Slashdot Mirror
Linux on the Desktop
webmaven writes "Mitch Kapor's Open Source Application Foundation just released a 34 page report on the Desktop Linux market, written by Bart Decrem, who has discussed desktop Linux previously. The OSAF is working on Chandler, which the press have generally described as an 'Outlook Killer', but it's really intended to be in a completely new application category, more similar to Lotus Agenda in some ways than what currently consider a PIM (email + contacts + appointments). The report goes into some detail about the current state of desktop Linux, trends, and various limiting factors, and concludes that while a revolution is not immediately in the wings, a trend can definitely already be discerned, and they expect adoption of desktop Linux to increase over the next few years, and identifies leverage points to accelerate the process."
Look at workalike apps that run on Windows. They can't even make it. You expect users to adopt a new OS *AND* utilities? Get real.
Unfortunately you're right.
We need a revolution in usability.
-uso.
Dreams, dreams, don't doubt dreams, dreaming children's dreaming dreams. Sailor Moon SS
here's the real link: http://www.osafoundation.org/
Forget "Outlook Killer". Just get rid of the damn clippy guy!
Linux is for desktops too?
Yeah, I'll go RTFA. : p
I assert that my comment is only my opinion, not that of any employer, past, present or future.
At first glance that sounds terrible, almost like a death knell to Linux on the desktop. Virtually every person who will have a computer in a "few years" will already has one today. They won't be bringing in many new users, they'll be converting existing Windows users. That must keep Bill up at night.
Trolling is a art,
...a question which sounds like "flamebait", but it seriously isnt.
Are there any real objective 3rd parties who investigate and report on the different aspects of linux ( ie TOC, benchmarks, etc ) who truly are impartial to either OS. It seems that anybody writing 'reports' are either slanted towards windows, or linux. I dont think i've ever read a report that says "well, linux sucks at x, and windows sucks at y as well. in summary, they both suck ( or they both rock, or whatever, etc. ) . "
Where does one find unbiased reviews and benchmarks of OS's ?
I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
Whatever happened to Ximian, or Evolution, or whatever it was called? I thought *it* was going to be the Outlook killer. How many Limux apps does it take to kill MS Outlook?
"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog!" - a dog
Of course, the last time we heard from this guy, he was explaining, "My big gripe about KDE is I think it's butt-ugly. The main reason I keep using GNOME is that the icons on KDE are aesthetically offensive to me. And the letter K is kind of offensive, it's not very elegant." The new report is Slashdotted, but I'm curious to see what other letters are slowing Linux adoption on the desktop.
At any rate, at least this story should generate some life on Slashdot. I'm trying to avoid doing work, and the last five stories are still in single digits for comments, including FP! trolls.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Predicting that Linux trend will continue to grow doesn't exactly take a genious , does it ?
I mean even windows is continuing to grow ? So what's the point here ?
If linux is replacing the desktop *nix market, albeit very small (solaris, irix etc.) whats the big deal in that ?
How much M$ boxes are being replaced by linux ?
Currently linux and windows on desktop are growing at their own pace, as they don't share a common user base. And what ever common userbase they have , use dual-boot option.
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
How many Windoze users do you see that have wierd (and ugly) color schemes once they figure out its possible. In linux you can modify much more. It fits the advanced user's needs as well as the everyday user. Simpson Quote: Oooo.. Pretty Colors
I don't run Windows anymore unless I want to play Carmageddon II at home, and at work I only get into Windows if I need to use the custom workorder system that ties into Novell and MS Access. I can watch movies, play a few games, listen to music, surf, do email, and the like all without Bill and his Evil Empire.
We need to start new-to-computers people with non-MS operating systems. They'll be much more inclined to use anything handed to them, and they'll dislike the crashing problems, popups, and weird behaviour of Microsoft's OSes. I repair Windows machines at work for my job, and every time something goes awry, I don't think of it as normal anymore, I think of it as bloody annoying.
Being nearly Windows-free for the last three years or so has been really awesome. These things are tools, not cheap toys that break a lot.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Stop trolling.
.02
Linux isn't ready for the desktop but there are people out there willing to attempt to get it as close as they can.
"An Outlook Killer" is something that apparently people feel is necessary but what I feel is necessary is an IE browser (no, no matter what anyone says Mozilla doesn't perform anything close to how IE does, and yes, I have used both (Mozilla in Windows and Linux, and IE on Windows)).
No IRIX workstation was ready for the desktop as what we consider it today, believe me.
Windows and apparently MacOSX are ruling the desktop and will most likely continue to do so.
We are seeing movement towards Linux on the desktop but it's still got a LONG way to go. I guess as people become more and more concerned with getting it there, the timeframe will continue to shrink.
Just my worthless
Are you sure you didn't find the spell check helpful?
Forget the whales - save the babies.
Article in news.com about Lindows just came out with LindowsCD, so that people can try Lindows Linux without having to install it. They're not the first, but since they're selling easy of use and ease of transition, this seems an especially smart way to show people they can function in a non-Windows world.
I don't know, I find the latest versions of KDE and Gnome to be quite nice to use, and very pleasing to the eye. Granted, their actual functionality is very close to that of Windows, but as a standard desktop environment is concerned, KDE/Gnome are pretty nice. Of course, if you're talking about revolutionizing the Windows, Icons, Mouse, and Pointer model of desktop use, that's another story. I'm all for using a gesture-based system like in Minority Report, myself...
"Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of"-TMBG
umm.....dude....People Don't give a shit about the browser they have. they use the one that came with the damn system.
if you mean a single browser then yes...Mozilla 1.5 will be that....it is called firebird.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Could you be more specific as to what you see as the big differences between the best Linux desktop you've tried and Windows?
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
Moreso, when the competitor is a monopolistic giant of a corporation, entrenched in a significant portion of the desktop market for about 10 years now.
Let's just hope that desktop Linux doesn't suffer the same fate as Betamax in the disastrous Betamax/VHS battle. That's atleast one instance that I can recall, in which a superior product failed before a better marketed product.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
"they expect adoption of desktop Linux to increase over the next few years"
That's what they said a few years ago. And that's probably what they'll be saying a few years from now. Don't get me wrong, I like Linux. But it's just not for mom and pop and I doubt it ever will be given who is working on it and what they've been doing.
Linux innovates very little except in technological areas. It's GUIs even today fall short of Windows and Mac GUIs, and several years from now I don't expect Linux will catch up. I don't see MS or Apple kicking back sipping pina coladas at the poolside.
I think alot of great work has been done in Linux and I'm a Linux user myself, but not as my primary desktop. Linux is an OS made for geeks by geeks that love to push the geek envelope. That's great stuff in and of itself, but it's not going to put Linux in the mainstream.
And does it want to be mainstream? Do Linux users want it to be mainstream? For the most part, I think not. When asking a technical question in Linux circles, the responses you get range from apathetic to offensive. RTFM! NEWB! It's pretty rare you actually get someone with a little compassion that has felt your pain and is willing to help you out.
Everything about Linux (and Unix in general) seems to be as if it is some kind of rite of passage. You must fight the bear without weapons, then you must walk the fire barefooted and then you must master Unix! It is that final task at which the brave warrior often stumbles...
Really my main beef with linux is how hard it is to set the thing up when you haven't gone through the process in the last six months. I generally forget what the config file is named that I'm interested in, or where it happens to be located. Frankly, any setting that most users will have to change at some point in their life should be easily accessible through the GUI menu system.
I will admit that it is a heck of a lot better than it used to be, but I still have to do a bit of googling to get my linux system usable. Windows on the other hand, you can go to the control panel and what you want to change will likely be in there somewhere, unless it's application specific, and you don't have to read any manuals or docs to figure out how to configure your system - it's intuitive.
they don't? So you are saying that no one wanting to use Linux won't be concerned that they don't have MS Office and no "little blue E"? You're wrong.
