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'.
Do we like or hate IBM then?
There's an opportunity for desktop Linux in "running a fixed-function machine like a kiosk or ATM, a transactional workstation like a bank teller's station, or a basic office workstation that runs applications that drive business processes," the IBM agenda information said.
Bravo! Use it in places that you want to be able to lock down. I'm so tired of people trying to lock down windows boxes! Sure anybody can install anything on a win box... that's why it's bad for public access.
Our hospital records program runs on the web. Linux and any ole browser would save our computer guys tons of time.
Oh, well... Good luck.
I've been waiting for something like this... Now all I need is an opensource Car. [quote from RedHat install] Would you buy a car with the hood welded shut?? [/quote] I hate using my can opener just to the check the oil.
Karma whoring
As much as I love the "go Linux rah rah rah!" mantra, why not just go to asking "What's the best tool for the job?" For the computer-illiterate home user, Windows is fine (I'd advocate a Mac, but maybe the user LIKES having a zillion games and utilities and viruses available for download). For the corporate desktop where things should be locked down, Linux with OpenOffice may be a good bet at a good price.
If you're a power user, Windows is definitely out, Linux is a good bet, OS X is a good alternative. It seems to me whatever your personality is, one of the options will be your natural best fit.
And isn't it kinda nice that things work out that way?
Murray Todd Williams
This is a little OT, but since they are so upbeat, I have to report that kernel used in Suse 9.0 has problems with IBM's own ThinkPads. Pressing the Fn button causes keventd() to go crazy eating up 100% CPU and the computer has to be painfully and slowly rebooted.
Boo on the original posting!
This has nothing to do with open source on the home user's desktop.
The article "Red Hat: Stick with Windows at home" describes why home users should stick with windows (or macs or whatever open source.)
This article is dealing with linux on the desktop when a system needs to give its users a closed, locked-down interface!
Apples meet oranges.
Davak
Unless you're a total Linux zealot, you'd see that it's not ready for the business desktop. If it can't inter-op with other Windows desktops with ease (and don't go on about open office, evolution, etc...they're buggy and not proven at all), then it's not ready.
As for the home user, it's definitely not ready. Mom and pop can't go to walmart and buy games for their kids, greeting card software or proven money management software and run it on Linux.
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).
If quantum mechanics applied to IBM:
|IBM>= 1/sqrt(2) |good> + 1/sqrt(2) |evil>
Observing a Slashdot article seems to collapse this wave function. Thus, for any slashdot article, IBM is either good or bad.
My constants might be a bit off depending on what SCO is doing.
Long live Schrodinger's cat...
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 think there have been two things keeping Linux from taking the desktop by storm.
The first, and possibly most important, has been the lack of anything like MS Outlook for the Linux platform. Security flaws aside, it's a great way to keep everything organized - from e-mail, to scheduling, to notes, to tasks, etc. I looked at Ximian Evolution, but it doesn't allow public folders. A lot of our customers love those public folders - particularly for scheduling things. That's one of the grievances some of our customers have with Groupwise, too.
Now, though, I see Kontact/Kolab ramping up as an integrated groupware solution that will be distributed with KDE, already one of the two most popular desktops for X. Once this starts being adopted as a groupware solution by companies, IMO, corporate desktops are going to see a lot more Linux. I also think it will propel KDE ahead of Gnome (because Evolution, again, IMO, doesn't stack up to Kontact).
The other thing, and I haven't looked closely for it, so it may already exist, but that's an easy development tool for X. Visual Basic-style. Make something easy for your run-of-the-mill Joe to code halfway useful applications in, make it integrate well with an Office suite (preferably KOffice, since Kontact will work well with it), and make it free and open-source. Better yet, provide easy ways of migrating legacy VB/VBA code to it. Wham bam thank you ma'am, Linux on the desktop.
I claim first use of "Error No. 0B" - or "No. 0B error." It'll be the new ID 10T!
"Desktop GNU/Linux", that is, Home User not Kiosk mono-function uber-toaster (like a kiosk), will not be viable until all of the following conditions have been met:
- The user can add a new PCI card and install a driver for it
- The user can insert a hotplug device (USB or Firewire or even Bluetooh) and get a fixed, known location in the file system for it, the same one every time
- The user can click on any audio file and it will "just play"
- The user can click on any video file and it will "just play"
- The user can drop a CD into the CDROM drive and play it or rip it
- The user can drop a DVD into the DVD drive and it plays, including the horrible and ungodly menu
- The user can drop a CDR into the CDROM drive and burn a random selection of files to it, with long file names on by default
- The user can hook up a TV Tuner card and be able to play video from a cable box / antenna or a VCR.
And all of the above must be possible WITHOUT the user EVER seeing a command line, and without ever hearing or reading the word "compile."
Some of those are already available with the right distributions, and nearly all are possible in some way or another, but they require violating the two cardinal rules of the Home User: "I can't type" and "compiling is something only developers do". Fixing some of the above issues requires alterations to the kernel itself. Others just require improvements in user-side software, others are an issue of driver distribution and open vs. closed source driver availability.
Whatever, the origin of the problem doesn't matter. The why is not at question. But all of the above MUST be taken care of before GNU/Linux can be considered "ready" for Joe Home Desktop User. Until then, we're just spinning our wheels.
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
The list goes on from there. A base model 17" eMac, which is perfectly suited to the average productivity worker, is only $799. Bump the RAM up to 256MB for a few dollars more and you're done, it will all work right out of the box.
Compared to the pain of getting a Linux system up and running and then supporting it, going Apple seems like a no-brainer in enterprise IT environments.
- "When you want something with all your heart, the entire universe conspires to give it to you" -Paulo Coelho
My god! They've OK'ed linux on the desktop? I'm so relieved. I can finally start using it!
And why did you staple the trout to the RAM?
It is, if you expect him/her to stay that way. Of course that couldn't be good for the advance of civilization :)
Something that I learned when I was selling computers, PCs and Macs is that most people don't care to learn about what is going on inside of their machines.
They're more concerned with the football game, or with Jr's parent teacher conference. No matter how much you and I wish it was different, you just can't make Joe Sixpack care about technology issues.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
"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.
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
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.