Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
IBM Software Linux

IBM Releases Desktop Linux Presentation 364

Posted by simoniker from the slide-8-particularly-choice dept.
An anonymous reader writes "DesktopLinux.com, in coordination with the Desktop Linux Consortium, is making select presentations from Monday's groundbreaking Desktop Linux conference at Boston University's Corporate Education Center available. Sessions from the well-received program included talks from key companies and open source projects bringing Desktop Linux into the enterprise. The first presentation available is from IBM's Sam Docknevich, Linux and Grid Services Executive for IBM Global Services and is titled "Open Source Desktop - Directions for today... and Tomorrow". His presentation discusses IBM's push into the Linux desktop market, an initiative from inside Big Blue."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IBM Releases Desktop Linux Presentation More

IBM Releases Desktop Linux Presentation

Comments Filter:

  • IMHO, Open source is bad for the economy (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:17PM (#7483365)
    It annoys me that Linux developers try to compete with commercial companies. Listen: you are destroying bussiness! Sun will probably be the first casualty. With no commercial companies left, there will be no innovation. I propose the following "constitution" for open source developers:

    1) I will freely license my code for use in commercial products (ie, use BSD license not GPL.)
    2) If a commercial equivalent exists for what I'm developing, I will not try to market it as a replacement for the commercial product.
    3) My software will not be targeted at the average consumer (read: no easy to use UI, no easy installation process).

    So basically, you can develop research software, specialized software, etc. But please, if no-one buys MS Office and d/ls openoffice instead, innovation in word processors and spreadsheets will stop. We do not want this.

    • Re:IMHO, Open source is bad for the economy (Score:5, Funny)

      by andrewa ( 18630 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:22PM (#7483391)
      Hey Bill G./Steve B., you forgot to log in.
    • So basically, you want OSS people to innovate for you (most innovation comes out of research institutions, which open source a lot of their work) and then you want to use their work for free? Tough nuggets. Compete or go to a communist country where they ban competition.

    • Re:IMHO, Open source is bad for the economy (Score:4, Insightful)

      by cduffy ( 652 ) <charles+slashdot@dyfis.net> on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:36PM (#7483460)
      Please -- nobody's innovated in word processors or spreadsheets for years. What "innovative" new versions are, to 99% of users, is cost centers. Open source software shares development costs, and so reduces the costs of the businesses using it.

      Being able to build a business that's doing something truly innovative while using zero-cost, open source software as building blocks means those engaged in true innovation are spending less for the privilege of being able to do business -- which means there's more money left to fund real innovation rather than throwing money away on licenses for software which reached the plateau of its usefulness years ago.

      Yes, I know, IHBT; I'll be sure to HAND.
    • Wow. This post is so off-base I don't know where to begin. Call me a conspiracy theorist geek, but I'd bet that you're some kind of microsoft employee.

      #1 is stupid: why should I automatically let somebody commercialize code that I've been working on for free with the intent that my code shall be freely distributed? Corporations should not be able to feed off the open source community for commercial purposes.

      #2 is even dumber: if there is a commercial product out there, anybody should be able to work

    • Re:IMHO, Open source is bad for the economy (Score:5, Informative)

      by One Louder ( 595430 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:41PM (#7483485)
      This makes sense if you believe that all of the economy resulting from software is generated by the developers/publishers.

      However, you're forgetting about the users - many businesses rely on OSS, which they would not be able to afford to run using the equivalent Microsoft or Sun solution, at least when starting it up.

      More importantly, we are in a situation where an abusive monopoly runs viable commercial alternatives out of business, which is certainly not healthy for the software ecosystem. OSS is turning out to be one of the few forces keeping some of these commercial companies in line.

      So, yes, some older business models will fail, but others will replace them. I won't cry anoy more for Sun that I would for the monks who lost their jobs creating illuminated manuscripts .

    • The cry of the buggy whip manufacturer...with the gaul to make it look noble or even patriotic.
      1. It annoys me that Linux developers try to compete with commercial companies.

      Most programs are customized for a specific set of users, not off the shelf. Open Source fits right in with that and helps *MY* business.

      If you don't want competition, then don't ignore those markets in the first place! The vast majority of projects I see are started because there *isn't* a commercial company in that segment or t

  • Amusing (Score:5, Funny)

    by whig ( 6869 ) * on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:17PM (#7483370) Homepage Journal
    I really liked this picture [desktoplinux.com]. (Bill Gates getting bitten by a penguin.)

    • Re:Amusing (Score:2, Informative)

      by 110010001000 ( 697113 )
      Too bad that slide is factually incorrect. It clains that in order to migrate to .NET you need significant retraining and redevelopment.

      Well um, I am using .NET technologies right now and I don't see it. Still looks like a Windows app to me. Needless to say the "old" Win32 apps still work fine in .NET too.