That's what people interested in a "desktop" for Joe blow are going to be looking for. Their comfort apps.
Get real.
That SCO is dead and buried in the Linux market is pretty clear, but UnitedLinux was established in part to counter Red Hat dominance.
Would be interesting to know why the individual Linux distributers making up UnitedLinux is listed, while UnitiedLinux is not mentioned at all.
The pdf states that "...one of the studios commissioned an open source company to make Adome Photoshop run under Linux. Thanks to the open source development process, all Linux users can now run Photoshop on their desktop"
Anyone have any info on this? Photoshop is one of the last things keeping our web designer under the giant Windows thumb so I'd love to get more details. The Adobe site only mentions Linux in relation to the PDF reader, all other references I could find were about the crossover plugin.
And no, please don't extol the virtues of the Gimp - I've tried that...
Article: :-|
:-)
:-(
:^P
Document:
Slashdot:
Bottom Line:
It isn't just the desktop that needs polishing. Each app in Linux just doesn't look polished and integrated well with the rest of the system. I think more care needs to be taken to standardize the look of the OS and the apps that people use. I use Linux on my desktop at home but I am thinking of moving back to Windows not because Linux doesn't do something but because Linux is still ugly.
...And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." - Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984)
how about gpdf?
What's wrong with xpdf or Acrobat Reader for Linux?
If people are already using Linux on the desktop, they don't need to read a report about Linux on the desktop, do they?
...)
(not to mention that every "desktop" distro in the past two or three years has come with a pdf viewer by default
The requested URL
Linux will never be "ready" for the desktop. Neither will Solaris, AIX, IRIX, *BSD, or HP-UX. *nix is for servers and hackers, not Joe Sixpack and his PC. To succeed on the desktop, you need a UI designed for the LEAST computer-literate people out there, it has to support ANY hardware they can throw at it, installing/removing software has to be easy, etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Besides, if Linux did gain wide acceptance as a desktop OS, we would all lose our elite status and have to go back to VMS.
Having seen a great deal of hype and discussion about how Linux is going to push Windows off the desktop I see a problem with the whole subject...
No-one's actually defined who's desktop they want to aim at.
Now, if it's the corporate desktop then distributions should concentrate on a small number of bullet-proof applications included on the CD's. They should be set up so that they're designed to be "plug-and-play" when it comes to setting them up for a specific task and they should only allow the admin to change the look and feel etc. After all, it's an interchangeable office tool like a desklamp. Or it should be.
If it's the desktop of Aunty May then they should target with a few, easily used and bullet proof set of applications and a desktop which is very simple to use and only does a few things but does them extremely well.
If the desktop is for the computer hobbyist then they need a core set of programs which are bullet proof and a desktop which is customisable etc. In addition to this a lot of optional toys should be available.
Now, which of these "desktops" do you want to conquer?
In my opinion, for the last two, Apple have got the right mix with MacOS X, so Linux distributions could do worse than following Apple's ideas on combing novice usability with UNIX nutter complexity.
No operating system I've seen does the "desklamp" type interchangable desktop system all that well other than maybe Sun's SunRays and other thin clients, but they rely upon server CPU to run the applications.
Agrajag: "Oh no, not again!"
Would you mind also telling us what exactly makes GNOME/KDE feel like "a fucking Edsel"? And why exactly was whatever was on that IRIX (maybe CDE?) so much better?
For me it's the exact opposite. WinXP seems like an utter mess that is coated with "eyecandy" that I can't imagine anyone enjoying or tolerating longer than a week willingly. Mac OS X with aqua looks nice for a while but no thanks, I just want a nice and clean desktop. I think GNOME does a very good job at this and KDE ain't bad either.
Seems to me like you're just trolling.
Just take Mozilla Thunderbird and Calendar, integrate them into the kernel. Then put in a feature that allows an arbitrary host on the network run arbitrary code on your machine in the interest of letting other people invite you to meetings automatically.
That should infuse some of the old MS flavor into the dish. Should really get the punters switching to linux in droves.
i don't like my old sig.
precious few viewers? are acroread, xpdf, and ggv not enough for you? Windows users only get the first choice....
Since when? There's several and most distros include at least one. You can get a free Adobe PDF reader for linux no problem. If you don't like Adobe then there's Xpdf. Ghostview can also reads/write pdfs I believe.
it's a routine. SCO news, linux in the desktop, Wireless, but in fact they arent news, just opinions about the same topics, in fact these opinions should be in comments, not in the main page. where are the news?.
i second this. No it is not a troll to say linux desktops suck becasue they do. the kde gnome feud doesnt help. I switched to OSX 1 month back and im not looking back. people shoudl seriously look at OSX and not windows as aguide. Look at panther, with native QT and X11 modes, there is seriously NO need for linux on the desktop
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
this story?
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
It only takes one good viewer to view the file. xpdf worked find for me. Also, the only good viewer I can think of (off the top of my head; I know there are others out there somewhere) for windows is acrobat. For Linux, I know of xpdf, acrobat, and ghostview off the top of my head.
Nothing if you want to only view it on a screen. YMMV, but I've found pdf's print out more consisently across printers than html does. PDF also prints nicer IMHO.
Nothing new. I've had Linux on my desktop for years.
One of these days maybe I'll open the box and install it.
Seriously, though, what would a gesture-based system be like for disabled people? Surely more diffucult than a mouse (which can be hooked up to a mouth-based control or something like that). ??
The one single Linux app that would kill outhouse would be a proxy or a plugin that would allow other email readers such as mozilla or evolution to access an exchange server running in MAPI only mode. (No i don't mean the Ximian connector).
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
I've switched to Linux as my full time desktop.
It is *ready*. It is usable. Even my wife gets it when she sits down at my machine. The only caveat is minor installations for the browser (Flash mainly).
I'm an avid Gnome user - but applications such as K3B for burning, Gaim, even Grip are easy enough to use for an average user.
The article did a fantastic job by going into details by category, and then summing up the good and the bad, and I like the smilies.
Linux on the desktop scratches my itch. I can do everything I want to (even games) and if I can't do something I can usually knock up a script or a bit of C to bend it to my will.
:o)
Sure, if Linux was no longer 'sexy' I might have to give up playing some new releases (UT2k3 for example, or NWN) but I could live with that - the Quake engines were opened up way before Linux was a buzzword and they are still fun to play. There might have been more GPL game development too that way.
So in the long run all of the troll bitching about OSS desktops being 'not ready' or 'unsexy' means nothing. It'll carry on being used by the people who it is ready for, and the reast can join up gradually as it gets more mature or gains a feature they want. Doesn't mean much to me - and it's not like it's all going to stop working with vendor support yanked thanks to the GPL.
If you like it, use it. If you don't fix your problem or use something else. If everyone took that attitude towards Linux specifically and OSS in general the world would be a less irritating place
Beep beep.
After I discovered squirrelmail I stopped using email clients all together. Of course you need a IMAP server.. or access to one. In a corporate environment that's not a problem though. Neither is it one for the tech savvy Linux/Unix/BSD home users out there. So why create an Outlook clone aimed at these people? Why even use Outlook in these places?
Added bonus... if you run your own IMAP server you can also use amavis-new and spamassassin.
"no, no matter what anyone says Mozilla doesn't perform anything close to how IE does..."
And that's a bad thing?
Ok so I started on linux back in 1996 with some old version of Red Hat, can't remember what release it was. I remember the 2 months it took me to initially figure everything out. Back then I was constantly on IRC and got a lot of help from OctobrX who was also sorta new at the time. I was 19 then and had nothing but time on my hands to sit and learn this stuff. Windows was just coming into Win95 and the nightmare blue screen of death was a twice hourly occurrence.
