Red Hat Desktop Edition

Sivar writes "Red Hat plans to enter the desktop business OS market, The Register reports. Red Hat says that the move is in response to growing frustration with Microsoft which has peaked since the introduction of Microsoft's new licensing scheme. The article states that the desktop offering is due next year and, surprisingly "...the company is considering subscription-based pricing.""

Comments

Oh dear!

[Anonymous Coward]

So, it's not just Microsoft that wants to rent software...

Since noone has noticed...

[Duncan3]

All service-based things are generally subscribtion based... from the pool guy to the Cable TV. Enterprise software has always been sold this way.

So redhat making their free software available for free-per-year makes perfect sense.

Competitive advantage?

[bildstorm]

Please tell me how with a subscription model, Red Hat is going to have a competitive advantage over Microsoft?

The only way I can see this happening is if the subscriptions are really cheap. But then again, we're talking about competiting not for small offices, but for large offices.

Please tell me how they are going to convince a large company that has invested in Microsoft helpdesk people to switch to Red Hat.

While you're at it, tell me how they're going to save them money from all the proprietary Windows software they're using.

Here's my current list of Windows software I would need replaced in order to maintain productivity - MS Project, MS Visio, Macromedia Dreamweaver, and Macromedia Fireworks.

Not a difficult list (note the general lack of MS Office, since I use OpenOffice), but not easy to overcome. I'm sure there are other people with far more obscure programmes they need.

I like open source and I like Linux. I just had stupid business models.

Re:Competitive advantage?

[Ami Ganguli]

You probably wouldn't be the target for this. Many offices use only an office suit, browser, and e-mail on the majority of desktops. You can leave the handful of users who have greater needs running Windows (at least short-term).

RedHat has played this perfectly. They've let others develop desktop until the combination of mature technology and market demand is in their favour. Now they move in and use their considerable name recognition to clean up.

Should work

[JanneM]

The subscription very likely covers ongoing support and (semi-)automated updates. This removes some of the need to employ Linux administrators by the companies themselves; in effect, it entails a standardized outsorcing package for desktop support. Depending on the price point, this can be a good deal for a lot of companies. This won't mean there is _no_ need for administrators within the company; rather, the local admin is relieved of a lot of the drudgery, and can do his/her work with the full backing of expertise from Redhat.

/Janne

ObDebian

[spongman]

I like Debian's subscription-based pricing scheme the best.

(sue me, I've got karma to spare)

a long way to go

[selderrr]

I fear that for linux to enter a business market on the desktop, there's still quite a long way to go in terms of user friendlyness. On all other fronts, linux equals or wins against MS, but on the desktop, GUI is the only thing that really matters :
- stability ? XP is stable enough for the desktop
- security ? XP with no services is secure enough behind a corporate firewall
- CPU efficiency ? When running Office and Outlook as sole applications on a 2GHz PC, you've got to go pretty ballistic to get inefifcient.
- open source ? You really thing any desktop user gives a flying donkey ?
- commandline unix underpinnings ? see 2 remarks above

all that matters is how well users can become at easy with their machine (in their own adorable shitty, messy and totally disorganized way. Remember that a desktop user does NOT WANT to understand his computer. He just wants the computer to adapt to his personal shitty messy and totally disorganized way of organizing things)


I did the test many times and put a linux box in front of a reasonably willing (although reasonably dumb) subject and frankly, they didn't even figure out how to reset their desktop. Linux just doesn't get it when it comes to dumb-ass desktop users.

Re:a long way to go

[ponxx]

> I did the test many times and put a linux box in front of a reasonably willing (although
> reasonably dumb) subject and frankly, they didn't even figure out how to reset their desktop

This has absolutely nothing to do with user-friendlyness, it's merely a case of what people are used to. What normal person would think that to reset your computer you have to click on "Start" and then on "Turn off your computer" to be given the option of "Restart"?

In terms of user-friendlyness for someone who has used neither before I imagine they would be very similar. The three things working for Windows are:

• It being pre-installed on 90% of computers sold. Have you ever tried installing XP from scratch? Compared to SuSE 8.0 (FTP install), XP took three times as long, needed user intervention every 10 minutes, needed seperate drivers from the manufacturer for half my peripherals as well as rebooting at least 4 times until i had all the lates security patches installed.. SuSE was up and running in 30 minutes by essentially choosing "standard system" left my windows install intact, included it in the boot manager, found graphics, sound, printer ...
• previous exposure. People have learnt the ways of windows, even if they are inconsisten. They don't like to change.
• program lock-in. As many others have said, deliberately incompatible document formats mean it IS a nightmare to convert to LINUX if you have a large number of interlinked spread-sheets etc. Then again, in my experience different windows/office versions are not always as compatible as they claim :).

MS business desktop is more than just the OS

[Brento]

The hidden cost of MS's business desktops has always been the tools. You can't simply buy licenses for XP and call it a day: you need administration tools (SMS), antivirus tools, firewall tools for your mobile users, service pack distribution tools, etc. None of these are bundled with the cost of XP (crummy firewall notwithstanding), and the desktop costs get expensive quickly.

I'll bet RedHat is going to sell this as an alternative to the frustrating patchwork of programs required to administer a network of 50-250 PC's, because that's always been a MS weakness. MS has decent tools like SMS, but they require so much knowledge & work that they don't really pay off until you've got a bare minimum of 100 PC's.

Not that desktop Linux rollouts won't have a learning curve, of course.

Already exists, few care

[nuggz]

Let see

MS demands subscriptions, people get upset, they don't want to have to upgrade.