      • Re:Amusing (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Brandybuck ( 704397 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:24PM (#7483397) Homepage Journal
        It's a whole different widget look! Aaaargh! If Linux can't make any headway on the desktop because GTK+ widgets don't look like Qt widgets, then why are we letting Microsoft get away with .NET widgets that don't look like MFC widgets?
        • why are we letting Microsoft get away with .NET widgets that don't look like MFC widgets

          Perhaps because Windows Forms are intended to be a replacement for MFC, rather than a complement to them? On the other hand, no-one (well, nearly no-one) is suggesting that GTK+ is a replacement for Qt...

  • Where's Sun? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Sun has the Java Desktop System, which will be both Linux and Solaris. How come they aren't there?

    Fortress of Insanity [homeunix.org]
    Blogzine [blogzine.net]

  • I sadly feel abused (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Linux Desktops are commercially available (e.g. Ximian) is written on one of these slides. I feel so abused for my volunteer work on GNOME.
    • I beleive the intent was to comfort PHB's who only go for comercially available products, regardless of the price or actual differences. Also, Ximian does some nice polishing work.

  • Question? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by niko9 ( 315647 ) * on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:30PM (#7483431)
    What's to prevent IBM from releasing an all in one Linux desktop solution? Linux + IBM Power PC + a IBM reference desktop motherboard? Something with AGP, built in sound, USB 2.0 and firewire.

    Why woudn't IBM want to do this. Could mass adoption of these chips drive their prices down and make them competetive with INtel and AMD chips?

    Would that make sense? If not, why so?

    -

    • Re:Question? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:40PM (#7483480) Homepage Journal
      IBM has traditionally had problems releasing hardware with a good price point. I'm not really sure why this is. They have also always had a serious problem making computers which look cool. Take a look at the PS/Valuepoints if you don't believe me; when they came out, even all the cheapest PC clones looked better than that.

      IBM can make far more money selling services. PowerPC really offers no tangible advantage for the average desktop system over x86's descendants.

      • Thinkpads have been the best-looking laptops for years, and they've actually had some pretty snazzy looking servers. Surely they can translate this into some form of desktop or tower.

    • Re:Question? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ducomputergeek ( 595742 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:52PM (#7483531)
      Well, there is one that FreeBSD + PPC with AGP, sound, USB 2, and firewire.

      It's called Apple Macintosh with OS X.

      • But IBM designed the PowerPC 970, which is what the G5 is based on. Nothing is stopping IBM from selling PPC970 computers to consumers, with Linux preinstalled. And maybe Apple would finally deflate their prices, if they got some competition.
    • What's to prevent IBM from releasing an all in one Linux desktop solution? Linux + IBM Power PC + a IBM reference desktop motherboard?

      Because if it flopped it would steal a lot of momentum from both PowerPC and Linux. It's a risky business, and IBM has good technology. It's better to hedge your bets by keeping things separate, especially when you are trying to convince customers.
    • Patents.

      And lots of them. IBM holds a whole load of patents on pretty much anything even vaguely software related (MS and SCO both know about that :).

      The GPL places quite stringent rules on distributing patented software -- if IBM is going to distribute Linux, they must license those patents for everyone's use. Which, given that patents are the tactical nuclear arms of the software litigation industry, is not likely to please the higher-ups at Big Blue.

      Hence, IBM contracts out the OS supply to other comp
  • I like how instant messaging is disabled for every type of desktop... why bother including it on the graph then?
    • Cause not having it is an important bit of info. Instant messaging is a bane to security and regulations inside many type of companies. They are illegal by law in places like hospitals and banks. Banks have to be accountable for every bit of info going out and IM doesn't allow this.

      So not having IM would be a selling point.

  • And yet: (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:35PM (#7483453)
    1) You can't buy a IBM Thinkpad unless it comes with Windows. That 'old "Microsoft tax"

    2) IBM can't be bothered to support FreeBSD on their laptops. Public case in point - the use of Type 165 for the partition that held the backup info. Private case - IBM staffer claimed they'd help with a USB implementation issue on one type of Thinkpad. (The USB doesn't work at all with FreeBSD and the only way Linux works is if you force the probe order in some wonky way.)

    3) Many of the new style Thinkpads come with the Intel wireless - the one only supported under Windows.

    I'll believe IBM cares about Open Source when they address the 3 above. Otherwise its the swapping of one corporate master for another.

    • Re:And yet: (Score:5, Informative)

      by fw3 ( 523647 ) * on Saturday November 15, 2003 @07:22PM (#7483656) Homepage Journal
      Well yeah, you're talking laptops, which are still a far cry from well supported by Linux. Look at their servers, Netfinity units I picked up on ebay nearly 3 years ago used Linux-boot cds w/ java for Raid-controller configuration.

      1. the number of buyers for thinkpads with linux is tiny. IBM has in fact shipped some models with linux pre-installed but as a general move, linux on laptops is still pretty chancy, why should they put all that effort into somthing that obviously will generate no return.

