Slashdot Mirror
Rethinking the Linux Distribution?
eldavojohn writes "ONLamp.com is running an interesting article about rethinking how the community distributes Linux and the open source applications that often come with Linux. The author isn't arguing that Linux needs to become a full blown web OS over night but instead, asking if the community should be considering 'Software as a Service' and what he means by that is perhaps many of the open source applications that run on Linux should be available through a browser. The reasons for this are obvious, the code is open so anyone could host it, it would be platform independent so anyone could use it and it might attract more users to the Linux environment. The obvious note here is that many of the enterprise software makers are switching to Software as a Service, shouldn't the open source community investigate the possibility of a Web OS?"
Why UNIX?
So basically you want to run the apps on the remote machine and just use the local machine for display and storage. Hmmmm. Sounds familiar. Sounds like X11 or Remote Desktop doesn't it?
The only reason for the 'do it in the browser' meme seems to be set up for web this and web that and aren't set up for giving you Windows TS or Unix Shell accounts....
Oh, and X11 isn't that efficient over a network of course!
Why would we ever want to run our word processor in a web browser?
Certain applications make sense on the web. Web search engines, for instance. Even maps, and seeking directions from place to place. Basically, anything that takes large amounts of information and makes it readily accessible. I can understand those being on the web.
But... word processing? Image manipulation? *Why* would I want to do that? What does it gain me?
Nothing.
What do I lose?
Control. If I choose to change applications, or try a new application, I am at the mercy of the host. If the host decides to upgrade, and I hate the new version, I am at the mercy of the host.
The whole idea smacks of, "Let's do it, because we can!"
Corporations like Microsoft and Google want us to go that route, because then *they* get to control even more of our lives. But why would *we* want that?
Collaboration can happen without application hosting. It'd be better if we focussed instead on creating a great P2P collaboration framework, and build that into many applications, such as OOo, or the Gimp, or any other system you might want to use for multi-authored documents.
But the web?
Seriously.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
"Software as a Service" is 100% a marketing term. Trust me, Mr. Newbie Author, the open source community has been thinking of avoiding desktop deployment for a long, long time - just ask the Apache team or anyone who's ever written a web app.
"Linux as a Web OS"? I'm not sure you know what Linux is if that's the best thing that came out of your head the last time you toked up.
Where is it? I know I saw a fancy bootup screen for a linux based Google operating system. I'm sure by now they have tons of features. I mean they basically have an office suite thats web based. They have photo-management functionality, they've got a huge user base (not to mention cash like friggin crazy).... so where is my Goonix! I want the iso ready for installation on my 1gig flash drive so i can take my Goonix everywhere I go!
Relocating to San Francisco / Palo Alto... Hire me?
Well, I think the RTFA has a point, but doesn't quite take it all the way home: the reasons web-based software is popular are simple: no installation/uninstallation hassles, automatic "updates" of the software, network transparency, collaboration, etc.
There is nothing in that list that restricts that app to be browser-*based*. You can build an offline, desktop-based (but maybe browser-*launched*) app that installs and uninstalls simply, has collaboration features and updates automatically. With VM technology brewed into the Linux and Vista++ kernels, there is no technical reason why we can't have desktop apps that have the best of both worlds. We just need a standard (or even better some sort of framework) to make this easier. That's I think where Apollo, Silverlight, or JavaFX want to take us; it'd be nice if there was an OSS stack (like the LAMP stack) that matched these capabilities...
Right now you can run some P2P app on your computer, listen to music and balance your checkbook in between check for new stories on /.
That's because your computer has a LOT more internal bandwidth than external.
Now imagine that you're trying all of that online. All of a sudden your multi-tasking box becomes a single-task box as each of those apps tries to share your limited bandwidth. For most of us, it's easier to buy a faster CPU or hard drive than it is to get a faster Internet connection.
And that's just ONE computer with its own Internet connection. It only gets worse when you start adding more people to your connection.
And the goal is to do what? Get more people to use Free software?
The reason more people don't use Free software is that their workstation already has similar apps installed. Why download AbiWord when 90% of the workstations out there already have Notepad and Wordpad installed?
well you can use torrents for distributing install CDs, which doesn't take any real bandwidth from the server at all.
Moving to a "software as service" model such as Web applications is a step back to the mainframe days, in which someone else controls the software you use. The benefit of the personal computer was that the software resided on the user's computer, under the user's control. This increased the freedom of the user. The free-as-in-speech software movement further increased the freedom of the user by allowing the user to own, modify, improve and share the software. This can't happen with the "software as service" model.
The free/open source software community in particular should resist this erosion of user freedom. After all, user freedom is what free/open source software is all about. Why should it be lured into giving that up? The question, as always, it who benefits: the company hosting the web applications (who can easily spy on everything you do with their software and even create a EULA in which you agree that they own the material you create with said software; most users just click "OK" and never actually read the EULA) or the user?
Hint: it's not the user.