Fast forward to 2003. WinXP is plenty stable, much more so than any windows OS thusfar. MacOSX offers all of the benefits a UNIX systems can plsu a stable non-beta interface with standards and a lot of really great off the shelf software. I don't see the appeal of Linux on the desktop and I don't think most others do either who aren't visiting this site.
Linux is ok in servers, i use FreeBSD personally but to each their own. Linux makes a semi adequate desktop if you look past the old, antiquated install processes, weak package management, lack of uninstall options, the nightmare library system that's almost impossible to keep under control without spending more time on it than you do actual work. The GUI's are sorry to say, horribly old and overly complex. There is no standard GUI for developers to code too without pissing off one side or the other (KDE or GNOME). Commercial developers are treated like dirt when they actually want to charge for software and/or wont release their hard work to everyone open source.
For the geeks Linux is ok. It's even fun to tinker with. Consider however most people could care less, and when I say most I mean MOST, I don't see any gains being made. My mom has enough trouble with MacOSX I can't imagine giving her Red Hat 9 and telling her how to use GNOME. "Here mom just compile this program with 'make install &' and then run it at the terminal". This is far far far from user friendly and as far as I can tell NO ONE is working to change this at all.
Linux is doomed to niche status until people in the OSS community start caring about ALL users and not just people who know what man pages are. This is the same with Apple and their closed hardware and stupid advertising. I don't know a single person that understands apples commercials enough to research them and figure out what they hell they are trying to sell.
Ok, so ending this rant I will say that Linux on the desktop is fine for some, even preferable. But don't even think that Linux in it's current state will be making any major headway into the desktop market. Servers and some business and scientific apps sure, but never the consumer desktop market.
What's wrong with xpdf? or GGV?
Actually, I won't... but anyone that reads that article should really look for the DATED version of the origonal... it's at least a year old, which in computer time is... well... a long fucking time.
Not Free(as in beer). Free(as in "I'm free to beat you over the head for being a dumbass")
"To succeed on the desktop, you need a UI designed for the LEAST computer-literate people out there, it has to support ANY hardware they can throw at it, installing/removing software has to be easy, etc., etc., ad nauseum."
Better or easier have nothing to do with anything.
Network marketing is everything. Absolutely everything.
In the end, nothing else matters.
I wish it weren't so, but it is.
Somebody should post a comment about how the most usable desktop ever was some punched card contraption for the PDP-10. That'd learn the vintage snobs.
-- Repeat with me: "There is no right to profits".
Hrm... aren't segfaults usually an indication of bad ram? Thought so.
Not Free(as in beer). Free(as in "I'm free to beat you over the head for being a dumbass")
Until Linux or any of it's derivatives can get the word out to the average uneducated user then they'll have no hope for making any inroads in this area. Windows, albeit crash prone and such, althought XP is heads and shoulders above the rest, is the most well known and simple os out there. Yea I know Macs are simple too but they are over priced and have no where near the software that Windows does.
What any form of Linux needs to compete on the desktop level is name/brand recognition, a good pr strategy, and massive advertising. I know this can be misconstrued as selling out but if you wanna compete on that level then you have to match the Windows effort which is massive to say the least.
Linux rules on the server front IMO but on the desktop is needs more work for Joe Average. Most of us can get whatever we need to work on Linux but Joe Average doesn't want to have to mess with compatibility issues, be it, hardware or software. This would be the key factor in a lot of people's decisions but there's also the simple fact of why fix something that isn't broken in their eyes. If they are happy with Windows, which most are because they know nothing different, then they won't switch regardless
Windows has the apps, games, and most market saturation.
Mac has the design niche
Linux has the uptime, loyal user base w/ Mac, and dependablity but needs to incorporate something major on the desktop level that the other's don't have. I'm not sure what it is at this point either:) In my eyes the dependability is major but people want something major in terms of bells and whistles. If there was true cross compatibilty with Windows apps then Linux would be a true contender. Until then it's desktop market share will be flat.
**Disclaimer**
I am no for any OS over another and refuse to debate OS's on a fanboy level. I just state what I believe and refuse to be tied to one OS over another because of all of the fanboy flames I always seem to encounter. They're all decent at the least and they all have their own drawbacks so I'll leave it at that although I could write a ton on the different factions and their ideologies
You aren't free to do anything, until you've lost everything.
PIMs always refer to functionality to manage things such as email, calendar and contacts and sometimes tasks.
It seems to me that as organisations become more and more connected into multi-segmented operational processes, you would think that handling Workflow notifications and responses would be the next killer-app.
Are there any PIMs which try to integrate notifications gracefully with the other functional elements?
If this isn't pure troll, I'd be very curious to know what rock you crawled out from under. If p0rn is the most important factor for you in choosing an OS this message will go right over you. I personally use Opera on both my windo$e and *NIX machines. I am able to use the web the same on both OSs; granted I don't browse p0rn all day either. It is exactly your type of thinking (oh it used to be that way, I'm sure it still is) that is killing *NIX on the desktop. I also work in a heavily MS environment (as an admin) and I'm able to completely maintain our Win2K AD domain from my Linux machine. I've been using it as my primary workstation for months now. Stop trolling and try something new for a change (other than p0rn)!
"Reality is a crutch for people who can't handle drugs" - George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)
What I need for Linux to be on my desktop:
- Video editing ability (home user style) similar to what I can do with Pinnacle Studio 7/8
- Functionality of MS Excel WITH VB for Applications
Those are my two main sticking points. Other than that, I could probably switch full time (except for games).
My guess is you're mixing and matching apps then... I use nothing but apps designed to be used under Gnome 2, and it looks and feels integrated to me.
Yes, they do if they want to know: (a) what to do to improve Linux so others to use it on the desktop; and/or (b) how to promote Linux on the desktop.
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
One concern is the ability in future years to access documents in by then obsoleted file formats. Office 20002 no longer natively supports the ability to read Office 4.0 documents.
Funk that! What about the flying cars?
no matter what anyone says Mozilla doesn't perform anything close to how IE does, and yes, I have used both
Then use Opera?
Putting the romance back into necromancer.
Actually, in my Cisco networking class that I took back in 11th grade, the thing took so long to load (first start Windows, then start Novell client, then log into the network, then start IE, then load up Cisco's crappy all-flash web site) that I actually did 'doze' off a few times :-/
Good grief. We often spent half the class time starting the computers.
And while I'm on the topic of slow, I tried out Knoppix 3.2 the other day. It was slow and bloated and couldn't keep up when it was playing some MP3s (I got skips and crap). Win2k on the same machine works beautifully.
One of the great things about Linux is that it's FAST. I run it on my old 586 here as a server and I can download files off of it faster than my 1.6 GHz Win2k machine can download files from itself (but then maybe that's just somethng to do with Ruby's IO being optimised better on Linux..).
Anyway, when you come out with these big, bloated GUIs that are less responsive and suck up more memory and CPU time than Windows, Linux loses some of its appeal...
And then there's the issues with dependency problems, blah, blah, blah. So, yeah. I think it'd have a better chance as a desktop OS if it got *cleaned up* at a low level (not just write GUIs to do the dirty work for you, but eliminate the mess completely).
Duct tape, XML, democracy: Not doing the job? Use more.
