Slashdot Mirror
OSDL Announces Desktop Initiative
rhetoric writes "Earlier today at the LinuxWorld Conference & Expo in New York, nonprofit Open Source Development Labs announced the creation of a "Desktop Linux Working Group initiative focused on greater use of Linux on desktops throughout the enterprise." A press release is available on OSDL's website, in addition to this Register article." It's all part of their non-secret plan.
The Register article says that the OSDL is setting out to crate a specification for what an enterprise Linux distribution should be made up of. Yet the Register article also implies that the OSDL is not going to receive much direct user input on the spec itself. Is this going to turn out to be another UnitedLinux?
SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
I've been using Wintel for over 15 years and have just recently installed Mandrake 9 on an older P2 450. Here are a couple of points I think are worth mentioning (ubergeeks can exclude themselves from the classifications below):
1. Linux is ready for *some* desktops only, namely ones where users won't be constantly tweaking and installing new software and hardware. You want a computer for grandma to browse the web, send email and view a few grandkid photos? Linux is great! You want to roll out corporate desktops where employees don't really need to be able to download and install the latest version of KaZaA? Linux is a godsend (provided the business software you need is supported).
2. Linux is *not* ready for the average user desktop. The average user wants to do everything grandma wants to do, but they also want to be able to install or upgrade software and hardware *easily*. In addition, they want a fully functional GUI, with no *necessity* of dropping to a CLI for everyday tasks. They want to be able to go to a third party software/driver website, follow the 'click here for Linux version' hyperlink, download the file, then double-click to install it.
Needless to say, as long as Linux distributions and desktop managers continue to proliferate, the average user's requirements will never be met. I say this as a *fact* not a *prescription*, so spare me the Linux-strength-in-diversity comments. I just think you can't have your cake (freedom/diversity) and eat it too (Linux on average desktop).
HOW'S MY POSTING? CALL 1-800-POSTING
Getting the office running on Linux might actually require work.
No, the spirit of free software is that we don't have to use it if it sucks, because we can just build something similar, but better. (Or something completely different, of course)
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
I agree with you - if there's no user input on how the distro should be laid out, how it should interact with the user and how similar it should be to Mcrisoft operating systems, then how is this going to succeed?
SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
For some reason this doesn't quite match my own subjective perceptions. I know a lot of Mac buyers, a lot of linux users, but not that many linux desktop OS buyers. Isn't the majority of Linux sales directed to the server market? Or they mixing the figures as they go along? Pity there is no link provided for the research.
Linux : going from competing desktops to competing desktop initiatives...
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Sun recently sent me a CD with their Java Desktop on it, which for anyone who doesn't know, is a slickly-packaged Linux distro with a very user friendly interface, Sun's excellent StarOffice suite, Mozilla, etc etc. I've been having a play with it (I use StarOffice on Windows anyway) and I'm quite impressed. It's all nicely integrated with a mostly consistent look and feel, for the end user there's no messing around, anyone who's familiar with Windows and MS Office could pick this up in a day and be productive. As an old-skool Unix user, I'd personally prefer a NeXTSTEP or IRIX desktop, but as a normal Windows user, JDS is impressive.
That's the way to do Linux on the desktop - it has to be as near as possible seamless. Someone who knows what they're doing has to sit down and make it all work. Bundling together a package here and a package there as Red hat does just isn't going to cut it. If the objective is to actually get Linux on the desktop, then OSDN should throw its lot in with Sun. But it looks like this "initiative" is just bandwagoneering.
Linux is ready for the business desktop.
:-D
Until the hardware manufacturers put as much effort into Linux drivers as they do for Windows drivers then home Linux desktop pc's will be restricted to the geek community.
That and the old old topic of gaming support.
Worst
The big problem isn't that Linux is particularly bad or anything, it's that many, many people already have Windows. As bad as Windows might be, it's really annoying and fear-inducing for bosses to imagine taking down all their machines and installing a different O/S on them. The meeting should be on how to get people to switch o/s's, not how to implement linux. Once people aren't scared to switch an o/s, then all will be well.
stuff |
No-one has said that the CLI has to go away. MS Windows CLI may not be as full-featured and may be hidden in the depths of the start menu now, but its never disappeared. What we need is for the CLI to not be essential, and for a GUI to be available to the end-user for most if not all tasks.
This JDS from Sun has quite a head start. How can they compete?
Stick Men
(Mods: this is on topic - bear with me)
So off I went to France. It was beautiful, perfect snow, lovely mountains, perfect pistes. I put on my snowboard and started to learn.
The problem I came across was that I couldn't do anything I wanted to. I could see where I wanted to go (I wanted to hit the slopes dammit!) but I completely lacked the skill required to get there.
