Slashdot Mirror
IBM and Its Thoughts on Desktop Linux
Knuckles writes: "According to c|net, IBM will give desktop Linux a thumbs up at the Desktop Linux Conference in Boston on Monday. Sam Docknevich of IBM's Global Services group will give a speech titled, "The Time is Now for Linux on the Desktop." It seems that IBM will not go for the multi-purpose desktop, though, but for machines performing narrowly defined functions (kiosks etc.). However, basic office workstation seem to be included in this definition, according to C|Net" And in a classic case of the right-hand not knowing what the left-hand is doing, Realistic_Dragon adds: "IBM was leading the words of Red Hat's CEO in comments to the UK government last year saying that '...open source was not ready for the desktop'.
That's the main question, I think. I'm pretty computer literature, work as a web developer/designer/programmer and all that, but I've always been a Windows user. Recently, when it came time to reformat my notebook, I decided to just try out Linux because I was curious. I went with Suse. It installed fine, but it was a pain in the ass to get it to recognize my screen size (1600 x 1050), it refused to see my wifi card, and the touchpad wouldn't work. Fair, enough, I can deal with all that because it's a notebook after all, the drivers aren't at all standard. But the actual user experince... well, honestly, yuck. The main thing that made me get rid of it was just how crappy everything looked. Widgets were clunky, interface fonts were either too large or too small, everything was jagged, and the web looked simply terrible. I installed Firebird to see if that'd make browsing a little nicer but no luck. Fonts were huge, tiny, and looked like placeholders instead of something any sort of attention to detail had been put towards. Then I tried upgrading the software. It came with Open Office 1.0; I wanted 1.1. But it didn't look like it was going to happen until I felt up to compiling my own binaries. If someone as tech savvy as me isn't willing to do that, I can guarantee my parents sure as hell won't be up to it. End result: I got rid of Linux after a day. It wasn't worth the huge amount of effort required to do anythign with and it was ugly and clunky enough that it got in the way of everyday use. I realize all of these can be improved and I'm sure in the future they will be. When that happens, maybe I'll give Linux another try. But for now, it isn't anywhere near ready for the average user's desktop.
This seems like a pretty sound analysis - Linux is ready for the desktop in many areas. However it's still not ready as an integrated multi-task appliance in the same way that windows is.
I like to use my PC for lots of stuff, it's still tricky for me to do some things on Linux, lots of programs still don't interact well (cutting and pasting being the first thing that springs to mind, cue flames.....) but for certain tasks it's excellent (web services) and for many it's perfectly adequate (office / multimedia).
More people using linux to do some jobs will start to want to do other little jobs on it too. Whether we like IBM this week or not, this can only be good for user- and developer- share and linux profile.
Stemmo
Imagine if someone like IBM marketed their own Linux desktop distribution. I'd say they have the power to standardize some of the things that make Linux so confusing for new adopters (multiple desktop managers, shells, KDE vs Gnome, etc). Think Lindows, except not a toy, and with a huge company backing it. Home users are not going to adopt Linux in its current very chaotic state. These options are nice for nerds, but your mom doesn't really want to search through fifty open source apps while installing to see which one she likes the best to write a one page document for work.
A reputable company like IBM could give Linux some serious pull on the desktop (they already have in the server world).
In this interview (posted on Slashdot a few weeks ago) Linus says he is most interesting in desktop Linux. He says servers are not very interesting. He says Linux on the desktop is the only part he cares about. Just look at the article I linked to and read the question about Linux and the Desktop.
My point is that Linus, for me, kind of debunks the idea that Linux is intended for the server. Linus clearly says it's not. And now we have IBM giving a thumbs up for Linux on the desktop too. This is cool.
I see a "internet kiosk" in front of my school being hacked for at least a 3 months. Some soft already installed, popup commercial spam, "smart monkeys" (program to generate clicks on the web to earn you money for "login time" with spyware), etc. All under Windows. I've seen a bankomat nearby with error popup. I've seen dull, dead windows desktop on a "commercial bigscreen". I've seen BSOD on railway station screens. I've seen info booth with train schedule rebooting. I've seen SMS boxen on walls frozen, with some Windows requester unable to gain focus. I've seen a shopkeeper rebooting his cash register, booting W98SE. Gosh, I even surfed the net from the bank "account checking" booth after the app died during heavy rain that broke net transmission, leaving me with desktop and basic apps.
