Slashdot Mirror

I've still never met a single person that uses Linux as their primary OS.

I have for the past seven years. Sometimes, for months at a time, as my only OS, until I need to boot XP for a game.

We brag about how its making inroads and how its impacting the marketplace but we rarely see it in person.

Asus EEE PC. The machine's very existence depended on Linux. Once Linux proved you could create something that cheaply, that small, with good battery life, everyone else rushed to get in on it, including Microsoft. But even if XP had really been an option when it was built, MIcrosoft wouldn't give them the price they wanted.

So, whether or not it actually makes it onto someone's desktop, the fact that it's there as an option changes the negotiation. If I need an operating system for something -- maybe I'm a Fortune 500 company with thousands of desktops, maybe I'm a Toshiba or a Sony and I'm building a new set top box or otherwise smart device -- I can now negotiate a much lower price for Windows, because Linux is a real option, whether or not I ever intended to use it.

until Linux gets a unified interface,

Name an OS which has one.

a sane way of installing applications

Package managers are stranger, but they are more secure, and they are, in fact, easier.

Among other things: Reinstalls are no longer something to be feared. Just back up your home directory, reinstall, then go to add/remove programs, check all programs you need, and click "apply".

Compare with your "sane" way which involves digging through old, possibly scratched and useless CDs, as well as browsing online through dozens of web pages, looking for installer programs -- which are essentially unverified executables, each one opening you up for a MITM attack.

and dealing with dependancies

I'll forgive this, since you clearly haven't dealt with Linux directly in years, if ever.

Dependencies are not an issue. They are so much not an issue it's not even funny anymore.

Remember what I said above, about "add/remove programs"? That's it. All the dependencies are taken care of automatically.

and manages some actual commercial support

I bought this laptop with Ubuntu, from Dell. That means I actually have support. I can actually call Canonical if I have a problem.

I can also buy software for Linux -- Canonical has a repository of commercial software. Then there's programs like Maya, etc.

There's also Linus, and a number of other kernel developers, who have their paychecks written by an organization which lives purely on donations from these guys -- in case you're too lazy to follow that link, that's HP, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, Oracle, AMD, Google, Motorola, Nokia, Adobe, Dell, Mitsubishi... I could go on, just follow the link.

I would call that a significant amount of corporate support -- and that's not counting the developers these organizations often hire to work for them, but on Linux and open source.

I just don't see it appealing to the average consumer.

See, that's the more interesting question, and that's where the flamewars happen.

But often, it's a moot question. The rule of thumb I've found is that most people love Linux, when they give it a chance, and it will do 99% of what they want. But there's another 1% that they can't live without, that's different for everyone, that it won't do.

Many of these, there's really nothing the community can do to improve things, without destroying what makes Linux great. Consider: You complained about not having a "unified interface". If that meant enforcing human interface guidelines, it would kill some very interesting apps which explore some radically different ideas about human interfaces. If it meant just a

I've still never met a single person that uses Linux as their primary OS.

I have for the past seven years. Sometimes, for months at a time, as my only OS, until I need to boot XP for a game.

We brag about how its making inroads and how its impacting the marketplace but we rarely see it in person.

Asus EEE PC. The machine's very existence depended on Linux. Once Linux proved you could create something that cheaply, that small, with good battery life, everyone else rushed to get in on it, including Microsoft. But even if XP had really been an option when it was built, MIcrosoft wouldn't give them the price they wanted.

So, whether or not it actually makes it onto someone's desktop, the fact that it's there as an option changes the negotiation. If I need an operating system for something -- maybe I'm a Fortune 500 company with thousands of desktops, maybe I'm a Toshiba or a Sony and I'm building a new set top box or otherwise smart device -- I can now negotiate a much lower price for Windows, because Linux is a real option, whether or not I ever intended to use it.

until Linux gets a unified interface,

Name an OS which has one.

a sane way of installing applications

Package managers are stranger, but they are more secure, and they are, in fact, easier.

Among other things: Reinstalls are no longer something to be feared. Just back up your home directory, reinstall, then go to add/remove programs, check all programs you need, and click "apply".