After half a day, I'm ashamed to say I gave up. I was only there for 3 days and i'd wasted some of that precious time getting absolutely nowhere. So I put on my ski's, hit the reds and blacks and had a fantastic 2.5 days.
Linux is like that for me. I like it, I want to use it, the problem is that I think of it as a tool to do something else and I just end up getting frustrated because i can't do the boring things really quickly because i'm too ingraned in the Windows way of doing it.
I can change the display resolution quickly in Windows. I have to faff about in Linux. I can install items in Windows with a few point and clicks. Everything i've tried to install under Linux has botched up through my own general incompetance. The very basic of things takes 5 times as long and I get frustrated and eventually switch back to Windows (I still can't dial up under Linux, it refuses to recognise my external Hayes modem and KPPP dies horribly with some error message - the Gnome one hangs on startup).
Whilst Linux on the desktop might not be totally there, it's biggest problem is not that, but of people like me who don't have the patience to learn how to do the things (that they can do really quickly under Windows) differently.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
1. It doesn't catch all of the M$ viruses out there.
2. If it does catch a virus it will only blow away the user's account and not the whole computer.
3. User email accounts can be time limited to only send x messages per minute. This will further retard the proliferation of nasty email attached worms. (IP_TABLES LIMIT)
4. Software that is installed in a user's account runs with limited priviledges and is not going to muck up anything outside of the user's account. (It is also out of the reach of other users)
5. The installation and applications can be custom tailored to an organization so that there is no super-corporation dictating that ALL computers will have Winblows Media Slayer installed.
6. Trivial little things, like having the default search page be an internal corporate server, can be setup in a CD image so that everything is the way the corporation doing the deploying wants it and not the way some license agreement with Redmond mandates.
7. Documents will automatically be protected from other users by being protected in seperate home directories.
8. Usage of company computers would be limited to those people that have accounts on the computers.
9. ... etc. etc. etc.
Restore America: Dr. Ron Paul for President!
Finally, OSDL already has working groups and specifications for Linux in data centers and in carrier grade facilities. It makes a lot of sense to get a specification for desktop systems as well. Thus far the only specifications Linux has had to brag about in Enterprise space is its comformance with the Open Group's Unix specifications. Meeting technical guidelines is great but that doesn't really demonstrate the practical ability of Linux in any environment.
A smart specification and reference implementation will let just about anybody with the know-how build Enterprise grade Linux systems. As such just about anyone will be able to compete in the business, not just the kids with big brand names.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
X has a big advantage of having a number of virtual desktops. Why dont distros agree to have #5 given over to documenation & monitoring. (#5 is alive) & #6 given over to Distro Specific features.
Assuming they have 6 desktops (I know you can have more) 4 would be for the user, 1 for monitoring, 1 for exceptions and warnings & 7 to reset the mouse & keyboard.
ls
Kids today are tyrants. They contradict their parent, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers. - Socrates 400 BC
We all know how good committees are at deciding things. Compromise usually leads to the lowest common denominator. Do we really want a Linux desktop that's designed by a committee? Isn't that against the whole spirit of free software?
We are talking about industry standards. Outside of the software industry, they work very well. The software industry is still in it's immature stages - like the engineering industry was before there were standard sizes for nuts and bolts - manufacturers actually deliberately made their nuts and bolts incompatible because it gave them lock-in, just as the software industry does now. Incompatible nuts and bolts seems crazy now, closed/incompatible file formats will seem crazy in the future.
Linux is getting closer to the easy desktop. I think it's ready as a base-system; but what gives the guys in Redmond the upperhand is the application portfolio that have been added to the Windows OS over the years. The day we get native versions of Photoshop, Dreamweaver and the other major apps on Linux - it'll be very hard to resist it. We also need Outlook/Exchange-killers. Evolution is great; but we still have a way to go.
:)
I still haven't recommended Linux on the desktop for any friends of mine, because I know who'll get the call when they can't install their new webcam etc. (You guessed right, me). It won't be long before they ask me I hope; when they see my slick desktop -- and how well everything works. Then I'll help them.
We have KDE 3.2, Gnome 2.6 and kernel 2.6 lurking. We see more and more user friendly distros; and a rise in live-cds.
Still, when I hear people get viruses and such I can't help myself but comment it with a little: "Nope, no viruses. I use Linux."
In the end: It's hard to beat free
Your analogy is dead on, Mr. Silver.
But it's worse:
The vast bulk of the Linux world doesn't even recognize the truth of what you're saying. Whenever someone complains about Linux useability, they are told that "all you need to do is [poorly-documented two hours of time-suck here], and anyway you're just a M$ troll you swine".
