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.
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.
...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.
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...
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.
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
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
True, homeusers will probably switch to Linux for the same reason they use Windows now: it's what they use at work.
Centralization breaks the internet.
"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.
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...
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
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!"
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.
Nothing new. I've had Linux on my desktop for years.
One of these days maybe I'll open the box and install it.
Mac OS X certainly refutes your claim that "*nix is for servers and hackers, not Joe Sixpack...."
I do agree with your analysis of the state of the Linux UI, but Apple has demostrated that you can put an effective and attractive GUI on a unix machine.
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Teach him to eat and he will fish forever.
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.
"no, no matter what anyone says Mozilla doesn't perform anything close to how IE does..."
And that's a bad thing?
What's wrong with xpdf? or GGV?
No - we need an OS/windowing system that forces coders to make things usable automatically. Command line and graphical launch should be the same thing from a developer standpoint - instead of having to pop-over to the command line, the user should be able to pop-open a constext menu for the run-parameters of a program, and see limited options, not just an ambiguous text-passing system. It should be more convenient to write a configuration system through a graphical widget window then through a text editor. Basically, I think code should move away from the simple text config file, and more into a database-style concept of a header that defines widgets. So, the configuration simply becomes an onscreen list of widgets - with no text file to get confused by. Sure, if the coder leaves out the doctext then this thing is confusing - but at least widgets will give you a vague idea what the control does.
The problem is that all major OS's are gradually evolutionary growths from the 80's. None are actually "designed".
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?
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....
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.
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...
Another VERY good reason why home users will use Linux rather than Windows is that DRM realted technologies will be abhorent to Linux so when they buy their CD and it won't play on their PC they'll just bring it back and tell the store to go to hell and download the tracks from XXX. Likewise when they pick up a few DVDs over in the US (or Europe) and come back home they will be able to just play them and not discover that they have locked themselves out from playing the rest of their collection. Now I know that Windows does not preclude them doing these things, but you have to venture into a seedier underworld of crackers where on Linux the hacking will be done out of the box (or else they will just have to get any DVD to play and then be able to play any other DVD without fear).
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
Dictionary Nazi says,
n ary&va=commodification
/-"mä-d&-f&-'kA-sh&n/ noun
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictio
One entry found for commodify.
Main Entry: commodify
Pronunciation: k&-'mä-d&-"fI
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -fied; -fying
Date: 1982
: to turn (as an intrinsic value or a work of art) into a commodity
- commodification
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.