Compare with your "sane" way which involves digging through old, possibly scratched and useless CDs, as well as browsing online through dozens of web pages, looking for installer programs -- which are essentially unverified executables, each one opening you up for a MITM attack.

and dealing with dependancies

I'll forgive this, since you clearly haven't dealt with Linux directly in years, if ever.

Dependencies are not an issue. They are so much not an issue it's not even funny anymore.

Remember what I said above, about "add/remove programs"? That's it. All the dependencies are taken care of automatically.

and manages some actual commercial support

I bought this laptop with Ubuntu, from Dell. That means I actually have support. I can actually call Canonical if I have a problem.

I can also buy software for Linux -- Canonical has a repository of commercial software. Then there's programs like Maya, etc.

There's also Linus, and a number of other kernel developers, who have their paychecks written by an organization which lives purely on donations from these guys -- in case you're too lazy to follow that link, that's HP, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, Oracle, AMD, Google, Motorola, Nokia, Adobe, Dell, Mitsubishi... I could go on, just follow the link.

I would call that a significant amount of corporate support -- and that's not counting the developers these organizations often hire to work for them, but on Linux and open source.

I just don't see it appealing to the average consumer.

See, that's the more interesting question, and that's where the flamewars happen.

But often, it's a moot question. The rule of thumb I've found is that most people love Linux, when they give it a chance, and it will do 99% of what they want. But there's another 1% that they can't live without, that's different for everyone, that it won't do.

Many of these, there's really nothing the community can do to improve things, without destroying what makes Linux great. Consider: You complained about not having a "unified interface". If that meant enforcing human interface guidelines, it would kill some very interesting apps which explore some radically different ideas about human interfaces. If it meant just a

You can find the most current FAQ/WIKI on Linux kernel RAID (MD) here:

http://linux-raid.osdl.org/index.php/

This is updated by people from the Linux Raid mailing list (on which the relevant people hangout).

Cheers
Ferg

>>> and bond the modems together.

Do you mean this :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duct_tape
this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanoacrylate
or this :
http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/Bonding
?

Here is Linux's NFS v4 architecture. Other implementation's use kerberos too. Kerberos is one of the major improvements to NFS v4.

http://developer.osdl.org/dev/nfsv4/site/architecture/

"It's a disease, I tell you. The apparent inability to accept the fact that we're not all a uniform gray paste." http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects /2007-February/001131.html

Among others, another possibility Service Availability Forum (http://www.saforum.org/). You can download an open source implementation at http://developer.osdl.org/dev/openais/ and play with it (runs on top of Linux).

You forgot to say at what bandwidth levels full offloading becomes relevant. I think your target audience is (for the foreseeable future) a lot smaller than you're implying, or so it seems to me.

FWIW, I tend to agree with the Kernel devs' general position on TOE. The way that many hardware companies are so damn secretive about the interfaces to their hardware (for whatever the reason, whether justified or not), I certainly won't blame the skepticism.

She didn't work for OSDL, She worked for OSRM.

For some bizzare reason it's very difficult to see the story properly. Here's a direct link to the foot of the thread.

http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/deskto p_architects/2007-February/001119.html

The very original mail from Linus is really old:

http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects /2005-December/000390.html

Anyway, Linus' argument is quite simple. Gnome does not have a reasonable development path. It doesn't try to teach you how to do more, just tries to be easy. This makes it a trap, which anybody can learn, but nobody easily learns from and won't let you develop further. (learning curve is shallow at the beginning then very steep, where KDE is steep at the beginning then shallow). More importantly, he's arguing that the Gnome developers are hiding behind ease of use as an excuse to avoid introducing functionality which is needed for advanced users. They should be adding the functionality, but hiding it instead of just failing to add it.

His patch is in this email

http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/deskto p_architects/2007-February/001129.html

note, it's downloads as a .bin file, but it's actualy a .tgz. His patch makes the title bar just another area of the gnome window so that it can be configured easily and consistently with the rest of the mouse actions.

My opinion: I thought this was another stupid Linus spout off flamewar. Actually he's not being too unreasonable for once. Since Gnome is trying to be the interface for beginners, it would be really nice if they saw their job as trying to educate users in possibilities. His patch is reasonably clean/sensible but it does add more code. At my count 604 lines added compared to 210 subtracted. For a person who argues against feature spew that leaves too many prisoners to argue that a rejection is totally unreasonable. He should have found a way to reduce the number of lines of code whilst introducing his feature.