If Linux is to crash on that things, I'll gladly give it a try and would like to give it a try. Maybe Linux is not ready for that stuff - we don't know. But what we know: Windows is not ready for them, for sure!
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Personally I don't see what the problem is. For the last two years I've been working at Hill AirForce Base in Utah and they have a Microsoft ADS network. My RedHat 9.0 laptop intergrated just fine in that environment.
:-)
I was able to get email from exchange, mount the home directory or any network server share and write/read files, access any of my Solaris/Linux servers I managed and so on. Oh, and I submitted my timesheets from OpenOffice 1.1.0. They were in excel format btw
Not ready for the desktop? 99.99999% of all users on the base did the above or less on their computer (unless they were solitare junkies then it was even less).
I have yet to hear a valid argument why Linux isn't ready for the desktop. Sure you can customize the hell outta it compared to Windows. Most people don't customize Windows beyond changing their background and screensaver. You can do that in Linux and be just as happy.
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
At that time, they contended that you were better off paying for a term server with 8-12 thin clients connected to it; instead of paying ~$1200-2000 per desktop, you would pay ~$5-10k for the server, and ~$200 per thin client.
However, since there really wasnt a significant savings in hardware (most of your savings were due to lower admin costs), hardly anyone jumped on board. Also, around this time the first sub-$1000 computers started coming out.
Linux on the desktop? Hardly. IBM is just recycling the Network PC.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
"The average home user cannot use linux."
That's funny because I have had the most computer illiterate people sit down at my RH9 box with no windows open and figure out how to browse the web quite effectively with no instruction from me at all.
"Mozilla is not up to the task, sorry. It doesn't even render most webpages properly (including such common ones as YAHOO FINANCE)."
I don't think you can categorically say that without some level of proof. And "render . . . properly seems to be an either/or kind of statment. I argue that there are some things that are irrelevant such as font size so long as it does not effect the browsing experience. The only website I have found to date that doesn't work right at all with Mozilla is www.sprintpcs.com after you log in to manage your account.
I feel quite confident that the web pages that don't work right are those that seemed to ignore web standards completely.
"Openoffice is slow and bloated, as well as difficult to use."
Lets start out with the "slow and bloated" comment first. Define slow. Slow to start? Slow to print? That is completely ambiguous at best and not completely bound in truth as far as my experience goes. I give you that it is slow as Christmas to start. After startup completes I find it to be faster than Word.
Difficult to use? I don't find that to be true. Neither did a friend of mine that wouldn't know the difference between a word processor and a spreadsheet application. He used OpenOffice to write a research paper with no complaints. I even asked him if it worked ok.
"Linux is not ready for the home user."
I do not agree for 100% of home users. I think it is ready for a good portion of them already. With each passing release of kernels and distros that gap closes more.
"At least on Windows, when I uninstall a program, it uninstalls its libraries (for the most part)."
I do not see that uninstalling programs is any more thorough on Windows than Linux. They are both scripted and thus the uninstalls are only as good as the uninstall scripts. I have seen some that did nothing more than delete icons on Windows. About the only thing I can say about Windows uninstalling is that most (not all) software makers make the uninstall program easy to find.
And don't even get me started about dll's that refuse to allow themselves to be removed without doing some registry editing and/or booting to a command prompt only in Windows.
Bottom line is that I have had my RH9 box running since RH9 was release and it has not crashed once. At all. The only time it has been rebooted was due to power outages.
Besides, your conclusion is that home users are prepeared to deal with all of the nasty viruses/worms and all the problems they cause yet they cannot deal with Linux?
And now, two days later, this! LMAO.
Desktop Linux fits two kinds of users very well. The first kind are like your parents. Once it is set up, they don't mess with it. There's maybe seven icons that get clicked all the time and thats it. You did luck out with the garden design software.
The second type mess with the system constantly but are comfortable doing things like editing text files and resolving dependencies. Whatever comes up technically gets handled.
