The Failures Of Desktop Linux

PDAJames writes "Maybe Linux isn't quite ready for the desktop after all. After an earlier, very positive evaluation of SuSE Linux Desktop, ZDNet UK has carried out a more in-depth review, running the system in a production environment for two weeks, and found it wanting. A key problem area was interacting with the corporate Windows network. When will this stuff finally be ironed out?"

Comments

Failure?

[Arandir]

The title of this Slashdot article is "The Failures of Desktop Linux". Yet this is NOT a failure of desktop Linux, but rather a problem "interacting with the corporate Windows network".

Big difference!

I'm not using Linux in a corporate environment, but I am using FreeBSD, which has exactly the same "desktop" software. It interacts with the mandated corporate Windows network just fine. There are some problems, but nothing that couldn't be easily fixed on the IT side of things.

For example, I can't use Outlook Calendar, and sometimes I need to schedule meetings. I can't use Korganizer or Ximian Connector, because they require the Outlook servers to turn on WebDAV. But all it would take for it to work would be for IT to click one single checkbox in the server configuration screen. This is by far the biggest pain I have, but it's one trivially solved if IT wanted it solved.

There is some minor problems with MSWord documents, particularly those with tables and form elements. But in the two years I've used FreeBSD at work, I've never had to boot into Windows to open a Word document. In fact, the ONLY time I boot into Windows is to run Outlook Calendar, and play Quicktime LOTR trailers...

If there are problems interacting with the corporate Windows environment, then blame the environment, and not Linux, BSD, Apple, or anyone else. Saying Linux is a failure on the desktop because it isn't a Microsoft product is like saying the Dodge Neon is a failure as an automobile because it doesn't use Ford Taurus parts.

Re:Doesn't play well with Windows boxes?

[ameoba]

To cary your analogy out, It's like trying to build a new car that doesn't quite fit on the existing roads and when you DO get your new automobile to fit on the roads, GM goes the roads so that your car still can't drive on them.