      2. See 1, if the market for Linux on laptops is small, the market for fbsd on laptops is that much smaller. As it happens I have installed fbsd on my Thinkpad, don't use usb so don't care but I do/did care that it corrupted my linux partitions and completely fails to recognize the OpenBSD disklabel.

      3. See 1. latest-hardware drivers on Linux has always lagged. with 99% of the market, sure windows drivers get written right off. Funny how revenue will cause code to get written.

      • I'm actually running Linux on a Thinkpad right now! Of course, it's a 350C (48625Mhz), and it's minimalist Slackware 9.1, but everything but the broken 9600 baud modem works. I use PCMCIA for ethernet. Of course with my DSL it's wierd to download faster that I can write to the 215MB hard drive, but it's great for writing Perl.

        Say, anyone got a spare battery for one of these?

      • Typing this from FreeBSD 4.9 on a Thinkpad X20 while pointing around the screen with a USB mouse.

        Some IBM laptops are ok.
      • 1. the number of buyers for thinkpads with linux is tiny. IBM has in fact shipped some models with linux pre-installed but as a general move, linux on laptops is still pretty chancy, why should they put all that effort into somthing that obviously will generate no return.

        That number however is quite deceptive. I work in a Linux shop, and we run GNU/Linux on virtually every machine we own, including our IBM laptops.

        However, Linux only shipped on a few low to medium end models, and of course we wanted the

    • Re:And yet: (Score:5, Insightful)

      by hbo ( 62590 ) * on Saturday November 15, 2003 @07:53PM (#7483770) Homepage
      1) You can't buy a IBM Thinkpad unless it comes with Windows. That 'old "Microsoft tax"

      Sad, but true.

      2) IBM can't be bothered to support FreeBSD on their laptops. Public case in point - the use of Type 165 for the partition that held the backup info. Private case - IBM staffer claimed they'd help with a USB implementation issue on one type of Thinkpad. (The USB doesn't work at all with FreeBSD and the only way Linux works is if you force the probe order in some wonky way.)

      That's not the case with current ThinkPads. And though it was an inexcusable blunder when they initially committed it, IBM fixed the problem with a BIOS update 3-4 months after they were pummeled by the FreeBSD community (Link to my 2 cents worth of pummeling [slashdot.org].)


      3) Many of the new style Thinkpads come with the Intel wireless - the one only supported under Windows.

      Of course, that's the case with any Centrino based laptop out there. It's Intel's worry, not IBM's.

      I'll believe IBM cares about Open Source when they address the 3 above. Otherwise its the swapping of one corporate master for another.

      Corporations are fictional legal persons. They don't "care" about anything. People within corporations do. A lot of people within IBM care about open source. Andrew Tridgell works for IBM, for example. IBM has embraced Open Source for a variety of reasons, but in my opinion they all boil down to this: Free and Open Source Software gives IBM an advantage over its rivals in the competition to sell Information Technology to global business. IBM will attempt to assist its customers in saving money through the use of
      1. Cheap hardware. This means Intel and AMD today. In the future, it could mean Power, if the latest supercomputer offering is any indication.
      2. Cheap(er) Software. This avoids the Microsoft tax and "sticks it to" a major competitor. IBM isn't pretending that free-as-in-beer software is actually cost free.
      3. Superior services. IGS is poised to win a lot of business helping customers realize cost savings by switching to the first two bullets.

      IBM has lots of other irons in the fire with regard to Linux, but those are the ones I see most clearly. The fact that they are focussing on Linux and not FreeBSD is a function of the marketplace. Linux is the OS that the largest percentage of the FOSS community has gotten behind. IBM wishes to leverage this energy for its own purposes.

      This may be cynical, but consider that the effort has resulted in substantial (many 100's of millions of dollars worth of) contributions of code by IBM to Linux, Java and many other projects, the hiring of many FOSS authors, to work on their own projects, substantial direct cash support for OSDL and others and the hiring of lots of folks who really do care about FOSS, though they may not be codejockies.

      Finally, IBM is fighting a lawsuit aimed at stopping the forward momentum of Linux, and by extension, the rest of FOSS. One result of this suit could be the legal validation of the GPL, which would be a huge step forward for the entire community, even those that prefer the BSD or some other license.

      So, IBM may be pursuing its own interests, but they are making a lot of moves that hugely benifit FOSS. The committment is long-term, but even if it weren't, what IBM has done up to now deserves recognition.

      Disclaimer: I now work for IBM. But I made my decision to join them by considering the points I just made.
    • You can't buy a IBM Thinkpad unless it comes with Windows. That 'old "Microsoft tax"

      I bought a Thinkpad for a relative in China, who wanted a Thinkpad because of IBM's reputation. (I had to agree with her; I've never had any problem with them hardware-wise, unlike many other laptops.) I tried to get one without Windows, not because she's a Linux user but because she would naturally prefer a Chinese-language version of Windows and the sellers in the US only sell English-language editions.

