Slashdot Mirror
10 Linux Predictions For 2002
Weedstock writes: "In an article on LinuxWorld, Joe Barr is once again making 10 predictions about the success of Linux for the new year." The first of many sets of predictions for 2002, no doubt. And some guy named "Robin" or "Roblimo" or something like that wrote about Linux in 2003 for Newsforge.
As far as I can tell, item #4 has nothing to do with Linux directly. Unless of course you believe it's a matter of MS vs. Linux and that's it.
Methinks Linux is about creating a good operating system, not about killing Microsoft. Or did I miss something?
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
I'm surprised he didn't predict that Linus Torvalds would be elected head of the UN, and linux would be installed ona satellite thus rendering us the ability to communicate to alien species.
I doubt that the CIA/FBI/NSA even uses windows XP for any sort of confidential information. Most like they're still running the nearly bug free Windows NT, or some incarnation of unix.
A rabbit in the hand is worth 4 in the cage
This is almost the same article I read in 1995! Back then, I was involved in a newsgroup discussion on usability for Linux on the desktop. Most of the predictions, and complaints from back in the day are still there. Sure, there has been polish added, and some really cool features. The kernel has added lots of new features, but the only interface I have seen that came close to a real desktop has been on a freaking Mac (and I HATE macs). At some point in the future, a group will get together and put together an opensource desktop that my wife could use, and be happy with. After 6 and a half years, I won't hold my breath. Don't get me wrong, I'm already running the 2.4.17 kernel on my Thinkpad. I just wonder if predictions like "Linux desktop will appear in public places" are realistic when it is really an OS for nerds, and will continue to stay that way until a real organized effort takes place to bring about a simple desktop.
Flame answer 1: Yes, Gnome and KDE are great, but they are great for geeks, not moms. Maybe end the political crap and have them get together for a cookout at my house to bury the hatchet and take the best code from both to make KDGnome? That would kick some ass!
Flame answer 2: Because Macs are great for destop publishing, but that is not what I need to do. (and yes, I know it's BSD, and not Linux)
Flame answer 3: Sorry Linus. You have done great things here, and I have great admiration for your work. I know you are not competing with MS here. I would just like to see Linux knock the head off of Bill's empire. It get's predicted every year.
Flame answer 4: I know, I know, I have all the source code. I should write it myself, right? Well I suck at programming C, and I am man enough to admit that I could not write production level code for a project like that.
Spackler
I say...
1. Business as usual. Linux will continue slowly replace Unix servers. Windows will continue to sit on the desktop. Talk of a mainstream linux desktop will continue for several more years.
My wife now finds it easier to use my Linux box to:
-check web mail
-read and print doc/xls files
-surf w/o crashing browser
-use dial-up
-other business stuff.
...rather than boot up her NT box to do the same.
Now with software we use (Moz/StarOffice/KDE) being so nice, stable, & useful, the desktop is at last becoming a viable alternative for Windoze users--with just a little prompting.
To me, the interoperability with Word/Excel/Exchange is the critical thing for businesses. In 2000, this clearly did not work well at all. I think 2002 will indeed herald the year that linux will be occationally adopted as an alternative in corporate environments. Reading/printing these file formats (and protocols) is now *finally* reliable. Ximian's Exchange connector completes it for most businesses.
I don't think that the desktop not being adopted in large numbers this year was because IT managers didn't want to do it, it was because they couldn't do it.
Now they can.
"As much as people make fun of MS never innovating anything, everything I see in Linux development is meant to bring its functionality in line with Windows. If I see anything in Linux that enables me to do more than Windows, and do it with more stability (sorry, in my experience, Linux with X gives a much more unstable environment than 2k or XP), I'll give it another try. "
Yet another MS troll modded up the wazoo.
Look at where the linux desktop was a year ago. Now extrapolate another year. You see where I am going here. A year ago linux desktop was little more then a dream right now KDE looks and works great. KDE 3.0 will probably be even better.
And you know what it does not ever need to catch up or surpass windows. I remeber a year or two ago anytime a SQL server vs Oracle debate sprang up on usenet the MS people always made the same argument. SQL server is good enough to do what you want and it costs much less. The same argument goes here. As soon as Linux is good enough OS with good enough apps everything then the price factor will kick in.
When faces with a choice of spending nothing and getting 80% of the functionality or spending hundreds of thousands of dollars corporations will start making the switch. Once they switch people will start switching at home.
Having said all that I am still waiting for something in windows that is as elegant as syslog.
War is necrophilia.
Well that's a bit of a stretch. "Dependendts", "Slaves" or "Prisoners" would be better descriptions, IMO.
They will betray and leave Microsoft the first time they get the chance.
After all, like it or not, MS brought PCs into the realm of usability for the average idiot.
Like it or not, but this is plain wrong.
It was asian-hardware makers which brought PCs into the price range suitable for the average person. Remember DOS? Remember high-memory? Remember IRQ/DMA problems?
Usability is secondary and always was. Otherwise the awkard DOS could have never had any chance against MacOS.
Do you really think Dell would be pulling in almost $32 BILLION dollars if we were still using Dr Dos?
Now, let's get clear about something: Microsoft always trailed the computing industry. Windows was late - very late. All other computers (Amiga, Apple and most Unix) had GUIs much earlier than Microsoft.
Yet, everybody pretends as if without Microsoft there would be no GUI. Without Microsoft, the computing industry would be a couple of years farther ahead than it is now.
Welcome to the joys of market share. MS and the "OS-community" are in much different positions. Since most people use Windows, if a hardware manufacturer wants it's product to sell, they have to make it work with Windows.
That's correct now, *BUT* on servers, most manufacturers support Linux as good as Windows and it's possible that a couple of years down the road, Microsoft will have to write drivers themselves for RAID, etc. and will support only a limited selection of server-hardware. (And this will eventually kill them)
You need an example?
Compaq dropped support for the Alpha-platform, because Linux has taken it over completely and Windows only accounted for 5% of new sales of Alpha-systems.
Within a week, Microsoft dropped support for the Alpha, too, because they just can't support it alone, they just can't.
Hell, even on ordinary x86-hardware, Windows is much more complicated to install if the hardware is not preconfigured by the PC-maker for Windows. If you build your own computer, you know what I mean.
OS developers write their own drivers because they have to. Until they have sufficient market share to justify the expense from the manufacturer of creating another set of drivers, this will be their only option.
Yes, but Microsoft does not have that option.
Once, their dominance is in danger it's just a big way down for MS without any hope for return.