What needs to take place is for the MS biggots to give *NIX a try. I work in a mostly MS environment and I use my Linux box for most of my entire day. I am able to administer out Win2K AD domain, as well as the other mundane daily tasks. I very rarely go to my windoze bos for anything. I didn't think this was possible when I built the workstation but I wanted to ?try?. I've been on it since. In fact, for most of the stuff I do on a daily basis, this machine out performs the MS machines. In fact, I use Rdesktop a lot to connect to MS servers, and it is WAY smother and better than the MS TS crap. This is all a lot for me to come out with, as I even worked at MS for quite a few years, and at one time was hardcore MS (hold the flames please, no asbestos underwear today). But I've changed my thoughts and ideals, as would many others if they just give it a freekin try. Sure, there are million antiquated excuses as to why MS is better or worse, but you will never know what works best for YOU unless we try new things.
"Reality is a crutch for people who can't handle drugs" - George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)
I never want to hear about Betamax vs. VCR again, especially from "tech" or "nerd" people it is getting old move on the Netscape vs. IE or something like that ok...
Onward to the Aether Sphere!
My girlfriend says IE is faster over and over again. I don't see it, but then I don't go to a lot of sites running on IIS (which allows IE to cheat on setup time. IE does start faster, because most of it is loaded into memory before you ever click the IE icon. Mozilla can't do this because Mozilla.org does not own the operating system. Also, some sites use activeX controls and other IE specific things, (except for one site I use for work I'm lucky enough to not have to use any such sites, since I use Firebird the type of sites I look at (they adhere to w3 recommendations) actually look better).
i don't like my old sig.
Having precious few good PDF viewers on Linux should tell you something about its readiness as a desktop OS. If someone like you, adept enough to be reading /. and hold opinions about file formats and viewers, has a hard time reading a PDF file then that probably tells you more than that report ever will.
Take it easy,
Guy
I just don't get. My desktop looks pretty damn good with 3d panels, zooming icons and all. Sky pilot classic with Mozilla is pretty damn sharp too. Whenever I boot into Windows it's like I've gone back in time. Maybe the "eye candies" should be installed by default instead of offered as add-ons as they are now? Those who don't want it can always remove it.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
This is my biggest gripe with Linux, especially in X...
When I install a program, I want to know how to run it. In fact, I want it to give me options on how it should install itself. I want to be able to choose whether I get an icon on the desktop, or in the menuing system.
Windows does this quite well; people seem to have settled on an installer system. But in Linux, even RPMs can be a bitch to install. And you should never have to use the command line to install a program unless you want to do something very specialized with it.
I also agree about standardizing on the look and feel of application windows.
Not if he stole the machine! ;)
Anyone with Windows on their desktop needs a bigger Office........
or is it the opposite......
or is it a paradox and we'll all blink out of existance ?
Head hurts, need more Tequila.
Or at least that's what your software vendor keeps telling you.
umm...the cluless people don't give a crap....just tell them what is the office replacement....what is the INTERNET, and what is their E-mail...they will be happy...it is the people that are just smart enough to know what they are doing on windows that HATE changing becasue they do not want to put in the effort to "Relearn" everything...even though there is very little to relearn since all desktop computing is the same...all the ideas and such are exactly the same...it is just a matter of looking for the thing you need and getting over the habits of the old system.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
There seem to be an almost critical mass of ideas, tools, code, etc. surrounding "the Linux desktop thing" right now. It feels like something is about to happen.
What if someone comes up with new OS where encryption and strong auth are built-in, X is thrown out or reworked to some kind of networked XUL thing, file system is more like Reisers namespaces, DRM is builtin as well (to satisfy future Palladium sharks), all configuration files are XML, etc?
Seems like with consolidation of Intel hardware and availability of huge number of Linux device drivers to look at, this is not a remote possibility.
Would not that be nice?
Who the heck modded this down? :)
:) Isn't there a Solaris version though?
In fact, you have excellent point. J. Random Luser is going to want everything EXACTLY like (s)he knows from Windoze, right down to the big 'e' and the ability of the browser to render broken HTML (cf. dosius.zzn.com's login page).
I say someone should decompile IE and clone it for Linux.
-uso.
Dreams, dreams, don't doubt dreams, dreaming children's dreaming dreams. Sailor Moon SS
I mean, he can get a bit annoying with the whole GNU/lunix thing, but even the most resolutely ignorant commentator should be able to distinguish between KDE/GNOME, and the linux kernel running under it. Normally it wouldn't bother me, but they are primarily talking about the desktops here.
If you think this is splitting hairs, how many reviewers do you think would know how to tell the difference between KDE 3.1.0 running on top of linux and the same desktop running on top of BSD?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
You know what I hate about Linux?
- The lack of any common GUI among apps. Hell sometimes you can't even cut and paste between apps. At least with Windows and MacOSX there is enough similarity between apps that once you figure out how to use one you are well off to figure out the rest. Linux there is no comparison.
- Application names...yeah, XMMS really screams to me that it is an audio player when I see it on KDE's equivelant of a start menu. Might as well call it asdkasdf@#3rafsdfa, there isn't a difference.
- Software on store shelves...oh wait, what software on store shelves other then maybe one Linux distribution.
- Forget support, doesn't do much good if my mom can't get a phone number for that replacement of her beloved Quicken.
- Sure there is games, but call me when Battlefield 1942, High Heat Baseball, etc. are available instead of just FreeCiv. Get games like those and just about every young male in the world will switch.
- Oh yeah, can I mention dependicies?
I can see Linux gaining desktop share in corporations, but IMHO it will not be a major force in the home market for some time to come. All the current development focus seems to be on server functionality.
Linux needs better support for hot-plugged devices, a better GUI, easier configuration, a cleaner file system, and better applications.
By far, the majority of home computer users care about ease of use and simplicity rather than configurablity. They want applications and hardware that are easy to install and use. This is something that GNU/Linux with XFree86 does not have. And, it will have to change before Desktop Linux is common in the home.
Check my journal for further thoughts on this.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
As for the gestures, have you seen the TouchStream? Granted it isn't a new take on UIs, but until that happens it's a pretty damn cool way to interact with existing UIs.
TouchStream
It would be trivial to put the "little blue E" icon on Firebird.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
I've been using Galeon (based on Gecko) for a while, and it now actually pains me to have to use IE if I ever sit down at a Windows machine. Even the development releases (e.g. 1.3.5) which have had many features removed for rewriting have more nice features than IE. For example, the ability to add nice textbox widgets to your toolbar for search engines, and not just some limited set of search engines, but anything at all (I use the Google one constantly, but I also have one for PlanetMath, for example). Of course, there's also tabbed browsing, which is so useful and obvious that it's ridiculous that IE doesn't have it. Galeon is also quite fast. I've never had any performance issues with it.
I've also tried Konqueror, and thought that it was pretty nice (though it lacked some things like tabbed browsing, but hey, it's a filemanager too). I don't use KDE however, so it takes too long to init all the KDE stuff the first time Konqueror loads. If you don't mind KDE though, it's probably worth looking at. It'll probably load as fast as IE does in Windows if you're running KDE (as it won't have to do anything to initialise).
There are plenty of "IE Killers" already available for Linux - why not try these two?
In the same place where you can find unbiased comparisons of VI vs Emacs, KDE vs GNome, Mac vs PC, etc.
nowhere
MOD THE CHILD UP!
ghostview is for windows as well. I would assume it would display PDF for windows as well as linux. Never actually used it myself, acrobat suits my limited PDF viewing needs.
I've been using Wintel for over 15 years and have just recently installed Red Hat 9 on an older K6-2 550. Here are a couple of points I think are worth mentioning (ubergeeks can exclude themselves from the classifications below):
1. Linux is ready for *some* desktops only, namely ones where users won't be constantly tweaking and installing new software and hardware. You want a computer for grandma to browse the web, send email and view a few grandkid photos? Linux is great! You want to roll out corporate desktops where employees don't really need to be able to download and install the latest version of KaZaA? Linux is a godsend (provided the business software you need is supported).