For the lazy ones:

This is a .tar.gz with the patches:
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects /attachments/20070216/d6c4ac6a/attachment-0001.bin

https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/htdig/desktop_archi tects/2005-December/000389.html

For any of you wanting to read the whole thing.

What sort of clarification do you need? OSDL has had an NDA program for some time:

http://developer.osdl.org/dev/tab/nda/

Wil

• Home of Intel
• Home of Hewlett-Packard
• Home of Tektronix, FLIR, Mentor Graphics
• Linus Trovalds moved to Portland from the SF Bay Area
• O'Reilly Open Source Convention
• Government Open Source Conference
• Open Source Development Labs (OSDL)
• Large free Wireless project Personal Telco
• New PSU Open Source lab
• 5th largest Craigslist community (2004)
• Corporate HQ of Lattice Semiconductor, RadiSys, Planar Systems
• Home of Sun Microsystems High-End Operations
• Yahoo!, FEI, Credence Systems, and TriQuint Semiconductor located here

This is pretty typical: FUCKING IDIOTS

Seriously, this is how he argues. I could find lots more examples. You can't listen if you call people who hold a disagreeable position fucking idiots.

Still, the BitKeeper experience resulted in a better development tool being made so I can't really call it a loss other than annoying people by making them learn new tools every so often.

You forget how he totally backstabbed a fellow open-source developer, for, get this, letting users access their data with free software! This coming from the guy who cloned Unix. The hypocrisy is just stunning. Torvalds knifes Tridgell

Don't get me wrong, despite his flaws he does a good job heading up the Linux kernel. And Bill Gates was very successful with Microsoft. I still wouldn't want either as my president, that's for sure.

Easy cross-platform development can be learned at wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/). If you are serious and considers to sell your software anytimes in the future, there's no better choice.

If you know that one of the top inhibitors of Linux desktop adoption is applications (see http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005. pdf), you would wish that more developers would follow wyoGuide.

O. Wyss

Presumably the best defense against claims of stolen code is to do what the Linux kernel folks are doing and require contributors to certify that they have the right to provide the code. Here are the current rules for submitting code for the kernel, and here is the Developer's Certificate of Origin. Significant contributions should also be well publicized so that anyone claiming infringment is forced to bring it up soon, before people come to rely on it. In this case, it would then be Novell's problem, not the community's, if Microsoft claims that the code is theirs.

For traffic shaping there is always netem http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/Netem
If not for you have a look at nistnet URL:http://www-x.antd.nist.gov/nistnet/>
and dummynet.

I read that as you are saying the lack of Linux adoption is because there is no GUI? And hardware vendors don't write drivers for their products on this platform because there is no GUI?

No, read it once more. I say there is lack of Linux adoption (insignificant market share) because the applications available on Linux have no useful GUI (mind useful) and hardware vendors don't provide drivers or even information because there's no significant market share. This can easily proved right by reading the OSDL survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) or looking into this LinuxQuestions thread (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthrea d.php?t=105955) or acknowledge that 60% of the Linux users still use Windows applications (http://www.desktoplinux.com/cgi-bin/survey/survey .cgi?view=archive&id=0821200617613).

O. Wyss

http://threeseas.net/abstraction_physics.html

Stallman is correct that this OSDL based project is of FALSE intent.
The intent is to deceive and distract from the real issue.

When honesty of the matter (the nature of software) is dismissed via non-sequeturs and illogical irrational response, you just can't help but know what the genuine intent of the effort is.

There is no real excuse to not address the matter correctly. So why is it not being honestly addressed, but instead the presentation of so called short term detours?