      The IBM orderin

  • TODO List For Linux Desktop (Score:4, Funny)

    by EventHorizon ( 41772 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:36PM (#7483457)
    1. Fix X to be fast, non-bloated.
    2. Fix KDE to be fast, non-bloated.
    3. Fix Gnome to be fast, non-bloated.
    4. Fix Mozilla to be fast, non-bloated.
    5. Fix OpenOffice^W^W Write a new Office Suite.

    Not trolling: Go install Fedora and see how it runs on a three year old machine. There's quite a lot of work to do.

    Also:

    6. Standardize on one version of Solitaire.

    • Not trolling: Go install Fedora and see how it runs on a three year old machine. There's quite a lot of work to do.

      Not trolling: Go install Debian Sid on a 7 year old Pentium Pro 200 w/ 64 MB RAM. With a lightweight window manager like WindowMaker, even apps like Mozzilla Firebird and Abiword are reasonably responsive. There you go: cutting edge apps that run well on obsolete hardware.

    • Re:TODO List For Linux Desktop (Score:5, Insightful)

      by spoonboy42 ( 146048 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @08:09PM (#7483824)

      Just a few notes here:

      1. Mozilla is actually quite fast, especially compared to the competition (in essence, Internet Explorer). The monolithic Internet suite approach definitely does introduce some unnecessary overhead, but as Mozilla moves towards a modular model based on Firebird and Thunderbird, you can expect this to be remedied. The only major desktop browser that's left to consider, really, is Safari. Well, as it happens, Safari is based on KHTML, and the advantages of the very lightweight and speedy Safari are all present on Linux with Konqueror (which, incidentally, doesn't have the additional CPU/GPU overhead associated with Apple's Quartz framework).

      2. X is not a bad framework. Features like network-transparency and the like are, in fact, VERY important in environments where thin-clients/servers are common. XFree86, in particular, is being forked every which way at the moment which, while at first glance seems like trouble, will probably wind up introducing some very interesting innovations, both in terms of processing and memory-efficiency and eye-candy. In the meantime, XFree86 provides a compatible, stable base that is more than fast enough on modern desktop hardware.

      3. KDE and GNOME are not one-size-fits-all desktop environments. They are designed to be flexible and extensible and, as such, they tend to be more complex than, say, XP's Luna or the Mac's Aqua (incidentally, Luna absolutely sucks eggs as far as speed and bloat go, and while Aqua is admirably efficient given all that it does, one still must consider all that it does in terms of rendering iCandy). This flexibility is not necessarily a weekness, as it allows a desktop to be tuned for a particular user's needs, ranging from thin-client type apps to my dual-display K desktop littered with SuperKaramba themes. Anyway, what I'm getting at is that feature-set vs. performance is not a huge issue on modern desktops, and in places where it is (like embedded systems) Linux has very sleek, slim alternatives that still manage to be pretty and functional (like, for example, Opie [handhelds.org]). There are also desktop alternatives available for the KDE and GNOME-hating, thanks again to the modularity of X keeping the window manager and the display server seperate, ranging from GNUStep to Ratpoison.

      4. You've got a point about OpenOffice, I must admit. It's not necessarily a bad system, but then again, it's not really anything more than an Office clone. A free and very portable Office clone, but an Office clone nonetheless. One of the good things about Linux desktop software that I mentioned above is that it doesn't try to recreate Windows or Mac with precision, but rather provide a very flexible framework that can be adapted to the user's needs. OpenOffice definitely doesn't fit in with this philosophy, but I'm sure that there are other projects going on out there working to redefine how we think of Office suites. And if not, somebody ought to get to work on that. ;)

      5. Just a side note, Fedora isn't exactly the examplar of Linux's efficiency and performance. Go Gentoo [gentoo.org]!

      What all the above boils down to is this: Does Linux have a way to go before becoming the perfect desktop OS? Certainly, and work is ongoing towards this goal. However, we must also ask another question: Is Linux, at this moment in time, a better choice than Windows or Mac for many users and businesses? Absolutely, and it's looking better every day.

      • 5. Just a side note, Fedora isn't exactly the examplar of Linux's efficiency and performance. Go Gentoo!
        >>>>>>>>>
        Hell, Debian is a big step up!
      • 5. Just a side note, Fedora isn't exactly the examplar of Linux's efficiency and performance. Go Gentoo!

