Perens: Unite behind Debian, UserLinux

An anonymous readers writes "Infoworld is running a report on the Desktop Linux Conference, at which Bruce Perens suggested that in order to get Linux to the enterprise desktop, the Linux community should base their efforts on one single distribution... based on Debian. Perens went on to say that enterprises will be willing to pay Linux companies to engineer versions of Linux to suit their needs, but that the base distro should remain free. He suggested that by 2006, 30% of enterprise desktops will run Linux." Here is a wired story with more information about his proposed UserLinux project.

Comments

Unite behind Live CD's

[corebreech]

If they're running Debian, then that's great. But you need to put Linux into the hands of the masses if you want to take over the desktop and the best way to do that is to seed the planet with Linux Live CD's with the same fury that AOL soils the planet with their CD's.

No gcc, no including twelve different versions of AWK; just the kernel, KDE or Gnome (pick just one), OpenOffice, games, and all the rest of the shit that makes everything go.

Right now, when you say "Linux" to a layperson, they don't know what the fuck you're talking about. A Live CD is a painless way for them to find out.

We can rebuild him. We have the technology.

Re:Unite behind Live CD's

[eurleif]

If the masses knew that it was another operating system, most of them would use the CD forn a frisbee. My mother recoils in horror when I suggest she should consider installing Linux.

Re:Unite behind Live CD's

[KikassAssassin]

KDE or Gnome (pick just one)

As a new Linux user myself, I'd suggest KDE over Gnome if you want to draw new people in. Gnome is an excellent interface, but by my experience KDE seems much more familiar to someone who is used to the Windows environment, and overall it has a somewhat more polished feel to it. That familiarity will make your average user who's never used anything but Windows before much more likely to try it out, rather than giving up from the start because everything looks different than what they're used to.

Re:Unite behind Live CD's

[FatherOfONe]

It's funny you mention cost and the "mass users".

If Windows XP was NOT bundled with their computer OR they had to pay extra for it, then I believe that a small portion of the "mass" would switch. The same small "mass" of people who drive an extra 10 miles to Wallmart to save 10 cents on their soft drinks.

I was just having a discussion with a teen age relative of mine who loves Microsoft because one of his relatives works there. He has NO intention of ever using anyting but Microsoft. So I broke it down this way.

He will spend $600 for Office, $100-$300 for Windows XP. So lets go low and say that is $700. I won't go in to continual upgrade cost, but it should be mentioned. So he will spend $700 or more than someone who runs Linux and Open Office. Both would do the job for what he needs. So if he went with Linux he could....
1. Buy a new PS2 and some games AND
2. Buy a better video card AND
3. Buy a better hard drive AND
4. Buy a faster processor AND
5. Buy a new GameBoy with Games.

So I asked him... Wouldn't you like to have all that stuff? I do with the money I saved by not running Microsoft Office and XP at home. (I don't own a gameboy but he got the idea).

Cost does matter with Linux a lot for the masses. There needs to be a distro out there that is free or near free. There is a huge Linux market for the PC users who shop at Wallmart...

Re:Unite behind Live CD's

[Spoing]

1. I find most of my "family" support time is devoted to pops-ups, spam, updating and patching windows, and virus eradication...

I used to do that. Now, if I touch anything on a Windows system outside of work, I make sure that the software isn't a petri dish waiting for a plauge. Firebird has been a welcome replacement for IE, and OpenOffice is also something folks tend to appreciate.

Discussing the problems with HTML email and how spammers abuse it also helps.

When they load on crap spy ware, I tell them not to do it -- remove it *once* -- and then if it happens again tell them to remove it themselves. The only help offered are pointers of where to go and a reminder why they really really don't want to load crap. Less is more for most Windows users.

Along the way, you bet I mention that these problems aren't a problem for me -- ever -- and why they aren't. Facts not propaganda.

1. why the hell would anyone NOT want to give all those things up especially on a box that is most used to surf the net and read emails?

Well, you're not really helping them by fixing these problems so often. They don't see much of a downside if you're thier tech support -- after all, you are the one dealing with it.

I know it's hard not to "help", though you have to ask if you are helping or drug-dealer-like providing a quick "fix" leaving the core problems intact.

Replacing Windows would be ideal, though in the short term get them to use software that isn't motivated by the pushy-salesman's idea of being helpful. Most open source projects are there to be helpful, not to sell you an upgrade and special 'deals' with partners through spam, deception, or simply changing all your default settings.

Remember to tell them you can't keep fixing thier computer if they can't use it properly. If they protest that they are ignorant and you are such a great computer guy -- ignore it and teach them the right way. If they protest the lessons do not cave in, cut them off!

Re:Unite behind Live CD's

[scalis]

I am not sure I agree that just because KDE looks more like MS Windows it means the users will find it easier to work with. Siemens Business Services did a study on this a while back (story was posted on slashdot too) Part of it reads:

"Before settling on Ximian, Siemens evaluated plain vanilla Gnome and KDE as well. Siemens found KDE to be more "Windows-like" than Gnome, but that led to problems when non-technical users expected a more Windows-like experience. Gnome, particularly Ximian's version, was "different enough" to set user expectations that the experience would be less like Windows, which led to fewer adoption problems"

It's where I'm off to

[mccalli]

Following Sun's decision to end of life all the Cobalt boxes, I'm converting my Raq4 over to Debian. The stability combined with security backports appeals to me.

Whilst reading all of the recent dropping of Red Hat Linux and purchasing of SuSE etc. I did wonder if this would lead to a boost for Debian. Take the Fedora project, for example. It seems madness to contribute to this over Debian, since with Fedora you really are just beta testing Red Hat Enterprise edition for them - the whole 'giving back to the community' thing is better handled by Debian since that is not meant for feeding back into commercial distributions.