There is no need for short term anything here.

read it, know it for yourself.
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/priorart-discuss/

When do Linux enthusiasts realize that a Liunx desktop system isn't an option for ordinary users. It doesn't matter if the Linux kernel is 10 times better than any other OS and it doesn't matter if the Linux desktops (Gnome/KDE/XFCE/etc) are more or less usable, if the free applications an ordinary user wants to work with aren't available! Can't people understand that OSDL in its survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) found out that application support is the first "Top inhibitors of Linux desktop adoption". And that still 60% of all Linux users (which currently are mostly power users) still use any kind of running Windows applications (http://www.desktoplinux.com/cgi-bin/survey/survey .cgi?view=archive&id=0821200617613). Sorry but as long as this is the case Linux isn't ready for prime time.

Most sadly there seems nobody interested in this matter, neither ODSL, DesktopLinux nor any other Organization cares about fixing this situation. Neither do RedHat, Novell, Sun nor IBM which pour much useless money into the wrong channels. So one doesn't need to be good prophet to predict that Linux won't be ready when Windows XP gets retired and quite possible also with Vista. It's incredible sad that the free software community doesn't seems to be able to acknowledge this situation and fix it. Not within this or the next year and quite possible not in the next 10 years as well.

O. Wyss

PS. I know I shouldn't write such a message since I most probably get stabbed like the early messengers bringing bad news to the king.

On the FOSS side of things of course, we have merging of designer/developers and users, so the issue is somewhat irrelevant. We can still improve our communications and documentation *a lot* though.

If this merging would be true, we all and not just a few percents would use a FOSS desktop system these days. Just think why does the OSDL survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) mentions "Application support" as its first "Top inhibitors of Linux desktop adoption"? And why still use 60% of all Linux users some kind of running Windows applications (http://www.desktoplinux.com/cgi-bin/survey/survey .cgi?view=archive&id=0821200617613)?

O. Wyss

A community that's perfectly happy with EMACS and VI? ...

It's not the community that's happy with the OSS UI design, it's just the posters who aggressively voice there opinion here. Else the Linux desktop would be the number one desktop and users wouldn't use Wine, etc to run Windows applications. You don't believe me? Well why then shows the OSDL survey that a majority of the Linux users still wish for Windows applications (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf)? Or why use 60% of the Linux users any kind of methode running Windows application (http://www.desktoplinux.com/cgi-bin/survey/survey .cgi?view=archive&id=0821200617613)?

Unfortunately mostly the pro EMACS and VI voicers are also developers while rather seldom any none voicer is also a developer. Therefore most UI design mistakes don't get corrected even if it would be rather easy (see http://wyoguide.sf.net/).

O. Wyss

You might have wanted to add some additional information about TOE network cards and forgot so....

From http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/TOE

TCP Offload Engine (TOE) is the name for allowing the network driver to do part or all of the TCP/IP protocol processing. Vendors have made modifications to Linux to support TOE, and these changes have been submitted for kernel inclusion but were rejected.

A TOE net stack is closed source firmware. Linux engineers have no way to fix security issues that arise. As a result, only non-TOE users will receive security updates, leaving random windows of vulnerability for each TOE NIC's users.

Once resources are exhausted, TOE will either fall back to 100% software net stack, defeating the purpose of TOE, or will deny service to additional clients.

If an attacker can discover the TOE NIC model in use, they can use this information to enable resource-based algorithmic attacks. For example, a SYN flood could potentially use up all TOE resources in a matter of seconds. The TOE NIC will either stop accepting connections (complete DoS), or will constantly bounce back to the software net stack.

Usability improvements on the desktop are nice but when do people realize that usability improvements are desperately needed on the application level and only marginally on the desktop. What does it help if you have a perfect desktop but many of the applications one uses have a rather rubbish usability!

Usability is always measured in a greater context, a context which goes far beyond the Gnome desktop but spans any desktop used. Just think how an American driver feels when he drives in England or vice versa. You might interrupt that's rather seldom the case but not with computer desktops. Almost each Gnome users uses a KDE application and even 60% use a Windows application (http://www.desktoplinux.com/cgi-bin/survey/survey .cgi?view=archive&id=0821200617613 at the bottom) and everybody knows the easyness of MacOSX.

Sure application developers don't want to lose much time with usability they want to concentrate on functionality. So they can't follow multiple separate usability guidelines they simply don't have the time. Yet usability is a very important part in the acceptance of an application. To circumvent this, application developers should follow cross-desktop or cross-platform guidelines (http://wyoguide.sf.net/).