2. Linux is *not* ready for the average user desktop. The average user wants to do everything grandma wants to do, but they also want to be able to install or upgrade software and hardware *easily*. In addition, they want a fully functional GUI, with no *necessity* of dropping to a CLI for everyday tasks. They want to be able to go to a third party software/driver website, follow the 'click here for Linux version' hyperlink, download the file, then double-click to install it.
Needless to say, as long as Linux distributions and desktop managers continue to proliferate, the average user's requirements will never be met. I say this as a *fact* not a *prescription*, so spare me the Linux-strength-in-diversity comments. I just think you can't have your cake (freedom/diversity) and eat it too (Linux on average desktop).
Imposing Libertarian views on everyone online since 1992.
I tend to agree with him. Starting everything with a k or a g is annoying as hell. Everytime I used to boot up the 'konqueror', I started thinking about how much I hate the Mortal 'Kombat' where you use 'Koins' to unlock 'Koffins' in the 'Krypt'. IT'S FUCKING ANNOYING TO HAVE EVERY PROGRAM START WITH THE SAME LETTER. The g's in gnome are still annoying, but as much to me because i dont get reminded of the whole 'kombat' thing. I mean, say what you will about microsoft, at least it isn't Microsoft mOffice that comes with mExcel and mOutlook and mWord. That's why I use enlightenment, no omnipresent prefixes there, no-siree. Now let me go fire up ETerm..... Oh dear god no, what have they done???? And in the new version, E17, they have about ten more built in apps on the way that all begin with E. Jesus christ it felt good to get that rant out though....
I too find it quite painfull to use IE these days. Not because of rendering or anything along those lines, simply because of the lack of tabular browsing and popup killing. I have been using Crazy Browser for a while now, which isn't really anything except for a new front end on IE with tabs and popup killing. I love it for the windows world, still loads fast cause it can take advantage of the so called IE cheats.
h tml
The crazybrowser.com site seems to be down but if anyone cares to check it out:
http://www.webattack.com/get/crazybrowser.s
During his keynote, Mitch Kapor also announced that OSAF supported Senti-Metrics (analyist consultants who help companies communicate with their online constituencies) in the launch of OpenSector.org, a news and discussion site that aims to help public sector types meet open source software developers, projects, advocates and ideas.
/., the site accepts story submissions from the community, which are reviewed by a team of editors (also from the community: the site asks folks to sign up if they're interested in being considered).
OSAF is also supporting Bart Decrem (author of the Linux Desktop paper), who helps develop the site's content. Like
If any company has even a thought of entering the desktop market, they have to focus on their commitment to sales. Sounds easy, right? But that commitment means showing up for sales meetings and making sure the customer is happy not only with your product, but with your company as well.
Microsoft didn't get to market dominance by ignoring their customers. The problem they have had in the past has been a pit bull aggression toward their competitors. This often left the customer with half finished products, but their early focus was to move the product closer to what the customer wanted at all times. Their focus has changed now that they dominate the market, but their competitive drive still remains on steroids.
Compare that to a Linux vendor who was supposed to speak at our company today. They set up two consecutive meetings with our company and a LUG to show how their software would not only provide a good user experience, but would also convince skeptical IT personnel that their product was a ready replacement or alternative to Windows.
They decided to 'no-show'. And they did it without providing adequate notice. Through their actions, they have told both organizations they scheduled meetings with that the customer is not important.
I know that things go afoul and that sometimes a scheduled event must be cancelled. But if Microsoft had scheduled the meeting where they thought they could have an opportunity to get to a competitors customer, they would have shipped a sales representative with a 102 degree Fahrenheit fever rather than 'no-show'.
That is why they dominate the desktop market, and probably will for years to come.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
..They're going for Kuteness. Get it right.
OSAF will out in force be at OSCON, the O'Reilly Open Source Conference, July 7-11. We'll have a session "Chandler: An Open Source Personal Information Manager" with Mitchell Baker, Katie Capps Parlante, Andy Hertzfeld, and Chao Lam on Thursday, July 10 at 2:30 (my keynote is Thursday morning).
We'll also be having a BOF Thursday evening "Chandler -- An Open Source Personal Information Manager" at 7:00pm. If you're at OSCON, come see us.
Why are we using this arbitrary word 'ready' anyway? This clearly depends on who's using it and what they're using it for. People say that their mom can't run it, but forget that their mom can't run Windows either. It's a pointless argument anyway.. people wondering whether or not linux will 'succeed'. This isn't a commercial product, it's a bunch of open source projects. Look at how much developement was done before anyone knew about it or was interested in using it. It can't really fail. The real question is will Linux ever occupy the majority position on desktops the way that Windows does now. I think the answer is obvious. If Microsoft doesn't come up with some serious innovations then EVENTUALLY they will lose the desktop, where eventually could be a matter of a few decades.
My Blog
I have to use DV editing software and DVD playing software that don't come with the distribution of my choice (Mandrake) and they don't look like they fit. Also, the fonts in the web browser don't look like the fonts in Open Office don't look like the fonts on the desktop. This is where the lack of integration really shows.
...And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." - Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984)
Gartner claims: .net would dominate the net by 2003
In 1999, they claimed that Apache was not that good and that IIS would crush it in about 1-2 years.
In 2000, they said that Linux would occupy about 1 % of the servers on the web (totally ignoring that netcraft already showed Linux as being on more than 10% of the web servers at that time)
In 2001, they said that
So, here is my prediction:
Gartner is worthless and will be losing a lot of money in the course of the next 2 years.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Thanks for the hearty laugh, Zone man .
I also have at least seven different distro's or versions thereof, sitting around here that have never made it on one of my several computers for longer than a month before I finally gave up and wiped it clean, because of hardware/software/driver conflicts/problems/unfuckingbelievable hassles.
I'm no dummy, but I sure felt like it wasn't worth the effort.
And please, before you hassle me for that last statement, I've been working with, and building computer systems since 1978, I know what I'm doing.
And KDE IS butt ugly, especially the K.
Sure, just what I want to see all the time, a BIG K.
I really wanted to see what LINUX was all about, but it hasn't been happenin' for me.
So now it's been a few years, and I want to try again.
So whats a good distro these days? Anybody?
If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
Vendors... lie? sniffle.
The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
www.apple.com, of course! Where else? ;)
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Look at panther, with native QT and X11 modes, there is seriously NO need for linux on the desktop
That requires a commitment to expensive Apple hardware. Don't get me wrong. It's nice kit but very expensive for what it is. I can spend less than $600 on the hardware for a Linux box that will perform more than acceptably. The lowest end Apples start at $800 and will be handlily outperformed by the $600 commodity box.
I would say an acceptable commodity desktop that isn't ruled by any one corporation is much needed. I would trust Apple not to screw me as a user more than MS but not a hell of a lot more. Basically, I don't trust any proprietary vendor. They're always looking to raise/collect the rent.
but nobody does anything about it. Press releases about the latest "Chandler" vaporware fell like snow, but it's no closer to the desktop than a scribble on a napkin.
Meanwhile, I'll keep using my Unix desktop.. MacOS X.
Every so often, another 10 or 12 M$ users get fed up an try Linux. Two or three stick with it. Every now and again a few hundred people buy a Lindows-based cheap PC from Walmart.com.. Most of those keep using it because it's simple and runs pretty good. Every now and then one of us geeks gets fed up, decides to try Linux, needs the skills for our jos, etc... and we're hooked. The rest is history.
The whole Open Source community is a different way of thinking. It's a whole new world that takes some getting used to. Once on board, however, a small percentage of the "users" become the "contributors". With more contributors, more problems get fixed, more features get added, more things are moved to the new environment.
