didn't find the spell check helpful?
Re:The next few years.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The next few years.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The next few years.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The next few years.. (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, I can see him now... in his 50 million dollar mansion fistfulls of $1000 bills in each hand nervously cowering under his bed. Can't sleep the penguins will eat me. Can't sleep the penguins will eat me.
penguins... penguins... penguins... can't sleep.
But don't worry tommorow he has a swim in his money vault planned -- to take his mind of things.
Huh? (Score:2)
Re:PDF? (Score:5, Insightful)
(not to mention that every "desktop" distro in the past two or three years has come with a pdf viewer by default
Re:PDF? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, they do if they want to know: (a) what to do to improve Linux so others to use it on the desktop; and/or (b) how to promote Linux on the desktop.
Re:PDF? (Score:2)
Re:PDF? (Score:2)
Re:PDF? (Score:2)
It only takes one good viewer to view the file. xpdf worked find for me. Also, the only good viewer I can think of (off the top of my head; I know there are others out there somewhere) for windows is acrobat. For Linux, I know of xpdf, acrobat, and ghostview off the top of my head.
Nothing if you want to only view it on a screen. YMMV, but I've found pdf'
Re:PDF? (Score:3, Insightful)
Slow stuff sucks (Score:2, Insightful)
Good grief. We often spent half the class time starting the computers.
And while I'm on the topic of slow, I tried out Knoppix 3.2 the other day. It was slow and bloated and couldn't keep up when it was playing some MP3s (I
Re:Linux poised for desktop failure: Gartner (Score:5, Funny)
In 1999, they claimed that Apache was not that good and that IIS would crush it in about 1-2 years.
In 2000, they said that Linux would occupy about 1 % of the servers on the web (totally ignoring that netcraft already showed Linux as being on more than 10% of the web servers at that time)
In 2001, they said that
So, here is my prediction:
Gartner is worthless and will be losing a lot of money in the course of the next 2 years.
Re:Fix application installations! (Score:3, Insightful)
Installers in Linux can easily set up shortcuts, menu items, or display a message during the install