Yet Gnome might still follow the MacOSX way sticking to there own perfect way and be happy with a rather insignificant market share. Or they help working on fighting off the first "Top inhibitors of Linux desktop adoption" (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf).

O. Wyss

Yes, it seems Ubuntu's competition, if merely only a perception, has given Debian a shoot in the arm. It wasn't but a week ago that I wondering what character from Toy Story was next to be used in Debian's developement cycle.

Perhaps Debian's position is, has been, and will always be that of a producer of 'raw' material which can be used by others to their own refinement.

As soon as Linux looks as shiny as MacOSX, this will change. Yet the question is, can Linux eventually reach this point. For that Linux (better said the Linux desktop) first has to solve the "top inhibitors of the Linux desktop adoption" (see http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005. pdf). Any GUI software has to use DirectFB/Cairo (see http://www.directfb.org/) as it graphic engine so it looks as shiny. And applications have to follow the wyoGuide guidelines (see http://wyoguide.sf.net/) so they have an equal usable look&feel. If these requirements are fulfilled Linux will completely replace MacOSX.

O. Wyss

but he's not really talking about software, is he? He's talking about Microsoftcompatibleware and Buzzware.

Well there are alway several oposite point of views about what's exciting SW. But when you look what the majority of the Linux users consider useful SW the article is just right. Read the OSDL survey about what users think of the Linux applications (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf), especially about the first top inhibitor of the Linux desktop adoption.

O. Wyss

Because the Windows design and UI guidelines aren't actually that bad ...

True. Also on Linux there's more or less all kind of UI design used, so when everything is different it doesn't feel that uncommon. Yet it's exactly this "not possible to become familiar" which is the top inhibitor of the Linux desktop adoptions (see http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005. pdf).

O. Wyss

IMO financial applications are the number one sample why the Linux desktop hasn't gotten more than a few percents market share. Can you really imagine an ordinary dentist ever use GnuCash on his Windows box? Or a carpenter, or a house wife? Can you really think that such people go out, buy or install Linux on their computers? No that won't happen, not until the art of writing FOSS has changed dramatically.

That said financial FOSS applications will only become possible when they are true cross-platform, when they are available on Windows and MacOS as well. Yet that's not sufficient, they also have to look native and they have to feel native on any platform. Else people, who use computer as tools and not as gadgets, won't use them.

Ordinary people don't look with the eyes of a fan, the look with the eyes of an annoyed worker who wants it task done as fast as possible. None of the so far mentioned applications look acceptable in their eyes. At the current state none written in Java or with GTK will satisfy these people. The only choice which produces acceptable results are using the commercial QT or the free wxWidgets toolkit. It may sound harsh but that's the case, just listen to the complains these people bring up against FOSS applications (or read http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005. pdf).

Yet looking acceptable is only one step towards broad acceptance, the other step is feel acceptable. Sorry, a FOSS application following the Gnome UI guidelines does not feel acceptable on Windows, MacOSX, KDE, etc. If you port a Gnome application to another platform you have to take care of all the little details which are different, which annoy users when the don't fit. These little details are listed in the only cross-platform guidelines wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/).

To summarize, to make a FOSS financial application successful you have to follow these simple steps:

- Design the application cross-platform, then you get enough market share.
- Write it with an acceptable look anywhere, use QT or wxWidgets.
- Care for acceptable feel anywhere, follow the cross-platform guidelines wyoGuide.

O. Wyss

The problem with the current implementation of the Commons is that it's passive, not aggressive. What I'm referring to is a handholding effort of helping developers through the Patent Filing process. I.e. a clear step up from the NoLo Press book on how to file a patent.

This is as opposed to the current Commons project, which is mostly just a collection effort of existing patents.

OSDL does not claim to be anything more than what is listed here:

http://www.osdl.org/about_osdl

It was only back in February that people in the Linux community were pointing out that the OSDL organization wasn't actually particularly useful to the community, beyond funnelling corporate money to a few worthy individual developers. They had a list of requests for things OSDL could do to actually be useful, and they also, for the first time, got a community representative on the board of directors.