Debian has free subscriptions, there is no mass exodus to the world of Debian/Linux

Redhat offers subscriptions, yippie skippie, the world will move to Linux. uhh why?

Re:Linux isn't ready for many companies.

[stock]

Americans say , "put your money where your mouth is", and "money talks".

Well now, if your wallet is empty, and you want to continue your business, people get inventive. Linux is the lumber and wood lying around (for free) to make it happen.

The claim that all my tools, spreadsheets, documents are in ms office format, and thus i can't switch overnight is true. But company's should really focus on platform independant formats instead.

number 1 rule was/is still , never have your computing stuff tied into a single ICT company/supplier. Many company's still alive today took the wise decision in the past to just buy the custom made package including its source code. In such a position no software company in the world can stall your business.

Robert

Lucky its not aimed at you.

[Psarchasm]

Most corporate users who use PCs and do not work in the IT department need the following...

Browser
Email
2-3 Corporate Apps
Word Processing

Thats it... You will have some that require spreadsheets, calendaring, and document sharing - but really thats about it.

Making the argument against this type of decision from the point of view of a PowerUser, or Developer is pointless. Yes if all your apps are only available on Windows, it won't work for you. But you are not 90% of all desktop users.

The Best Place to Start.

[Bocaj]

The enterprise is best place to start combatting the desktop front. Linux makes a great desktop OS for most people once it's setup and configured to there needs. That's were the rub comes in. You needed an experienced admin to do that. If employees can come into work, sit down and click on an icon to get their email, they'll be happy. I don't want to hear flames about application x is not available, bla bla bla. The majority of business computer use is email, web, and office tools. Linux has all of those things functioning well enough for most people. The ones who gripe, are the same ones who will gripe about the changes from 2000 to XP anyway.

I hope RH isn't as unfocused as /.

[LostSinner]

Alright, people, here's why microsoft kicked everyone else's ass:

They offered this nice little thing called migration compatibility . the only product microsoft EVER created from scratch was windows, and even that claim is dubious. their business strategy was to purchase established products, give them a microsoft-esque look, spice the functionality up a bit, and offer it to the public (now pay attention here) WITH MIGRATION CAPABILITIES ALREADY IN PLACE. want to move your documents from wordperfect to word? no problem. how about migrating email from eudora to outlook? gotcha covered. that's where microsoft wraps your underwear around your ankles and gives it to you rotten.

and you know what? it's only gonna continue. it's like screwing a gorilla... you ain't gonna stop till the gorilla stops.

so, what's the solution? first of all, don't offer an alternative to microsoft, offer a migration. you might also consider actually using some of microsoft's products. how about this? i see all of these posts talking about working with major vendors on making their software work on linux... well, the one vendor i KNOW all you fascist, self-mutilating slashdotters (and by god you are, don't even try to deny it) are overlooking is microsoft. why not try and convince them to work on linux functionality? with the whole court thing going on (email me sometime to find out how much BS and how anti-democratic it is), they've got a vested interest in making other products at least viable enough so that they can claim that they're not monopolizing the market. take that and run with it.

you know who you guys remind me of? all the people who are hanging around bitching that racism/sexism/any other -ism you want is still rampant and that there's no equalization of opportunity when all they really want is for the government to hold everyone else down so they can walk on them. fuck that! if you want to operate based upon the lowest common denominator, go right ahead, but i'll be damned if i'm gonna work on it, and you'll just keep getting trampled on by those with the ambition and the capability.

nuff said

Fonts?

[rmcd]

I've used mandrake linux for specific tasks (mostly using xfig), but one of the things that surprised me the first time I booted up was significantly lower font quality than what I had in windows. It seems to me that is a hurdle for desktop adoption.

I know that quality fonts are difficult to create. What is the prospect for linux getting screen fonts of Windows quality?

I'm there but I'm not..........

[RAMWolf44]

I have read many of the threads and posts here (I can say that this discussion has been, for the most part, very civil!! What gives, no bashing?? I'm glad to reply to such a group of ADULTS!!)

I have tried many of the Linux distros, I then discovered Mandrake. I like it. But I ended up going back to Windows! Why?? Sound problems, even though I use the industry standard of Creative Labs!! Mail SMTP. Recieving mail was always fine but the sending mail always never got through unless I used Netscrape Mail (ICK!! IMHO) Fonts, esp in browsers. I don't know what the deal is in Linux community with not wanting to intergrate as many available fonts into the system, I know that many are costly and MS owns so many of them, so forth and so on but the ones that are available should be intergrated completely into the system, as for the GUI, no I think the way it is now is just fine, let the user choose (I speak as a desktop user not a server person) And of course there is the debate of the drivers but I see many hardware folks bending over backwards to support the Linux Commuinity like HP, so give it some time, it all takes time!! Apps, there is the problem for me, besides the above mentioned. I use XaraX, PhotoPaint and a few others that I would not part with. So, unless I am using Wine, whick last time I used it I was lucky to get Notepad to invoke, I will have to give up my beloved and very useful Windows based apps. I can't see doing that. That's half the reason I use a computer right there. And I know that in time there will be more and more ported over but in the mean time it is obvious to me that Linux is a toy for the geeks and a dream for the desktop user that wants to get out from under Windows control (I'm one of them)! I am interested in Mandrakes 9.0 that is in it's last beta and maybe willing to play with it but the reports I have read about it thus far is that many are having problems with the sound cards being recognized, so that lets me down quite a bit right there!! Sigh.........in time!!

RAMWolff ;-)~