As more people move to the new environment, more commercial vendors of those really cool apps decide it's worth the cost to port their apps. From Games to server-side to productivity, more new commercial apps are deciding to join the fray.
As this "war of attrition" continues, we slowly reach the point refered to as "critical mass". That is where the percentage of users is high enough, the ease of use is good enough, and the level of "public expertise" is great enough that the Joe Sixpacks out their don't see a difference and start choosing Linux on purpose (or maybe just gets it because it's already loaded on the PC he wants and "oh, this one IS cheaper isn't it...")
At that point, M$ quickly loses it's $ and becomes the fringe radical OS, much like what happened to OS/2 and nearly happened to Mac/OS.
Something that is free (as in freedom), almost free (as in I didn't have to pay --much-- for it), and has a huge following that is constantly improving it will continue to increase in market share until it is the dominant player.
In the long term (that may be a few or many years) the only people not adopting OSS will be the dinosaurs that refuse to change and have a rabid, unexplainable attachment to the M$ OS.
As far as being a "threat to the software market", markets change over time. If a large group of people are willing to build, for free, the commodity pieces, then there is no market to sustain those software makers.
In a "for instance": Netscape went out of business (yea, I know, AOL bought them... they still went out of business!!!) because M$ decided to offer their new, buggy browser for free. Now, M$ is going to go out of business because the public has decided to offer their new, not quite as shiney, OS for free.
In the same vain, Oracle has, arguably, the best RDMS on the market, AND IT RUNS ON LINUX. None of the OSS dbms packages can really compete on their scale... yet. It is realy only a matter of time before the scalability, stability, and breadth of services of one or more of these OSS dbmss catch up or even pass Oracle. It will still take a while after that point for widespread adoption to kick in. I don't see that happening for another 7 to 15 years.
M$, however, only has about 2 to 4 years left in their profit cycle... and they know it. That's why they are getting soooo nasty. Linux has already passed them up on general stability and scalability. It's really only the flashy stuff that remains to be polished.
Yea, OSS will take over the market, with only a few niches left for commercial apps. The app vendors that don't port will go quicker because non-ported specialty apps give a valid target for the OSS crowd. (Take not Sdobe, Autodesk, Intuit, Macromedia etc...) A popular movement, like OSS, is like a train: get on board and enjoy the ride or stand in the way and get squished...
'nuff said...
--==-- I've found Karma to be a relative thing... Ya know, the kind you invite to Christmas...
How would something like this be an Outlook killer? As long as the Exchange server is required, you're not exactly you're not exactly 'killing' anything.
Finally, you must trust yourself. Free software is easy to try out, though it may require more effort in the short run. If you feel like it's time to "upgrade" your operating system, try dropping a knoppix CD and judge what people are saying for youself.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I've found the easiest way to convert people to mozilla is use the modern theme, turn off popups, and switch icons from mozilla to the IE's blue 'E'. Tell people that you upgraded their web browser so they won't get all those stupid little popups- that's why it looks all new and shiny. run them through it a couple of times, and introduce them to tabs.
Openoffice has a little ways to go before that happens but I did have one instance where someone asked me if I knew of a replacement of MS office. Apparently he was using a pirated version and it crashed and crashed and crashed some more. He tried reinstalling, but that didn't seem to help. He couldn't even open a file before it crashed.
So I uninstalled MS Office, did a virus scan and scrubbed most of his system, then installed openoffice. Haven't heard a complaint since.
Now, whether it was a corrupted version of Office or just the viruses, I don't know. I do know that he seems to be happy and hasn't complained yet.
I was just proud because in one fell swoop, I destroyed some viruses, stopped some piracy, pushed the OS Agenda, and got a Political Science major asking "so what is this linux thing anyways?"
Looking for Book Reviews? Check out Literary Escapism.
Compare the quality of the rendered output from xpdf/ggv with that of the real deal (Acrobat) and I think the answer is pretty obvious.
So whats a good distro these days? Anybody?
Can't you do your own research? I mean, for fuck's sake, is it that hard to find a linux distro to try? Get off your ass and try one. Redhat. Mandrake. Debian. SuSE. Gentoo. Fucking pick one and stop asking stupid questions you already know the answer to.
Moon Macrosystems. Sun's biggest competitor.
Evolution is practically a clone of the Outlook client. It is not an Outlook killer - it does nothing particulary new or revolutionary.
On the other hand, Chandler is a total rethink of how we will interact with our email/calendars/contacts.
Hmmm. I have the same complaint about Windows. A lot of applications function poorly as part of the unified whole, and many of them are non-standard in very disappointing ways. I've also found that some of the default behaviors are the stupidest things ever... only with Microsoft, if there is a way to change some of that stuff, it's far from obvious. I find that Linux GNOME and KDE are far more flexible and eye-catching in the main than Microsoft. And yes, sometimes there are discrepancies. You get what you pay for.
I do not have a signature
does acroread count as the real deal??
I've never noticed any lack of quality with xpdf...
Apparently they fixed the bug (  without semicolon).
-uso.
Dreams, dreams, don't doubt dreams, dreaming children's dreaming dreams. Sailor Moon SS
And by take the computer out of the box I mean a generic, untailored copy of the OS on the hard disk and standard application set (as distributed with the OS). ie. as a manufacturer would supply the unit.
Any local applications would be held centrally on the server which are accessed via a central network disk. This means that the sysadmins only have to upgrade an application once and all the desktops are automatically updated because they all use the same networked copy.
This would require that the base OS and the applications are logically separated on the filesystem so that a networked copy could be mounted over the top replacing the ones on the hard disk. (And by applications I also mean the desktop interface!)
Agrajag: "Oh no, not again!"
4.2.3 The commodification of the operating system
I'm pretty sure this isn't a word.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Let's just hope that desktop Linux doesn't suffer the same fate as Betamax in the disastrous Betamax/VHS battle.
No worries. It'd be impossible for desktop Linux to suffer the same fate, because the real people behind it aren't out for the same things as those that pushed BetaMax. The real guys working on KDE and Gnome and such aren't out to make a buck (although that is a perk for a select few), but are out to make a better product for themselves--and anyone else that wants to use it. Now, I realize that companies after that lucrative buck have jumped in and done a lot of work to improve desktop Linux to where it is today--but so what? When/if those companies cease to exist, their improvements (for the most part) will still be around for the community to use and enjoy.
Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
Decrem later issued a rather funny retraction which can still be found on archive.org. I wish the images that went along with the retraction were archived too, but it's still pretty funny.
The real Webmaven is user ID 27463. I don't rate an imposter, because my ID is such a lame-ass high number.
Are you sure that an 'Outlook Killer' would be a GOOD thing? Quite frankly, I find that the monolithic design of outlook makes it overcumbersome, and excessively complicated. However, Outlook does a relatively good job at all of its functions (Email, contacts, calendar, etc)
The 'Free' clients, however, all try to imitate Outlook by providing all the same functions. Needless to say, they do a lot of things, but they do them poorly. Why can't we have an application with a narrow focus that does its job WELL?
Look at the apps included with Mac OSX for an example. All the functions of outlook are separated into several standalone applications. Each application (Mail, Address Book, iCal, etc.) excels at its specific function, and tightly intergrates with the others using a simple XML interface.
Why can't we create a standardized XML interface for PIM applications to talk to each other (and even store their data on a server)? That way we can chose the best combination of apps which suit our specific needs the best. It would also standardize a method for storing this data on a server (the current open server-side mail protocols are designed ONLY for mail, not contacts, calendars, etc. M$ Exchange is the only application which can store all PIM data on a server)
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
hear hear I actually have an unused, legal Windows XP cd. Also if you use Mandrake Linux it has a really nice custom theme, Galaxy, that is far nicer to look at. Also I could easily complain about all the programs called Win something in Windows. Wincustomize, WinZip, WinWord, need i go on?