The genius of M$ is that they recognize when things are hard to use, and they make 'em easier. Ten years ago they could see that their screen font rendering sucked - so they made them unsuck. I certainly have issues with M$ - sometimes they dumb things down too much, and they often are untruthful. But, let's face facts, even Windows 95 was a far more useable system for 95+% of computer users than is any current Linux distribution that I've tried.
The sad thing is that there's a lot of room for improvement on Windows. Linux can, in theory, win the battle for the desktop. But if folks don't recognize how terribly deficient it is in day-to-day usability, there's not a prayer for it.
The only thing that this could do is focus everyone on creating 1 really great desktop rather than a number of (often) quite poor desktops.
To someone like me, the whole 'which windowing system to choose' debate is probably doing more harm than good to the adoption of Linux. It sometimes seems it's no longer that people choose one or the other on merit, but that battle lines have been drawn.
There's also no reason why you can't take this desktop code and use what you want and don't want from it.
Getting Linux on the desktop is to me an important objective. From a personal perspective, I don't use it because there's things I'd like to have that aren't there yet. From a more global perspective, Microsoft will attempt to crush Linux in any way possible. Convincing people to get on Linux not only increases the Linux user base, but starves Microsoft of oxygen to take on Linux. I don't believe that enough is being taken yet. It's still mostly hobbyists and a few specialists using it on the desktop. We have to get more home users and more small businesses on, and that means improving the desktop, getting the applications they need built and 'marketing' it to people.
We're already moving all of our internal desktop users to Linux over the next two years. There will still be dual boot for those that need it but most corporate desktop users not needing another operatng system will run pure Linux for the daily chores of email and document exchange. All my product support work is done in Java, PERL, and scripting so I can be 100% Linux for all my activities now. The default window manager will be Gnome but you can use others as your taste dictates. Most interprise applications have already been ported and the rest will be. The elephant is not only dancing but leading the parade.
Too lazy to create a sig...
Yes, the engineering world has discovered that it's far more profitable to standardize bolts but proliferate drive types.
The consumer never feels they're locked in, but has to buy mulitple sets of tools, if only to remove the patented head bolt and replace it with a standard one. Very profitable for the patent holder.
The software industry seems to be learning this trick.
Witness XML, a standard for creating standards. You can claim XML compliance and yet extend it in propriatary ways. It is plain text, but the file sizes are truly gargantuan, so you need to compress them, for which you can use your own propriatary compression method. Certain outfits are now even starting to create propriatary XML parsers.
The bolts are all standard, but you still have to buy the tool.
There's one essential difference between file formats and bolt design though. Bolts aren't given extraordinary protection by the DMCA.
KFG
So far, the Linux community exists modtly out of tech-people. When you look at Apple Computer, they have a separate division that purely focusses on human interface design.
Won't it be possible for people like that to spend some time on a better enduser-experience? Can GUI-development be organised in the same way as Linux' kernel-development is?
"Honey, I feel a certain distance between us..." "Really? A 31ms ping ain't that bad..."
1. An active-directory similar interface for distributing software packages. E.g. right-click on a group called "Mozilla 1.5", and then just add a computer into this group. This will make the computer install Mozilla 1.5.. All other software should be compatible with this "style", like we have with MSI on Windows. We have RPM on Linux, and that should be okay to use here. Thus we need to have computers as a member of this active directory-thing... And some Domain Admin accounts that are automatically applied to computer domain members. etc. I guess I could go on and on about all Group Policy features of Active Directory. :)
2. Desktop... that actually gives me good control. Also, X crashes much too often. (Linux geeks seem to laught about that Windows has to reboot often, but I hear my users often complain that they feel their computer crashed, even if just X crashes. And I do agree, not much use in a GUI when it crashes, and the time to restart X seem to match the time to restart a normal Windows XP computer..). Also, Desktop and icons must be files, and not stupid complex data-files, which is pretty hard to modify.
"The Open Source Development Labs (OSDL), [...], today announced that Trolltech has joined OSDL and will participate in the Lab's new Desktop Linux Working Group."
From the Register:
... meaning, no pop-ups, no more browser hijack? (I sure will miss 'em)
OSDL says it isn't out to create a Microsoft Windows replacement.
I don't get it. though there are some things for ODSL/Linux vendors to learn from Windows, there are very many things that they would NOT want to learn or copy from design of the monopoly OS to replace it. Desktop Linux should not become a Widows replacement for god's sake.
Linux is superior to Windows in many aspects, while Windows has some advantages in desktop use over Linux. For business computing, security can be the primary concern. I don't say either OS is more secure than the other, but the history shows that Windows is more likely to become a target of vulnerability attacks by hackers/ spammer/ ad agencies, and that some attack attempts successfully created mess. Even though there are far more applications available in the market, Windows wouldn't be a choice of OS if I were to make decisions.