There is a third type of user thats still a problem. These users want to continually add and remove software and hardware from the machine. The thing is, they don't know a thing about computers and don't want to know. Such users can usually get about two years out of a Windows install before they have someone straighten out the mess the machine is in. Sure the machine is likely hosed by then but they got some varied service out of it before bunging up the registry or the dlls. A MacOS (Classic) install will sometimes last longer under such use although OS X hasn't been out long enough for me to see the full range of brain damage it's users can inflict. I've even seen them buy whole new systems because it is easier than backing up data and reinstalling. These people aren't necessarily gamers.
Those users tend to HATE Linux. Linux will either totally rebuff such users or they'll do everything as root one time too many and completely hose the system. Lindows and Mandrake attempt to cater to them but screw it up by either having them run as root all time (yes, the option is there to create a regular user account. These users WON'T do it.) or being overly flaky. When I used it, Mandrake was crashy enough to make think I was running Windows 98 again.
Others have pointed out that work needs to be done on hardware detection/configuration and software installs. I think it will get there but those are the two things that really screw Linux as a consumer OS.
IBM sell a product called WebSphere Portal Server. It's reasonably inexpensive for the Enterprise Portal space, they have been getting fairly competitive on software pricing recently.
p t1.htm
But here's the hidden little feature. As a sample portlet included with the server are server-side portlets that read and write Word, Excel and Powerpoint documents.
They don't do it perfectly, not yet, and IBM is not doing a lot to publicize them. And they certainly won't be competing with a full-featured word processor or spreadsheet application.
But take a large corporate customer, who's users need to be able to read, change and create Office documents, but the vast majority only needing the base functionality, why would you be buying each of them an Office license when you can get it for free with your $20,000 Intranet Portal.
As Tim Thatcher, program director for IBM WebSphere Portal emphasises, these productivity components are not a stand-in for Microsoft Office. "We're targeting the users who don't need all the features of Word or WordPro," says Thatcher. "Businesses realise it's not cost-effective to deliver a full-functioned desktop to every user. On a manufacturing floor, for example, a factory worker in the breakroom can jot a letter off the kiosk using the built-in portal applications."
http://www.eos-solutions.com.au/news_sept/news_se
Would you buy a car with the hood welded shut??
If they built it as low maitnance and as reliable as my fridge (The compressor is welded shut) I would love it. Too bad they can't make one that will last for 15-20 years and needs no service except dusting off the radiator once in a while.
The truth shall set you free!
As an OS/2 and Linux user I must say - I praise IBM for the innovations and for being the rock in this Redmond infested waters. But I also fear them for their lack of a tehnical ideology. IBM goes whereever the money leads them, even though they have the strangth to lead the money to themselves.
They are trying to kill of all of their own softwareplatforms - OS/390 is almost gone, they are still trying with OS/2 (That one has really put up a fight) and AIX is next.
Whenever you hear the words "Strategic Platform" you know that IBM just have sentenced a platform to death.
Also that is why I'm glad-glad-glad-glad-glad-glad-glad (I wonder if he is glad!) that Novell picked ud the pride and joy of european Linux (SuSE AG) - and not IBM.
I am happy that IBM supports Linux, but I do not trust them one inch.
Live long and prosper...
I like IBM. I think they make great servers and great laptops. I just bought one of their T-series laptops. Their laptops work a lot better with Linux than most other major manufacturers that I've seen, but that's not enough. Pretty much all of the hardware on their laptops work under Linux, but marginally. The Winmodems they include are a real bitch to set up and may not even work fully, and the wireless MiniPCI cards they include either do not have drivers out for Linux or require a lot of work and/or binary-only modules to be useful. I also haven't seen anything released regarding their hard drive protection system, which is based mostly in software. ACPI support, of course, is not totally there in the 2.6 kernel, but it's making a lot of progress.
IBM, put your money where your mouth is. Intel might not give much of a shit about Linux on the desktop, but you say you do. Use your power to get Intel to develop Linux/BSD drivers or even release specs to all of the hardware they release as soon as they release it (e.g. Centrino). Release all of the specs to the hardware you include, fund drivers, do whatever it takes to get everything you release fully supported in open-source operating systems.