Joseph Farthing
http://josephfarthing.com
Good plan. Publish the report in a format for which there are precious few good viewers available on Linux.
Heck, there's even fewer good PDF viewers for Windows! There are plenty enough good PDF viewers for Linux (even including acrobat, which is pretty much the only one available for Win). If this were an MSWord file, you might have had a valid argument, since there's only a couple of viewers for that format in Linux, and none of them are all that great, but PDF is an open, well-supported standard, and it works fine. Everywhere.
What's wrong with good old HTML?
Not as well suited for printing. PDF is really just an enhanced form of postscript. And is easier for Windows folks to view than postscript. But from a Linux user's perspective, its almost hard to tell the difference between ps and pdf.
I realize I'm probably feeding the troll here, but there do seem to be a fair number of people still who don't realize that PDF is as well supported on Linux as it is anywhere, and it's for these people that I post.
It sure would kill outlook in my life. I have a machine sitting under my desk running w2k that i use for exactly one thing, running outlook. Why? because our company runs their exchange server in monopoly mode. If i could get at my email from my linux box, i'd wipe win2k off that puppy and find something useful for it to do.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
Here's how I see it. Linux on the desktop is inevitable. It is an option that businesses can choose to ignore at their own cost.
;)
Now if their competition somehow cuts costs using Linux and outmaneuvers them they will be answer to their share holders. But if they can somehow leverage proprietary software to make their business work more efficiently then it is still possible Linux might not become the dominant OS.
Speaking from experience I serious doubt proprietary software can be as dynamic and efficient as OSS. But I will give them the benefit of the doubt.
Listen up folks. Proprietary software NEEDS all the help it can get. Because we all know software doesn't build itself.
So, would Total Annhilation, Warcraft II, Grand Theft Auto, Duke Nukem' 3d, Quake, or any other host of games impress you?
I don't play games because they're new. I play them because I like playing them. I've played Battlefield 1942 a few times. It's okay. Some interesting concepts for vehicles and team play, but nothing that I particularly require. Why should I chase something because it's the latest and greatest?
Folks, play what you enjoy playing. If you want to play the newest "If it moves, shoot it, if not, shoot it and see if it moves" first person shooter, go ahead. It's cool. If not, so what?
I even still occasionally load up DOOM on a computer with an FM Synth MIDI sound card, so I can run through the levels with my adrenaline pumping to that Overdriven Guitar synth, shooting at loud monsters.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
You're right. The answer is obvious. xpdf is perfectly capable of replacing acrobat reader.
Time makes more converts than reason
Been using linux as an absolute desktop OS for 4 years now.. never had a problem... people see me using it and are impressed and they see how easy it is! Nick
Home Sweet Home Linux
korrect, heh....
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
The real question is:
"Is the desktop ready for Linux?"
Just be sure to wear the gold uniform when you beam down -- you know what happens when you wear the red one.
"2. Linux is *not* ready for the average user desktop. The average user wants to do everything grandma wants to do, but they also want to be able to install or upgrade software and hardware *easily*. "
Ever heard of Debian and it's "apt"?
Ever heard of SuSE and it's hardware detection with every boot?
Surely Redhat 9 does not represent all GNU/Linux distributions.
I've run linux for years, and unix before there was linux. It's fine for what it is. Here is an example of why it isn't ready for prime time, and maybe never will be:
I was visiting an old friend last month, but could only stay another three hours before running off to catch a plane.
She asked if there were any way I could install a scanner, and a new printer(old one was broken) before I had to leave.
She was running Windows 98.
No problem. We went down to Staples, bought the cheapest scanner and the cheapest printer. I don't even remember the brand names, although I think the printer was a bottom of the line HP inkjet.
I slapped it together. Or tried too anyway. Sh*t. I needed another USB port. Back to Staples. Bought cheapest USB2.0 card. *Finally* slapped it together. Everything worked, stable. Ran off to catch my plane.
Now let's say it was running any modern distro. Could I make it work? Sure. Would I have caught my plane?
That's why it's not ready.
- OpenOffice.org
- The GIMP
My, aren't you a nice fellow, and good day to you too.
I have researched, but I wanted some of the insights of /. readers on distros they've tried, why is that such a problem for you?
Thanks for nothing.
If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
Don't forget ghostscript and ghostview or GSview, which are available to both windows and Linux users.
Frogs are primitive animals - so the occasional extra toe is not that unusual. But this is very unusual.
you don't need to recompile anything on a distro like redhat or mandrake.
finding drivers,
don't have to do that either.
learning tons of commands,
not necessary with either redhat's or mandrake's gui utilities.
and installing programs is way above the average pc users head under current versions of Linux.
same thing again. it is not a problem with most distos now. RPM hell is similar to DLL hell except most package managers in Linux have some form of automatic dependcy checking. just click the RPM and it's all set. not to mention the awewsome package managers that bot debian and gentoo have, just apt-get packagename or emerge packagename and a package and it's dependencies are automatically downloaded and installed. up2date for redhat and urpmi for mandrake work similary but are not as advanced as apt or portage.
For anyone reading this comment who hasn't used Linux before, don't buy into any of this crap. it's the biggest lie that has been perpetuated about Linux. anyone can set up an rpm distro. it's easier than reinstalling windows.
Time makes more converts than reason
My original comment got modded to -1 in less than an hour while a bunch of aplogists got modded up to "insightful." It is this fanboy penguinista attitude that has been holding linux back and will continue to do so. Until a Lindows or a Dell figures out how to put together a professional and appealing desktop that is not simply a hacked together mishmash of a dozen desktop kludges it simply ain't gonna happen. And I don't say this as a MS apologist or fanboy - I want nothing more than to fire up an installer, repartition away windows and never look back. But as ugly as windows is from that first install screen, it at least gives me the opportunity to do what I want to do, right off the bat, without having to recompile the fucking kernel or pore through a dozen goddamn .config files while trying to make sense of instructions that "just work" but don't fucking do anything of the sort.
As another poster points out, OpenOffice and GIMP.
Unless you're a professional artist, face it, you don't need photoshop.
But, OK, let's say that you absolutely HAVE to have those two apps (and I'm sure you're oh-so-willing to pay retail price for those apps, no?).
Get Crossover Office and run both those apps through that. They both run quite well under Crossover Office.
Quit giving apps stupid names like Chandler. What the hell does this thing do, automatically record Friends or something?
First of all, Chandler is a dog. Its slow as shit. If you have a Gig of RAM and a 3.0Ghz CPU, execute Chandler and then go off and start to brew your morning coffee, come back and the main window might be visible, but the other widgets probably have not loaded into memory yet... Chandler: Good idea. Bad implementation.
You are right, but really, this is the job for Apple to have tackled. That is why the zealots pay them - it gives them the freedom to inovate. When the beautiful Aqua interface was introduced it was noted by various HI people that it was not revolutionary at all - examples of Palm OS were given as a revolutionary step up in HI - but Aqua was accused, rightly, of being no more user friendly than Win95. I think if Apple would really take a chance on something new that innovation would make its way down to GNOME.
nice twist
-pyrrho
You point to a very real problem but I don't think it is as clean cut as that....
.Net and now all we need is Portable.Net or Mono and we will be in business.
The problem is that for corporations, the training costs of teaching employees to use a new computer system is very real and so they want to use what the workers use at home (Windows). for home users, OTOH, the time cost of learning a new system is very real and so they usually opt to use what they are familiar with from work (Windows).
