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.

17 of 230 comments (clear)

  1. What exactly does this mean? by The+One+KEA · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  2. Perspective of a Linux neophyte by Sarojin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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
    1. Re:Perspective of a Linux neophyte by torpor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Linux is ready for *some* desktops only, namely ones where users won't be constantly tweaking and installing new software and hardware.

      in other words, linux is ready for the healthier installations, and not ready for sick computer use.

      constant tweaking and installation of new hardware and software is not using a computer productively. using a computer productively means that the computer is operational, in the sense that it doesn't actually -need- anything further to be done to it in order to function as intended. it just works.

      this 'just works' state is fairly easy to get to with linux, and other open operating systems, and stay there. but i can count on one hand the # of windows users i have personally known who can point at their aging computers and say 'that system just works, so i leave it alone and just use it'.

      15 years of Windows use may have given you a neurosis, a false standard, with which you are comparing other platforms where such inflictions aren't really a priority. of -course- you can tweak and install software in linux; indefinitely in fact.

      but the point of computing, and of computer use in general is to -USE- the computer to do something, not be continuously servicing it. this is a fact that seems so simple, yet for most window-dwellers, it often appears to be inseparable from 'actual use' as a concept.

      i blame microsoft of course. tweaking and upgrading and re-installing and installing and 'software choice' is just a way of getting you locked into a constant crackhouse fit.

      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*.

      why should they? ubiquitous, cheap computing (s/cheap/inexpensive) means that once you've set it up and got it working, you can leave it alone and just use it.

      people are starting to see that the windows treadmill is a trap. once you get sucked into a windows way of life, upgrades and re-installs and tweaks and fixes all seem to be 'normal' ways to use the computer, but in fact this is really a detraction from the core issue of computer science, which is 'how can i use this computer to do the job in front of me?'.

      microsoft, and others in the industry who have been around long enough to have weathered countless waves of API and hardware technological changes know that computers are a constantly-changing product. its like a lump of magic matter which never maintains its state long enough for it to become a fixture.

      but this is not the linux philosophy. the linux philosophy is: get it working, and once its working, use it.

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    2. Re:Perspective of a Linux neophyte by smallpaul · · Score: 5, Insightful

      constant tweaking and installation of new hardware and software is not using a computer productively. using a computer productively means that the computer is operational, in the sense that it doesn't actually -need- anything further to be done to it in order to function as intended. it just works.

      It is classic Linux-advocate style to redefine the user's problem to fit Linux's needs rather than the other way around. Some people like to get a new digital camera once a year. Some people like to install a new game once a month. Some people like to buy the latest and greatest MP3 players, video cards, wi-fi devices, photo printers, hand-held devices and all of it comes with software.

      People want the capabilities of their computer to expand as the industry expands and new things are invented. It's a very closed mindset that says the "computer has a use and once it is set up it is static." My uses for the computer change every day (especially as a I am a progrmmer). Why should my less technical sister be restricted from a similarly expansive view of computing? If I call her up and tell her BitTorrent or iPod is the shit, it should be easy for her to install BitTorrent or an Ipod.

      I'm not saying that Linux is intrinsically worse that windows at supporting dynamically changing systems: but for the average user today it is worse because of the driver and software support. That isn't Linux's "fault" but it is Linux's "problem". Not the user's problem. If you make it the user's problem they will stick with Windows and (frighteningly!) think of it as a more free and open system than the vision of Linux you are pushing.

  3. Re:Working group representing a consortium of vend by __past__ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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)

  4. Thats evolution by gowen · · Score: 4, Funny

    Linux : going from competing desktops to competing desktop initiatives...

    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
  5. Linux on the desktop by sql*kitten · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  6. Business desktop vs Home desktop by tr0llb4rt0 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Linux is ready for the business desktop.

    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. :-D

    --
    Worst .sig ever!
  7. Getting people to turn off Windows by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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 |
  8. Skiing by Mr_Silver · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I've been skiing now for 5 years. Last year I decided to try Snowboarding for a bit.

    (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.
  9. Keep in Mind by tres3 · · Score: 5, Informative
    The thing to keep in mind here is that they are most likely shooting for a corporate desktop where the secretaries will have a very limited portfolio of applications. They just need things like email, web, word processing, and a spreadsheet. Linux is an ideal client for that!

    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.

  10. Re:Working group representing a consortium of vend by pubjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  11. Even More Frustrating by occamboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  12. IBM - already doing it by GomezAdams · · Score: 5, Informative

    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...
  13. Re:Working group representing a consortium of vend by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  14. Re:What's missing? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Here's a few items from a private "Linux TODO list" that me and some friends maintain :

    • Easy software installation. People do not want to spend an hour installing a program. Apt/yum/emerge et al are not full solutions:
      • There are not and never will be any repositories that contain all the software you want in an up to date fashion. Mixing repositories leads to big issues, see OpenCarpet.org which immediately wanted to upgrade my copy of Frozen Bubble 1.0 to Frozen Bubble 1.0 thanks to metadata mismatches.
      • There is no standard for desktop integration - why should users have to type a cryptic command in order to install software? Why not just click the icon in the webpage?
      • The status quo is that packagers don't notify software maintainers when their software is packaged, so frequently there is no way to find out what random permutation on the softwares name your repository uses short of grepping/searching the full list. Worse, some packagers choose to split things into different sized pieces, for instance on Debian to get a full Wine setup you need not just "wine" but also "wine-tools".

    • Multimedia support is still weak. Today I wanted to watch the trailer for the Runaway Jury, but unfortunately Apple have monopolised the market on film trailers (I heard they pay or give free/ultra cheap hosting in order to make people use QuickTime) and, surprise, their website doesn't work well on Linux. There is no real standard location for browser plugins, nor is there any readily accepted implementation for embedding playback engines into the browser. You have to grep the page sources for the URL to the .mov, and even then it doesn't work as neither mplayer nor xine understand the MOV reference types (a proprietary form of redirect, in effect). So I can't watch the trailer.

    • We need to be able to run peoples existing games, applications etc nearly flawlessly. Wine has to get a lot better first. Recently Jeremy White of CodeWeavers set an interesting challenge - given how far Wine has come in the past few years, he thinks it might be possible to have 95% of Windows apps roughly functional by the end of 2005.

    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.

  15. Re:Working group representing a consortium of vend by CommandNotFound · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.