        Tests [linmagau.org] don't show any significant benefit for Gentoo versus binary packaging.
        • Gentoo's advantage all depends on how heavily you optimize with default CFLAGS. I use the following on my Athlon XP:

          CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -m3dnow -msse -mfpmath=sse -mmmx -O3 -pipe -fforce-addr -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -frerun-cse-after-loop -frerun-loop-opt -falign-functions=4 -maccumulate-outgoing-args -ffast-math -fprefetch-loop-arrays"

          I haven't benchmarked this personally, but I can tell you that, qualitatively, Gentoo "feels" significantly faster than Mandrake or Debian on the same mach
          • CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -m3dnow -msse -mfpmath=sse -mmmx -O3 -pipe -fforce-addr -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -frerun-cse-after-loop -frerun-loop-opt -falign-functions=4 -maccumulate-outgoing-args -ffast-math -fprefetch-loop-arrays"

            Too bad the devloper optimized the source for CFLAGS="-O2"

    • I use linux with gnome, X11 and firebird (haven't tried mozilla) on a P133 and they are perfectably usable.

      Saying "install fedora" doesnt make the "linux desktop" slow.
    • Odd, I loaded Fedora on a P3 450 with 128 meg of RAM and it runs just fine, as well as my P4 1.7 XP + MacCrappy anti-virus work machine. Swaps a bit with Moz and OO running, but completely usable. OTOH, Redhat apparently still pulls the same old shit so check that sendmail, etc. aren't running. They loaded by default here.
    • 1. http://freedesktop.org/Software/xserver 2. kde 3.2 has speed improvements. 3. Use a simpler widget theme, I was surpised at the speed differences. 4. Use epiphany, galeon, or mozilla firebird/thunderbird. Or Konqueror/opera for a non gecko choice. 5. Ximian OpenOffice, Koffice, abiword, emacs, vi ... Redhat has always been one of the slower, more bloated distro's, try something else. 6. NEVER!
    • 1. http://freedesktop.org/Software/xserver
      2. kde 3.2 has speed improvements.
      3. Use a simpler widget theme, I was surpised at the speed differences.
      4. Use epiphany, galeon, or mozilla firebird/thunderbird. Or Konqueror/opera for a non gecko choice.
      5. Ximian OpenOffice, Koffice, abiword, emacs, vi ...

      Redhat has always been one of the slower, more
      bloated distro's, try something else.

      6. NEVER!

    • Re:TODO List For Linux Desktop (Score:4, Insightful)

      by spasm ( 79260 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @10:54PM (#7484602) Homepage
      "Not trolling: Go install Fedora and see how it runs on a three year old machine. There's quite a lot of work to do."

      Tried running OSX or WinXP on a three year old machine lately? My three year old Mac (brand new 2001) won't even let me install OSX let alone *run* it..

  • Nice reading. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by miffo.swe ( 547642 ) <daniel...hedblom@@@gmail...com> on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:37PM (#7483464) Homepage Journal
    Looks like linux has more heads on the desktop than Apple. Time for hardware companies to take linux seriously, seriously,

    The next time some hardware company excuses the missing printer driver with linux small userbase point at this new info.

    I assume most businesses arent aware of this and many of them probably only needs a pointer to some stats.

    • Looks like linux has more heads on the desktop than Apple.

      Not according to Google [google.com]. Not the most scientific poll--UAs can certainly be changed, even easier on Linux on Mac, but does really 2/3 Linux users change their UA?--but I'd be interested to know how IBM counts Linux installs.

      • Re:Nice reading. (Score:3, Insightful)

        by miffo.swe ( 547642 )
        Well most banks require certain browsers as do many uninformed websites with flawed scripts. I would presume that most users running into that kind of problems change their UA. While people like me bangs our head bloody trying to get into the webmasters thick heads to change the scripts i think most people change the user agent when his happens.

        I have not seen many sites that doesnt render in Moz but i have seen plenty of sites that wont hand any code over unless you run IE (or spoof your UA).

      • Re:Nice reading. (Score:3, Interesting)

        by incom ( 570967 )
        In my experience 1/2 of linux users that I know IRL switch thier browser identifier to IE. Konqueror(and other browsers) should make that option automatically disabled when visiting google. It's too bad these people don't just enable it for specific sites that require IE, but most of them are busy and "just can't be bothered" with it, so they stay identified as IE all the time.

  • The only thing missing... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Space cowboy ( 13680 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:38PM (#7483470) Journal
    ... from a Linux desktop is bundling by a major distributor. People use apps. Apps are available for Linux. Worst case (possibly apart from games) you can use crossover or wine...

    Simon.
    (Who's been using Linux on the desktop for the last 3 years...)

  • The Battle has just begun (Score:4, Insightful)

    by argoff ( 142580 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:47PM (#7483511)

    If you think things are bad with SCO, wait till we start to hurt Microsoft's revenue stream, then all hell will break loose. With that much at stake, things are bound to get violent.