So yes - I have to agree. Debian would seem to be the way to go following the absorbtion of the big names. Let Red Hat do its own work in getting rpms ready for RHE 16.8 or what have you - concentrate your efforts on improving things for the community at large instead.

Cheers,
Ian

Anti-Redhat FUD but still a good point

[Jagasian]

It seems like there has been allot of anti-Redhat FUD lately. While I have always been a Debian fan, and I agree that every distro maker should base their distro on Debian, all this crap about Redhat leaving a hole in the consumer market because they made Redhat Linux a community project that is still heavily guided and sponsered by Redhat... that just smacks of anti-Redhat FUD.

Truth is that Redhat Linux 10 was released several days ago, and for trademark reasons it is called Fedora Core 1. Anyone who has used Redhat 8.x or Redhat 9.x, will be able to tell that Fedora Core 1 is Redhat 10.

I would love to see one internet based community developed meta-distrution of Linux, with one comprehensive package repository. This would be the Linux standard. Then companies that want to make a newbie-friendly Linux could cherry-pick the best software packages, make custom themes, and tweak everything and also provide support.

In my opinion, the thing that Redhat 8 through Fedora Core 1 do really great is that they cherry-picked a nice set of software packages, made a nice theme for the desktop, and put everything together into one nice coherent package.

Note that the good things that Redhat does with its distro do not conflict with having a Debian-foundation, and the fact that Redhat has decided to fracture the internet community because it refuses to have Fedora Core 1 be a customized Debian is just plain silly!

Other distros have shown the power of using a Debian based core: Knoppix, Libranet, and Lindows, to name 3 distros, all accomplish something slightly different.

1. Knoppix is a live CD based Linux distro with completely automatic hardware detection. Knoppix is a great toy, a great way to advertise Linux, and it makes for an uber rescue disk.

2. Libranet aims at being a general purpose desktop/server distro, and it adds value by greatly simplifying the installation and maintenance of the OS.

3. Lindows is supposed to be a newbie friendly / user-friendly Linux distro that emulates the look-n-feel of Windows. It is aimed at a large target market of casual computer users that want to save a few bucks.

So please tell me why Redhat couldn't use a Debian foundation for Fedora Core? All they had to do was create a small community layered ontop of the Debian community. Their job would be to cherry-pick software packages from the comprehensive apt repository that Debian already has, and integrate it all into one coherent system by tweaking settings and theming applications.

In conclusion, lets drop this Redhat ditched desktop Linux crap, and focus on the fact that Redhat is duplicating effort by not basing their community developed distro on Debian. It is starting to remind me of Christianity with its many demoninations.

Wrong

[turgid]

Why should volunteers spend their valuable time making something to give away to corporations?

For this purpose, commercial distributions such as SuSE and RedHat exist.

One size does not fit all.

The market will decide as and when Linux is ready for the corporate desktop, and in what form.

Microsoft is doing a marvellous job already of comitting suicide due to over-pricing its software, shoddy quality and vulnerabilities to malicious code.

Linux has been doing just fine for my personal computing needs since 1996. If corporate America (or anywhere else for that matter) wants to enjoy the privilege of using Linux, it can make like the rest of us and make an effort.

Debian needs to be brought up to date

[figa]

I recommended Debian for my company's development platform last year, and I'm now wishing I stayed with RedHat. Stable is hopelessly out of date, and the install is too difficult for junior desktop admins (windows admins) and developers to set up without my help (and I'm a developer, not an admin).

I need a stable release that evolves a few times a year, so that I can read reviews and decide when it's time to migrate to keep up to date. Debian only offers the choice between a year-old distribution several major releases out of date that nothing will compile on, and a testing release that moves on a daily basis, often jumping several versions back or eliminating a package entirely.

I also need a GUI installer, so I don't have to hold people's hands through the install. Nobody should ever have to use dselect, unless they're migrating from DOS.

The thing that upsets me the most about Debian is that the stable release is not always stable. The package for Galeon has been broken for a year now. The download manager for the Woody version crashes constantly, though the bug in Galeon was fixed well over a year ago. My choice now is between the unstable stable version and the completely unstable unstable version that stopped working entirely for me around 1.3.9 (yes I filed a Debian bug report). The testing version has since disappeared.

There have been numerous stable Galeon versions since last year on two separate branches, but I don't have an option to roll back to a useful version because stable is hosed and testing is gone. This ultimately caused me to give up on Galeon and just download the Firebird binary and install it by hand. So much for the wonders of apt-get.

Debian needs to either step up its glacial pace or make testing an honest milestone release before Perens starts touting it as an industry standard. I'm thankful there's still competition from organizations that put Linux usability over Open Source ideology.

Re:That would work...

[pyros]

Well, the thing about Debian is it's only user-friendly if your hardware works on it out-of-the box. My laptop has an Intel i830M chipset. If I want 1024x768 resolution with anything over 8 bit color, I must either user another disrtibution or run Debian unstable with experimental packages to get XFree86 4.3. I installed Debian unstable on my 5 year old PC this month and had to get on IRC to get my USB mouse working. Then after installing the 2.4.22 SMP kernel, I had to get back on IRC to get access to my IDE drives! These two should have been automatic years ago. As it sits now I can burn CDs in ATAPI mode, which is dog-freaking slow compared to the SCSI emulation mode, which I can't find any documentation on configuring.

Just to give you a little background, I've been running Linux at home, starting with Slackware, moving to Red Hat, and trying out Debian, for 7 years. I've managed a remote datacenter of 10 Linux boxes with nothing but ssh and the occasional use of a cyclades terminal server for when things get really fubar (like the nfs server got a little hosed and i couldn't log into anything remotley). So I'm no stranger to building my own kernels and configuring hardware by hand, I just find Debian makes it so much harder than it needs to be.