If you actually look at the OSDL's stated mission, it's all about attracting corporate interest to Linux, not about actually getting any open source development done directly. It's still a valuable function, but if Oracle wants to interact with the community (like, for example, pushing Ubuntu's kernel patches through the review process and into the mainline kernel), OSDL isn't going to be particularly useful, assuming that Oracle has employees who're active in the community (like, for example, Randy Dunlap).

So?

MySQL isn't a member either. On the other hand, Red Hat and Novell are, despite the fact that they're clearly competitors. So what does MySQL have to do with it?

The thing that was really kind of revolting is that OSDL goes out and basically says that they represent the Linux community while there is no direct feedback line back to the community.

So there is no immediate advantage to being a member for us.

The thing that was really kind of revolting is that OSDL goes out and basically says that they represent the Linux community while there is no direct feedback line back to the community.

So there is no immediate advantage to being a member for us.

Many people, as also I, don't know much of OSDL beside Linus Torvalds is there employed or they care for Carrier Grade Linux (whatever that means). Yet I know OSDL has done a survey about why the Linux desktop isn't a success (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf).

But now what? Even if the reasons now are more than obvious does the OSDL take the next needed steps? Sure OSDL has created the Portland initiative, unfortunately these people aren't able to do anything about the most pressing matter, the first top inhibitor for the Linux desktop adoption. It might be these people simply don't know how to fix this problem albeit I've shown them one possible solution (http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architect s/2005-December/000349.html).

OSDL might say that "they represent the Linux community", yet OSDL isn't able to bring Linux to success, to increase its market share to a significant amount. So I would think twice if to participate in such an organization. It's sad when even the self proclaimed speaker of the Linux community can't do better.

To say it once more, without agreeing on a single set of application guidelines, guidelines which enhance the usability and the look&feel, there's no hope. All one can say is "Yet another year without a Linux desktop".

O. Wyss

Many people, as also I, don't know much of OSDL beside Linus Torvalds is there employed or they care for Carrier Grade Linux (whatever that means). Yet I know OSDL has done a survey about why the Linux desktop isn't a success (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf).

But now what? Even if the reasons now are more than obvious does the OSDL take the next needed steps? Sure OSDL has created the Portland initiative, unfortunately these people aren't able to do anything about the most pressing matter, the first top inhibitor for the Linux desktop adoption. It might be these people simply don't know how to fix this problem albeit I've shown them one possible solution (http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architect s/2005-December/000349.html).

OSDL might say that "they represent the Linux community", yet OSDL isn't able to bring Linux to success, to increase its market share to a significant amount. So I would think twice if to participate in such an organization. It's sad when even the self proclaimed speaker of the Linux community can't do better.

To say it once more, without agreeing on a single set of application guidelines, guidelines which enhance the usability and the look&feel, there's no hope. All one can say is "Yet another year without a Linux desktop".

O. Wyss

Simply a matter of legal responsibility and risk.

Wikipedia risk little and for such reduced risk it carries little legal weight, naturally.

And no you cannot always correct errors, see http://www.wikitruth.info/

Note that it seems most controversy over "people".

An article was created on myself, incorrect and ultimatley targeted as an indirect unfair critisism on a project. The basis of the critisism was the "authoritive" persistance of usenet trolls, some outright admitted. While ignoring the much more official position of publication acceptance of organizations like the USPTO, FFII.org, and http://developer.osdl.org/dev/priorart/

I made some corrections and expanded the corrections to the creation of an article on the subject matter which the project is based. The subject matter of which is easily verifiable.

The article was deleted and it then being obvious the intent was supporting libel against myself, and fraud againt the project, all it took was a little threat of a lawsuit for the article on myself to be removed.

removal is not correction but denial of it.

Being objective, rather than subjective to this insidence, I see the truth about wikipedia. Its not about Truth! And this "not about truth" is even stated in their policies.

Popular belief and cleverly hidden opinions, insinuations is what wikipedia is about.

Get a market share above 10% and vendors with consider to release on Linux. Get a market share above 20% and vendors will release on Linux. Get a market share above 30% and vendors can't afford not to release on Linux!