  • Credible (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mostly a lurker ( 634878 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:47PM (#7483512)
    This is a truly excellent presentation, as we would expect from IBM. For enterprises, there are two specific aspects that will really inspire confidence:

    1. IBM has over 15,000 existing internal Linux clients and this is rapidly expanding.

    2. There is no attempt to gloss over potential issues, such as browser incompatibility with IE and weaknesses so far in supporting knowledge workers. These are accepted, but demonstrated to be applicable only to certain categories of users.

    The general message, which is convincing, is to look at each user segment separately and objectively and use Linux where it makes sense at the time.

    • browser incompatibility with IE and weaknesses so far in supporting knowledge workers

      I'm not sure what disadvantages exist for "knowledge workers" but I'm sure of the advantages. The stable platform and advanced window managers alone make place keeping and work organization much easier on free platforms. Not having to reorganize yourself every other day because your machine bluescreens is a big deal. I've never been at a loss for email clients, IM, browsers or file managers with free software. KDE's o

  • Powerpoint.... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @06:48PM (#7483516) Homepage
    Maybe before developing for Linux, IBM should develop an alternative to Powerpoint.......

    • You mean like Lotus Freelance?

    • Re:Powerpoint.... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by pllewis ( 634741 )
      Screw, powerpoint. Openoffice/Staroffice is fine with impress. Better, because it exports to PDF. My big point is with IBM, they still can't even port Lotus Notes to linux. Yes, they have the server ported, but Notes client should have been a priorty. The point is also still valid that they won't even sell you a laptop or a PC with any version of linux pre-loaded. With HP, they have it (for the desktop), but it's difficult to find on the website, and they're not any cheaper.
      • Yes, they definitely should port Lotus Notes client. My dad's company uses Notes bigtime... they certainly couldn't switch unless they had Notes.

        Of course they have a bunch of other crap they need because they insist on sticking with VMS for a lot of their products... insane.

  • path to the desktop (Score:5, Insightful)

    by b17bmbr ( 608864 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @07:02PM (#7483574)
    the path to the desktop is through the enterprise. sure, there are HUGE differences in needs, but, this is where windows started. wince it was used at the office, you needed it at home. now, with open source desktops, it is even better. sure, for many users, linux can do most things, but where it fails, i.e. video editing, plugging in a usb camera, etc. is crucial for the home users. but it does suffice for many though. now, go back to the office. linux is perfect. far better security, far easier maintanance, lower costs, etc. so, joe user needs to work on something at home, the boss says, here's a cd, install this on your computer. then linux makes headway into the home. and as that happens, drivers will be written, and maybe the bundled software will be written in cross-platform toolkits (QT, gtk, etc.) rather than win32/.NET. the tipping point my guess is somewhere around 5%.

    • Re:path to the desktop (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Tim C ( 15259 )
      far better security

      Not necessarily true. I know it's an old retort, but trust me - once Linux gains appreciable market share on the desktop, the virus and trojan writers and script kiddies will descend, and the exploits - and they're sure to exist - will be found.

      Sure, it'll be harder for them than it is with Windows, but not impossible.

      far easier maintanance

      Rubbish. Far easier for you to maintain, perhaps, and I'd even be willing to agree that proportionally, there are more clueless Windows "preten
      • it is far harder to maintain a windows based client network. period. 2 examples: remote access and powerful scripting. windows has nothing nearly as powerful. as for virus problems: not even close. the *nix model by its very nature precludes the tricks for most viruses. one, you have to make it executable (beyond most users), two, to make it work on system files, you'd have to sudo exec, it, and then you don't got root, three, most windows viruses, trojans, etc., come from intrgration model and a ho
      • trust me

        Why did I have a flashback to Joe Isuzu?

  • MSIE Compatbility (Score:2, Informative)

    by shirai ( 42309 )
    I have to say that until recently, there was one thing MSIE had that nobody else did: WYSIWYG editing.

    As a developer of web software, I'm glad I can finally support all platforms including Linux (and Mac) with the new Mozilla.

  • Problems with Gnome. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @07:26PM (#7483677)
    I think the major failiure with OpenSource (I'm saying open source because theres more than just gnu/Linux) on the Desktop is Gnome. In fact, Gnome 2.4 was awful. Gnome 2.2 was better though, and I'm glad that Sun and Ximian are sticking with that tree for now.

    Anyway, now that the LG fiasco was solved, I downloaded the Mandrake 9.2 ISOs. Such a relief from Debian with Gnome 2.4. All my hardware 'just works', no typing commandlines and Lots of sources that are easier to set up.

    I never want to touch Gnome again until they dump gconf-editor for a real configuration editor, similar to KDE control centre or TweakUI, fix the file dialog, and replace that FOOT with something tasteful. According to Section 9 of the HIG, the Gnome logo is a violation of the HIG, since no body parts are allowed in ICONS.

    So, if you want to see what a Linux desktop SHOULD be like, try Mandrake 9.2, and don't forget that KDE 3.2 is around the corner, I tried the Alpha and its FAST!