Please check your fanboyism at the door
Please take your own advice...
multimedia
Actually, Linux can play all media formats, and convert between them easily. All media players support all formats in Linux. Compare this to Windows, where certain players will only play certain formats, and every player wants you to convert music into their format, and some even require you to pay for the conversion and burning features.
and games spring to mind
On Windows I can't play games from a few years ago, let alone the classic PC games I have. On Linux, I can still play all the old games, and OSS emulators provide methods to play old games from other systems (dosbox, scummvm, agi, qemu). Games that require 3D acceleration just work, and don't require fiddling around and tons of patches. Linux may not have all games running native, but it's clear that when a game is made for Linux, it works superior compared to when a game is made for any other OS.
not to mention a decent-looking UI
Well, obviously that's subjective. But then again, you can customize it to your heart's content on Linux. Not only that but you can choose between different major UIs that are each well supported and tailored to different users. And yes, you can tweak it to look/act just like Windows.
and great desktop performance
I don't recall having to reinstall Linux every 6 months to get rid of system cruft, or having to restart to get rid of dead applications or memory leaks. I've never had to shut down because an application stopped responding. When I uninstall applications, they remove cleanly and completely.
Applications don't try to steal priority over other applications, and don't try to take over each other (i.e., some toolbars that come with applications, applications stealing each others' file associations, applications trying to launch themselves on startup and won't let you turn them off). Applications don't expire without warning and force you to download a new version that may or may not even support your version of operating system. Not to mention that I can even run Linux on older computers that currently supported Windows versions choke on. I can save my home folder to easily back up all my settings and personally installed programs, they're not scattered all over the filesystem. Other users can't mess up my files by default, but I can easily give them permissions to look at, edit select files, or share their own files with me.
I can copy my hard disk install and move it to another computer and it will work fine, and if I upgrade I don't have to reinstall my operating system (the other day I moved one system from an Athlon 64 to an Athlon 64 X2, totally different motherboard, video card, expansion cards, hard drive, audio, etc. I copied the Linux installation over onto the new one and when I started it up, you wouldn't even know anything had changed. Not a single dialog box nagging me that this and that was found, and this is changed, where is that driver, etc). All the required drivers come with my system and I don't need to install every hardware vendor's custom applet to sit near my clock and nag me about updates, promotions, or even just take up space.
If I have a printer, the interface for switching settings and viewing ink levels are the same as every other printer. I don't need to learn anything new to learn how to use my new printer, it just works the same. My sound card doesn't have a billion stupid custom applications that I don't want to use but have to install anyway because the driver updates require that they be there.
Anyway, 'nuff said.
Twinstiq, game news
When someone creates a mechanism to do deployments of just the pieces you need to run an app and installing them in an isolated sandbox - no one will care about the web apps anymore (and by apps I mean apps - word processors, spreadsheets, web editors). The key word here is "just the pieces you need to run". I.e. just the core of the app, 4-5 hundred K of code and relevant parts of libraries. I should be able to literally get up and running within seconds over today's broadband connections and continue working while this mechanism downloads the rest of the app code and data that may or may not get used in the future.
Another key word is "isolated sandbox". I should be able to install apps without the fear that they'll wreck my system. I should be able to remove them at the drop of a hat, too, with no negative consequences. Apps must know how to save both locally and "in the cloud", too, and they must be intuitive with respect to where you save. Once you've fully downloaded the app, you must be able to run it locally.
This just makes sense. You can't run a huge number of apps on the server, because server resources are not limitless. Client resources are pretty much limitless today, though. So no matter how you slice it, apps have to be run on the client and what's missing is a delivery mechanism that would make them as convenient as webapps.
There, I've outlined the strategy for the next 5 years. Now the question is, who will implement it faster, FOSS or Microsoft.
If someone wants to write a conventional wordprocessor they can choose to give it away for free without taking on any costs or liability. If someone wants to use that wordprocessor they can test it to their satisfaction and be fairly certain that it will then continue working. Worst case scanario - it doesn't keep up with some OS update in the future - and obviously they've checked that it uses an open file format, so that they won't lose their data.
OTOH, a software-as-a-service wordprocessor is as much use as an inflatable dartboard unless someone is going to provide that service and make some minumum level of service guarantee (including data backups). That costs.
Now, it would be great if there were Free/Open Source software-as-a-service SERVERS for people or companies who wanted to run their own "personal" centralised system - but as the main source of applications for a "Free" OS it just ain't gonna fly.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
The Hacker's Guide To The Kernel: Don't panic()!
So many comments posted thus far, and nothing about Affero. You can't discuss what free software in a "WebOS" (what a horrible term) means without bringing this up. The fundamental point is that the GPL allows anyone modification without no restrictions or obligations as long as you don't distribute the software to other people. Distribution is generally interpreted as different than running it. Basically, if you GPL a PHP driven website, anyone can take it, modify it, give other users access to "running" it without distributing any changes you've made.
As best I can tell, the Affero license addresses this, by a clause partnered with specific functionality in the program. 'If this software came with functionality to give source code to users, you may not remove it.' or something to that effect. I've already seen one or two sites that have decided that it didn't apply to them, and the development community behind it sounded like "so what?" Which is fine I suppose, but it feels strange to me that they were able to make a site for a client based largely on existing OAGPL'd code, integrate the code with existing technology(that is also widely used and would be interesting to many people), fix bugs, and then turn around and declare yourself unable and unrequired to fulfill the obligations imposed on you by the agreement. This is compounded by the fact that generally its much harder to tell when a site is appropriating OAGPL'd code. With traditional software, strings will usually catch hidden strings, debugging statements etc. Web software only has the output to look at.
I am somewhat comforted by the fact their site is already out of date, so either they or their client will be facing increasing costs in maintaining the site.
I Browse at +4 Flamebait
Open Source Sysadmin