How to get a higher market share? Fix the first top inhibitor of the Linux adoption (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf). How to fix this inhibitor? One important action (IMHO the most important) is to declare the guidelines of wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/) as the Linux application standard!

There might be other actions to fix this inhibitor but I don't know any. Just voice them here and now. But be sure unless this inhibitor isn't fix fast, the market share of Linux will stay low, too low for any significance.

IMHO it's essential that anybody (maybe O'Reilly) starts a Linux conference about this subject to discuss any possibility.

O. Wyss

Yet exactly Firefox is the counter sample since it's the most successful OpenSource application (market share above 10%). But you are right, usability is the worst problem OpenSource projects face these days (see the first top inhibitor for Linux desktop adoption in http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005. pdf). Unfortunately very few understands this and probably several years have to pass until appropriate measure steps are taken.

O. Wyss

2) Usability is not specifically an F/OSS problem - it is a software problem. There's a lot of crap software out there, that the vast majority of people never see (because it costs money). However, many people do see free / oss as it's (generally) availalbe free of charge.

I agree, usability is a software problem but it seems F/OSS is especially plagued by not usable. Just think, why still wish the majority of the Linux users none-free applications? Just look at the first top inhibitor for Linux adoption (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf). There must be a reason and what else could it be?

There are more proves just look at the sources (links) in this LXer article (http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/54009/index. html). But what's more interesting how long it will take the F/OSS community to realize this fact.

O. Wyss

The way to win the software patent undoing is to make programminhg so damn easy that its hard to find novel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction_physics Yeah, its up for deletion but that doesn't invalidate it. But its really not original research either.

http://developer.osdl.org/dev/priorart/wiki/index. php/Tagging_Prototype

http://www.osdl.org/about_osdl/legal/patent_common s/

Especially the Portland initiative of the OSDL which was just created for this task and which should know better do not even try to tackle the first top inhibitor of a desktop Linux adoption (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf [osdl.org]), not even after I've told them.

Open source will always be chaotic ...

There's nothing against chaotic but does it also have to be bad? I'm not against anybody doing anything in OpenSource but when it comes to standards there's no use for bad. So far the FSG mostly created sound standards but unfortunately that can't be said of the Freedesktop.org and even worse of the desktop architects of OSDL. Especially the Portland initiative of the OSDL which was just created for this task and which should know better do not even try to tackle the first top inhibitor of a desktop Linux adoption (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf), not even after I've told them. So my hope is the FSG will take over this problem and do a better job.

O. Wyss

Or say it with a single statement:

"It's the first top inhibitor of the Linux desktop adoption"

See http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005. pdf

and http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=183801&c id=15179906

O. Wyss

Simply because nobody realized the real reasons until OSDL published its survey in Dec 2005 (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf). Even today nobody wants to take the necessary steps as outlined here http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=183801&c id=15179906.

O. Wyss

You all may know that OpenSource isn't much loved by the ordinary users because of a range of reasons. The OSDL survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) shows that even the majority of the Linux users wish for Windows-Only applications. Novell's cool solution website (http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/16798 .html) proves that their users (customers) prefer Windows-Only applications. And the thread at LinuxQuestions.org (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthrea d.php?t=105955) gives more hints. To solve this I've a vision outlined in here (http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html ).

Sure enough this vision can only become true if many of you choose to participate which of course means a lot of work for all of you. But exactly here comes the Google SoC into play it would allow to get your own project be converted to conform to the wyoGuide guidelines (http://wyoguide.sourceforge.net/guidelines/conten t.html). So I encourage any project to apply for the Soc (http://code.google.com/soc/) to make it

• conformant to the guideline so any user may feel comfortable
• conformant in the code so any developer may feel comfortable
• conformant in spirit so the Ubuntu bug #1 (https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+bug/1) gets finally tackled.

So don't fear to apply even if your project is just a small one since when your project is converted it most probably will attract more users and more developers, soon surpassing any project which doesn't care.

If you are just a user of a project make the developers aware of this. You might even check the guidelines yourself and help in testing. Or you might help in suggestions for corrections, etc. Tell it to your friends, your university stuff or anywhere else. Just make this vision become true and the first Top inhibitors of Linux desktop adoption gets finally solved.

O. Wyss