Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Linux Business Software Linux

The Failures Of Desktop Linux 882

PDAJames writes "Maybe Linux isn't quite ready for the desktop after all. After an earlier, very positive evaluation of SuSE Linux Desktop, ZDNet UK has carried out a more in-depth review, running the system in a production environment for two weeks, and found it wanting. A key problem area was interacting with the corporate Windows network. When will this stuff finally be ironed out?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Failures Of Desktop Linux

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 28, 2003 @07:29PM (#6554685)
    interoperability between its DEs. I think that says a lot here: []
  • Re:Other boxen (Score:5, Informative)

    by Scorpion265 ( 650012 ) on Monday July 28, 2003 @07:33PM (#6554721)
    Actualy, Linux supports Appletalk, and OS X supports NFS. There really isn't a need for samba in a non windows environment. I also believe there will be support for Rendevous in *nix soon too.
  • by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Monday July 28, 2003 @07:47PM (#6554840) Journal
    You can move the database backend to postgres or whatnot, and keep the Access frontend, while you write up a new frontend in PHP or whatever your favorite language is. It's what we're doing, slowly. Of course, some of the databases are jumping directly from obselete Lotus Approach to postgres/PHP, a fine example of the perils of proprietary software lockin.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 28, 2003 @08:00PM (#6554933)
    If you really need proper windows domain authentication etc with minimal hassles, then you should consider Xandros.

    For further information check out the following article. 6. html

    Xandros Server is due anytime soon, and Xandros Desktop 2.0 should be due out around November or thereabouts.

    While its an excellent distro, not enough people know about its merits. It is the best distro for the corporate desktop where, integration into a windows environment is important.
  • Re:Not exactly fair (Score:2, Informative)

    by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Monday July 28, 2003 @08:04PM (#6554966) Journal
    The pitfalls of being quoted out of context. :)
  • by kyz ( 225372 ) on Monday July 28, 2003 @09:08PM (#6555448) Homepage
    showmount --all remoteservername

    It's just a case of one being graphical and one being a command program. Hire your favourite 14 year old nephew to program a Network Neighbourhood GUI that uses nmap, rpcinfo and showmount. Or teach the GUI users to use nmap, rpcinfo and showmount.
  • by /dev/trash ( 182850 ) on Monday July 28, 2003 @11:49PM (#6556321) Homepage Journal
    When will this stuff finally be ironed out?

    Microsoft's lack of open standards with stuff it develops?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 29, 2003 @12:52AM (#6556668)
    I had an AVI whose codec Intel made propriatery so only 2000 would play it (XP would send me to a page to purchase it) on Linux it playes great with MPlayer.
  • by ThatMadeNoSense ( 651445 ) on Tuesday July 29, 2003 @01:15AM (#6556764) Homepage Journal
    we would have more problems then you might think.

    That made no sense.

    Unless your just being a stubborn nix player.

    That made no sense.

    your talking about training hundreds of employes

    That made no sense.

  • by Dalcius ( 587481 ) on Tuesday July 29, 2003 @02:11AM (#6556965)
    "An infrastructure is not ripped out and replaced in a day -- or even two. I doubt that we'll see Linux being used for wholesale replacements of corporate desktops in the near future. Until that day does come, Linux needs to play nice with the current prevailing technology."

    For certain desktop aspects? Yes. Linux needs to play nicely, users aren't going to compromise.

    That said, I think it's very fair to argue that with the same corporate setup (IT guys doing all software administration for 90% of employees), Linux does fine for the vast majority. The hardest part of using Linux is getting programs installed and working and configured, which is all an admin job. Like it or not, the rest is generally pie. Most Linux applications (Galeon, Gaim, AbiWord, Evolution) all have very easy-to-use GUIs. I don't see Linux lacking here.

    I'm sure some folks will correct me, and I'm sure that even more will nitpick here, but how well did Windows work with UNIX? Can it do NFS well? Kerberos? All the client software worked with UNIX I would assume, but somehow I doubt that NT was extremely UNIX friendly upon its introduction. Somehow I don't see the "new technologies must be friendly" in this instance. Can anyone (intelligently) point out a flaw in my logic? (it's late)

  • Listen in... (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 29, 2003 @02:29AM (#6557031)
    News flash...

    Windows is the market leader, it's everywhere,
    and since windows holds 95% share of the desktop computers linux has to play by it's rules...
    Joe user dosen't care if it's windows, mac or linux, the only thing that counts is that they have their mail (outlook?), office and other apps and that their familiar enviroment. And in my opinion linux isn't quite ready for the desktop..

    As a long time windows user (and linux dualobooting since rh 5.0) I finnaly tried to make linux my primary desktop... ehh.. afther a couple of months, I reinstalled xp.. and just a few weeks ago I tried MacOS X at a friend, and you know what? I Switches, and never looked back, I bought myself nice 15" powerbook.. everything is just so slick and smooth and it just WORKS!

    until linux gets atleast the half of the slickness of xp or os x it has no chance, really.
  • by stefanvt ( 75684 ) on Tuesday July 29, 2003 @03:33AM (#6557187)
    Exactly, the German army, albeit the most modern and surely the most mechanized army of it's day in Europe, relied heavily on horses.

    But in 1940 their panzers were inferior to e.g. the French, unfortunately the French used them in a way that was outdated (only in support of infantry, WWI style) while the Germans used them in a superior way (as the spear point of their army).

  • by WWE-TicK ( 593858 ) on Tuesday July 29, 2003 @12:00PM (#6559989)
    > What about laptops? You'd have to remount > every time it comes back on the network, Use an automounter like BSD amd or autofs. Export the map file via NIS, and all the client needs to do is join the NIS domain, start the automounter, and then be able to access the network filesystems on-demand. Almost like magic! Also, you can play some neat tricks with how the automounter figures out what network filesystems to mount. For example, you can do a "cd /usr/local/programs" on the client and have the automounter mount "/export/programs/ia32-linux" if you're on a x86 Linux box or "/export/programs/mips-irix" if you're on a IRIX box. You can also start incoporating things like load balancing and redundancy while all being totally transparent to the user. So in short, all the tools you need to do what you describe exist in the UNIX world and have been around for more than 10 years. All it takes is a competent administrator to bring it all together.

"Well, it don't make the sun shine, but at least it don't deepen the shit." -- Straiter Empy, in _Riddley_Walker_ by Russell Hoban