  • Linux desktop profitable for Sun already (Score:5, Informative)

    by ChrisRijk ( 1818 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @07:29PM (#7483691)
    The FCS release of Sun's Linux Desktop will start shipping soon and is expected to be profitable for Sun on release - see this article at The Register [theregister.co.uk].

    Sun have had a number of StarOffice customer wins for over 10,000 seats, and a few for the Linux desktop bundle it seems (reading around a bunch of press articles). However, most of this is outside the US - see this article [infoworld.com]:
    Not among those seeking a Microsoft desktop alternative are customers in the United States, Schwartz said. "I will be blunt in saying North America has the least sensitivity to price of any nation on Earth," he said.


    Here's another quote from him, from this article [internet.com]:
    Company Executive Vice President Jonathan Schwartz Thursday said the

    appetite outside U.S. for an alternative to Microsoft is "voracious".


  • Why are they reccomending Gnome? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 15, 2003 @07:43PM (#7483735)
    Why not kde?

    Gnome translate-o-matic

    Ever since Gnome 2.4 was released, I have found more and more gnome zealots who MUST absolutely advocate GNOME at every possible moment. Here is a guide to some of their claims, and what they really mean.

    Unlike KDE, Gnome is free
    Translation : GPL is freerer than LGPL. LGPL allows corporations like Novell and Sun to have propeitry forks and lock away their changes from the user. Now that Novell has taken over Ximian you can expect Gnome to get put under corpirate lock. With KDE you have the choice, you either PAY UP or pay with your source code.

    Nautilus is much better than konqueror.
    Wrong, if your using nautilus for anything more than a simple finder clone you can forget it. No split screen, no ioslaves and forget about being able to have a decent file dialog, not to forget that it is as unstable as hell and is STILL slow on >3 Ghz machines.

    Gnome is easier to use
    Yep, nothing like using gconf-editor to edit all except the most trivial of settings. Want tear off menus? Want a useable file dialog? You won't find it here.

    Gnome has eye candy
    Yes, my pirated Win32 fonts with the patent infringing font renderer. Bit stream vera sans looks like Tahoma put through a shreadder! Of course I still reboot into windows to print using "Comic Sans MS.

    Gnome has a new web browser
    Yawb! Along with Galeon, mozilla, thunderbird, konqueror, atlantis, lynx, netscape and w3m. Yes I need another browser! Not to mention that its got a religiously offensive name and it dosen't allow bookmark folders. It also crashes like a crazy! Apple chose khtml for a REASON! its stable and light!

    For newbies, Gnome is the ideal choice
    Despite the fact that the only mainstream Gnome based distro has been EOL'd, and all the newbie distros such as Mangadrake, Lindoze, $u$E, Lycoris, Xandroze, Gentoo use kde default, the Local unix geek showed me Debian, which installed Gnome 1.4 by default, so it must be good if he uses it.

    You KDE guys must be sick of the K
    Our G's and monkeys are SO MUCH better, gedit, glib, gconf, bobono, ghex, gless, same-gnome.

    Gnome is themeable
    Yep, choose from High, low and medium contrast, default, and clean ice. Wan't to change the colour scheme? USE GCONF NOOB, plus if you complain about it we will tell you to fuck [gnomedesktop.org] off [gnomesupport.org] and go back to Windows [apple.com] or KDE [kde.org].

    Gnome has multimedia framework
    Its a kludge of esd combined with broken xine libraries. No wonder it crashes all the time and dosen't work on 95% of video files

    My Gnome work station
    My 1.1Ghz Packard Bell box my mum bought for me from PC world, that is made of made to break components, but it has a GEFORCE RADEON 9000 card, so it must be good.On the other hand, no-one (well, nearly no-one) is suggesting that GTK+ is a replacement for Qt...

    Gnome allows mac like operation.
    x86 compatible 1 button mice are almost impossible to find, and it dosen't copy the whole macbar concept. Not to even mention their auto apply implementation is broken and dangerous! Plus if they did actually come anywhere close to copying the Mac the C&D letters would come flying up their asses.

    Gnome is GNU software.
    gnu/Yay, gnu/gnome gnu/for gnu/my gnu/debian gnu/linux gnu/500mhz /gnu/celeron gnu/packard gnu/bell gnu/box.

    Inspired by the gentoo translate-o-matic.

  • Some day, but not today (Score:4, Insightful)

    by kuzb ( 724081 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @08:00PM (#7483789)
    Linux is still not ready for the desktop. Before people pull out their torches, flamethrowers and other impliments of death seeking my head, lets have a look at why.

    1) X - This was a neat idea, and has had a lot of time and innovation put in to it. However, it's still ununified, clumsy, confusing and bulky. When X works, it works great. When X doesn't work, it's a nightmare.

    2) Lack of standardization. Simple things which should work and operate the same over many applications sometimes do not. Such is the case with cut & paste, which beyond not being 100% universal, is a really lousy implimentation. If you're like me, and you highlight the text you want to replace with what is in the clipboard, you'll know what I'm talking about.