Let's face it, how difficult would it be for a person of "computer literate" (according to his/her resume) to learn how to maneuver KDE/Gnome? I don't think it would take a year. If applications are network-installed, employees on the terminal system won't have to worry about installation of application. Let the IT dept. take care of it.
If you have hundreds of Windows apps to run, use wine, codeweaver(also wine), or vmware. Running Windows on vmware/virtual PC gives you access to Windows apps and ease of security control under Linux at the same time. It's certainly better than getting hacked and filling your monitor with a bunch of pop up ads and crap because you are using Windows, or Windows replacement.
Don't make a replacement for the 'every-user-has-root-access-by-default' OS. Just let people learn and replace.
That's just a random subset of things that we need in order to provide a quality desktop that most non-trivial/non-grandma users do. There are a million and one other things we need as well.
In short while a huge amount has been accomplished, there's still a huge pile left to do. Still, it's not as hopeless as it looks - the distance Linux has come since I started using it only 2 years ago is incredible. Beautiful fonts, cleaned up desktops, hugely improved artwork, maturing applications and powerful media players are just a few of the achievements I can think of.
To create a world-class desktop, an overhead vantage point is needed. I guess this'll be a stretch for the development model of free software.
Windows and Mac heads are used to a VERY strong cross-application cut and paste.
Windows has often - (no sarcasm) - exceeded expectations in this area by allowing all kinds of data to be intelligently moved from one app to another.
It's something designers rely on and use all the time.
Now is the winter of our disco tent
We have to get more home users and more small businesses on, and that means improving the desktop, getting the applications they need built and 'marketing' it to people.
I would argue that focusing on larger business desktops would be a quicker route to the home users. People will buy a home computer to match what they have at work, not the other way around. In an enterprise, computers are chosen carefully for consistency and hardware compliance, so the desktop will run well. With a home user, you have to support every little webcam widget sold at BestBuy or Walmart, or else you lose.
If we get millions of corporate desktops established, hardware manufacturers will start supporting it, and people will start buying Linux for their homes.
And while I don't think we need to standardize on a particular window manager or desktop environment, at a minimum the Gnome/KDE environments should share lots of standards, such as clipboards, stanadard dialogs, themes, etc. I think this is what OSDL is trying to do, which is similar to freedesktop.org. Having multiple GUI toolkits is not necessarily a weakness; the same condition exists on Windows and that hasn't seemed to affect it negatively.
Note that the only non-profit member of the committee is precisely freedsktop.org - For those who don't know, freedsktop.org is (in a nutshell) a common effort by the GNOME and KDE developers to develop standards to let Linux Desktop Enviroments coo- and interoperate. Things like a universal protocol for the system tray, etc.
It just makes sense to see OSDL and their corporate partners sponsor Freedesktop.org, it is a win-win investement for everyone involved ... and I would much rather see the big corps interested on GNU/Linux support Interoperability and Standards than adopt one particular technology as a "de facto standard". Way to go !
Windows does a pretty good job of making general computer tasks easy to do. What drive me nuts, as a developer, is that they take this same dumbing down restrictive philosphy to their development tools. I really find that much of dev studio just gets in my way and slows me down. Linux has just the opposite problem. Everything is designed with the developer as the target user (not intentionally mind you). This results in all of us loving Linux, because it works naturally for "us". The problem with this is that the community that makes Linux is too close too the product to see/admit that it alienates end users.
"Hardware support? ... Easy addition of new hardware? ... Easy addition of new software?"
If we exclude home users for a moment, and think about linux on the desktop in businesses, all of these problems go away - normal users do not (or should not) do any of these things; their IT support department should.
But if the game developers go linux... well
We've already seen linux proliferate into the 3d graphics and rendering biz.
And we see linux adopted by a lot of programmers
Over time, this spawns a move to 3d games...
Already some popular developers follow linux. America's Army is supposed to be quite good. Doom 3 is likely going to kick some serious butt.
Really, linux already has a strong following of "coders." If more and more of those coders happen to be game coders, then you'll see the advancement of linux games. It's not really hard to port a C++/OpenGL game between linux and windows. The core of the game itself is the same, and the APIs/language very similar. No recoding of the game itself is needed, just a recoding of wrappers.
Doom3 could be a pioneer to this. Let's say D3 support for linux is really good. If the engine is really all we expect, then it will be adopted and licensed by others for new games beyond D3. These games could also be made to easily run on linux.
Once one major game makes it to linux, the clones may follow. After that... the slide is inevitable.
....it's just the supporting software that needs the tweaks. There is a distinction here...