Add to this the following problems: Large mindshare/lockin of VB programmers who maintain in-house applications, lack of extremely easy end-user installable Linux applications (without needing to read directions). Soon you have a situation where there is quite a lot at stake and software licenses are not so scary anymore.
All that being said, is Linux ready for the desktop? Yes. My parents use it. of course they are not trying to download the newest freeware/scumware on the net so it works fine for them. And they are not afraid to read directions, even though they know very little about computers. Their learning has been gradual and focused (like for all of us) around a need-to-know model (when I need to know it, I will learn it).
In a corporate environment, there is very little that Linux lacks, although many of the best network management tools are still under development. The only real thing it lacks is a good way to run VB inhouse apps (WINE may not cut it, and GNOME-BASIC seems to still be very immature). Fortunately, Microsoft came along with
The thing is that the corporate market is the cornerstone of anyone's desktop market. Microsoft saw this, and Apple missed out, IMO. If people learn the basics of Linux at work, if a computer manufacturer offers them $400 (or more as market saturation forces prices up) off the price of their new computer to run Linux, do you think that they will? Of course they will.
So it cuts both ways. And it may eventually be to our advantage.
It is the business customers who we need to target and the home user will follow.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Their names.
XPDF and GGV. It's sad that it's not geeky to me, and I understand what they are.
Seriously, though, I wish people would actually come up with names for their programs instead of slapping on a prefix of x, K, G, or using an acronym.
"Sufferin' succotash."
gv? xpdf? maybe even the Adobe Acrobat Reader for Linux?
Strange, but my Linux distro (Mandrake) came with PDF readers, I had to download and install Acrobat Reader for Windows....
Languages aren't inherently fast -- implementations are efficient
"I want nothing more than to fire up an installer, repartition away windows and never look back. But as ugly as windows is from that first install screen, it at least gives me the opportunity to do what I want to do, right off the bat, without having to recompile the fucking kernel"
As long as all you want to do is play minesweeper. It's just as well you don't have to recompile anything since windows comes with no compiler. Incidentaly I have never recompiled the kernel on my home machine, ever.
"For me it's the exact opposite. WinXP seems like an utter mess that is coated with "eyecandy" that I can't imagine anyone enjoying or tolerating longer than a week willingly."
Not true. I put up with it for 10 days before reclaiming the partition for something more useful.
It's just because of marketing exposure and brand name recognition that we do know better.
SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
http://www.mplayerhq.hu/
I wonder if the authors also forgot to do their homework on other parts of use of Linux on the Desktop.
Robert
What also is needed is close integration with the major PC vendors. One could think of Integration depertments at the major PC vendors, where Linux distro vendor staff design/implement/testdrive Linux preload's on PC's and Laptop's and also testdrive extra needed Linux drivers to get all the hardware of new to be released PC's/laptop's going.
Further i think the report is rather RedHat Linux oriented and they better rename it from desktop-linux-overview.pdf into desktop-redhat-overview.pdf. Lots of sections are too negative because they are describing RedHat's point of view?
For instance this section on page 19: OpenSource application developers : quantity : good quality : lacking. I guess Micheal Tiemann lately doesn't get so much bugfix reports at Bugzilla anymore. Maybe their techie beta-drive audience has left?
Robert
i havent found a good web editor for linux that has all the built-in ftp and the bells and whistles that dreamweaver has. i do flash at work too, so...
now, there are two results that could come from this post.
1. you could say, "hey, hadnt thought of that, youre right."
or...
2. you could say, "hey moron, havent you ever heard of $perfect_MX_replacement?"
so im thinking to myself i win either way, id love to switch back to debian at work, but win2k has the macromedia stuff. and dont start talking about Wine, okay? ive spent several hours trying to get that to just run the installer for MX with creeping success. maybe im a moron, i dunno.
i sell illegal drugs
'One concern is the ability in future years to access documents in by then obsoleted file formats. Office 20002 no longer natively supports the ability to read ten year old Office 4.0 documents."
18000 years and we can't read those files? That's not just Microsoft's fault, is it?
There is a Universal Life Value Check it
Thanks for pointing that out. My confession is archived here.
File this in the "flogged dead horse" department.
With all the back and forth about Linux on the desktop being either dead, alive, moribund, or as this study says, "much work remains to be done," folks are forgetting that once past the reliability issue, (which Linux has convincingly established) usability with existing data and the ability to interface with other users will drive users to one OS or another.
If the Linux desktop had these characteristics, every tiny nonprofit in the U.S. would be using this system - it is far less expensive and much more reliable. Yet I don't see hoards going to Wal-Mart and picking up the CPU Builder's model for $350. The reason (aside from the fear-of-a new-OS factor) users do not have the ability to share core word processing and speadsheet files back and forth as easily as they do with established (read Windows) software. If all your friends are on AOL, use Word, Excel or Works because it came bundled on their system, it's going to be extremely difficult to get them to be venturesome and try something else.
Smaller government agencies, non-profits and caritiable groups would seem like the best market for Linux to move into. But a charitable or non-profit business with very few IT dollars to spend, with overworked (and likely non-technical) volunteers or staffers, will have very few "technology pioneers" willing to take the risk of a Linux desktop. All their colleagues have Word files. Although Adobe is making great strides in making the PDF a more universal document, they do not support Linux, and I have not seen third party application that creates PDFs on Linux. If your file does not EXACTLY translate to Word, or your speadsheet has complicated links that won't transfer to Excel, you won't like the application.
What is needed is a different approach to the issue. Linux has to offer features and applications on the desktop that the other systems don't, AND be fully compatible with existing software.
Figure that one out, and maybe we can bury this one for good!!
I currently use Mandrake Linux. I recently added a SCSI card and disk to my system running an IDE drive. Here is what I did:
1. Go to Fry's and buy el-cheapo SCSI card. The only one they had under $30.00 indicated Linux support on the box. All other operating systems required drivers found on the CD inside. Hmmm....
2. Install Card. This was basically pick a slot and insert card correctly.
3. Boot machine.
4. Make a couple of new directories using the file manager.
4. Run DiskDrake.
5. Choose new drive with the nice little drive tab. Create new partition or partitions with a couple of clicks. and tell the system where to put them in the filesystem.
This dialog is nice, it shows what parts of your disks are in use, or not. Finding your new disk and defining how you want to use it is pretty easy.
Getting to this point required that I type nothing. Also at this point, I have a lot of interesting choices that used to be harder a couple years ago, but now are just as easy as anything else. (Journaled filesystems, win32 compatable filesystems, and the usual Linux filesystems. --All of these are point and drool.
The defaults are sane as well. If I just want to use the disk, I can just go with the defaults and choose a target directory and be done.
6. Since I know what I am doing, mount -a. If I were a newbie, I could always just reboot as well.
Done.
It is clearly possible today to run Linux with very little effort. I could have done all the steps above manually, but I did not have to.
I also would have likely made some goofy mistake with a comma or something just like you did.
For someone getting started, Mandrake has done a good job of putting those options they need most where they will stumble into them. --Just like microsoft does.
The good part is all the power still exists under the hood when the time comes...
Blogging because I can...
You're welcome. But could you put the desktop screen shot there too?
The real Webmaven is user ID 27463. I don't rate an imposter, because my ID is such a lame-ass high number.
"Outlook-killer" seems like a self-defeating product category. Not to mention that his super-smart team like to write specs, not code. We'll all be way tired of hearing about how great this is going to be well before we can actually download it--if that ever happens.
(An aside: In his OSCON keynote, Mitch Kapor claimed to be innocently on the sidelines during the whole Lotus "look-and-feel" lawsuit days, while the rabid lawyers ran amok. That's not how I remember it...)