Java Desktop System Rivals XP, OSX in Usability

protohiro1 writes "In this glowing review Chris Gulker calls Sun's Java Desktop System 'the most polished and real-world user-ready Linux desktop in existence.' Well, I'm sold. Will this finally sell the PHBs on a linux corporate desktop?" Newsforge and Slashdot are both part of OSDN.

Comments

Article Summary

[Phroggy]

So, it rivals OSX in usability because Nautilus has a toolbar button that opens a Documents folder, it can browse SMB and NFS shares, Evolution showed an hourglass cursor while launching, and - are you ready for this? - cut, copy and paste work.

Yep, I'm sold.

Re:The Price

[runenfool]

Actually, at the risk of sounding like a zealot I've heard of organizations with ratios of 1 IT guy supporting a couple thousand machines without difficulty. Crazy? Nope - Mac OS X (and OS 9 before it even). I didn't believe it myself (and Im a Mac user), but people with large Mac installations (all three of them) seem to get by pretty well without a lot of support costs.

My memory is a bit hazy, but I think I talked to a few folks in K12 who made those types of claims (I was trying to do an informal TCO study of large Mac installations since you can't find a good recent one from something like Gartner), as well as a guy from Los Alamos IIRC. Perhaps we just got used to the support intensive Windows model.

OK, Im being a little vague, but its 3am and my buzz is wearing off :)

Good Review, But Still Smells of Linux Elitism

[reallocate]

It's very good to see Sun launch a a Linux distribution that won't make repel adults in horror, but Gulker perpetuates at least one of the abiding and unfortunate errors of many Linux supporters.

Contrary to the linkage made by the review, ease of use is not synonymous with "dumbing down". Ease of use does not mean hiding capabilities. It simply means what it says: easy to use.

Example: Creating a "Documents" directory and suggesting users sore all their documents there makes a system easier to use. Nothing frces a user to do that; no capability is lost. If a user wants to track through the file system and store files in other locations, nothing prevents that. A "Documents" directory is based on the same principle as the "etc" and "home" directories. Both provide a suggested place to store files that share certain characteristics. If using a "Documents" directory is for dummies, why don't we see smart admins storing configuration files all over the file system? Surely, anyone smart enough to use Unix doesn't need help finding files?

Other examples exist, but the perpetuation of the bogus ease of use/dumbing down linkage remains an ugly theme of the Linux community.