    3) Very basic things which should be autodetected and configured by XWindows are simply not. How long have scrollwheel mice been around? How about mice with more than three buttons?

    4) Lack of proper native support for popular applications. Ok, so perhaps this is not linux's fault, or Xs for that matter. However, wine and crossover office are poor substitutes to running windows applications under windows. While it is good that linux software has sprung up to try to fill the void, much of this software is nowhere near as good as their windows counterparts. See: MS Office vs Openoffice or Gimp vs Photoshop. Before Linux is viable, big names need to port applications over to run nativly. Otherwise, you may as well just run windows.

    5) Regardless of the advances made with the Linux desktop, it is still not user friendly. More to the point, it's confusing. Having a lot of choices can be a good thing, and a bad thing. For us gearheads, it's great. But for the average user, it's a tedious hassle that takes too long. I can set a windows box up from start to finish in about an hour. Linux almost always takes the entire day.

    6) Package management in linux sucks. Installing something in windows is almost always hassle free, and fast. Installing something in Linux is sometimes hassle free. Library conflicts, bad software and things that just don't compile for whatever reason really hurt linux as it increases the complexity of the whole process.

    In short, Linux is not really a good desktop operating system. It lacks standardization and most popular modern applications are not available for it.

    Lastly, how is a conference on Desktop Linux solutions groundbreaking? I'm sure many have been held before.
    • 1) X - This was a neat idea, and has had a lot of time and innovation put in to it. However, it's still ununified, clumsy, confusing and bulky. When X works, it works great. When X doesn't work, it's a nightmare.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>
      Nobody complains that the GDI lacks unification, so why do people do the same for X? X is a drawing API. You can draw whatever you want with it. Same thing with X.

      2) Lack of standardization. Simple things which should work and operate the same over ma
    • > If you're like me, and you highlight the text you
      > want to replace with what is in the clipboard

      That works fine. It's if you highlight the text and want to replace it with what's in PRIMARY that you get screwed. CLIPBOARD (where text goes when you highlight it and then hit Ctrl-C or use the "Copy" menu option in any sane modern Linux app) behaves just like the Windows clipboard (pasting happens with Ctrl-V or "Paste", of course). Note that old KDE versions are _not_ sane; KDE3 has it fixed. PRIMA
    • It lacks standardization and most popular modern applications are not available for it.

      If you define Linux' success by the number of "popular modern apps" available for it, then I'd rather Linux never succeeds.

      One of the more interesting things about Linux is that it gives people a chance to resist the slavish dependance on monster apps and to break the software monoculture.

      Otherwise -- and you say it yourself -- why not just run Windows?

  • But RedHat says.. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Saturday November 15, 2003 @08:07PM (#7483816) Homepage Journal
    That linux isnt for the desktop... Who should i belive.. big red,or big blue...

    ( as i sit here submitting from Konq running on FBSD 4.9 )

  • also.... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ShadowRage ( 678728 )
    for now, I dont see linux converting the common power user, who wants photoshop, macromedia flash, flashy lights, easy game creation utilities, games and more games, and various other frills. microsoft will have those people for a while longer.
    another BIG need is the push for scanner compatibility, SANE doesnt cut it, at all. sane is more of a hassle than it's worth. someone needs to come up with a better, more kernel integrated scanner system, so all you need to do is install a kernel module when you want
  • For those of you on the west coast you can check out some great Linux talks at SCALE 2x [socallinuxexpo.org] next week. IBM, Novell and all the other big names will be there too. Talks include Andrew Morton, Chris Dibona, Seth Nickell (freedesktop.org / gnome.org) and more... John Terpstra will aslo being speaking as well as doing a book signing of his SAMBA 3 book.

    To get a free pass to the expo hall use the code "free" Full passes can be had with "scalert"

  • We live in interesting times (Score:3, Insightful)

    by lateralus ( 582425 ) <yoni-r@actcUUUom.com minus threevowels> on Sunday November 16, 2003 @02:03AM (#7485737) Journal
    We live in interesting times as far as the Linux desktop is concerned. We saw two great desktops emerge for Linux: GNOME and KDE. We are also witness to a paradigm shift in the approach to development under Linux, brought about by the different needs and demands of the desktop environment. The server space has its own, well rooted developers. Most of them cannot switch to developing under a desktop environment successfully unless they too notice the paradigm shift.

  • IBM and Ximian (Score:3, Interesting)

    by G3ckoG33k ( 647276 ) on Sunday November 16, 2003 @02:35AM (#7485862)
    The IBM and Novell connection just seem stronger now with slide 17 [desktoplinux.com].

Slashdot Top Deals

How many QA engineers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? 3: 1 to screw it in and 2 to say "I told you so" when it doesn't work.

Close