HP May Be Developing Its Own Version of Linux

vondiggity writes to tell us that HP is working on several different ways to make an end run around Vista. Among the plans is also a supposed rumor that certain factions within HP are developing their own flavor of Linux. Executives at HP deny that any meaningful amount of resources are being directed into plans for a mass-market operating system, stating their main goal is to innovate on top of Vista. "Still, the sources say employees in HP's PC division are exploring the possibility of building a mass-market operating system. HP's software would be based on Linux, the open-source operating system that is already widely available, but it would be simpler and easier for mainstream users, the sources say. The goal may be to make HP less dependent on Windows and to strengthen HP's hand against Apple (AAPL), which has gained market share in recent years by offering easy-to-use computers with its own operating system."

Comments

That would be awesome!

[Ethanol-fueled]

They could name it HP-LX!

Re:That would be awesome!

[DittoBox]

Then we can't call it Hockey-Pux anymore!

Re:That would be awesome!

[buraianto]

They could call it Hockey-Tux.

Re:That would be awesome!

[Anonymous Coward]

That is not the preferred nomenclature. Gnu/HP-LX, please.

Re:That would be awesome!

[Anonymous Coward]

or Hinix, Pinix ... Schminix.

Re:That would be awesome!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been waiting for a manufacturer to adapt it's own Linux distro to compete with Apple. I just always thought Sony would be the company to do it first.

Within the next ten years I can see all manufacturers having a branded OS distro that they either sponsor (i.e. RedHat/Fedora, Canonical Ubuntu) or outright own (i.e. APPPLE/OSX).

I can see them ultimately updating and maintaining the same distro core, but branding it to their own company image (Themes, Backgrounds, Boot Images). But in the end they are all compatible with each other because they all built off of the same distribution with identical package manager servers.

This is the where the market will ultimately go. FOSS is the future, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the FOSS of choice will be Linux...other companies will open up well before Linux ever gets past 10% market share on the desktop.

Re:That would be awesome!

[Hognoxious]

HP-LX = Hickie Licks?

Re:That would be awesome!

[darth_phoenix]

nah...lets call it HINUX

Lest we get excited.

[g0dsp33d]

It occurs to me that they aren't going to do this because they love Linux. They would do it to make money and I'm willing to bet that if they make their own version it would be designed to be difficult to move to other systems. They won't want to develop something at any expense and have someone else under cut their prices.

It might be nice to have the average user know what Linux is though.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Narpak]

If HP makes a decent version of Linux for their computers, even if it has system locks, could be an important introduction into the OS for many new users. A growth in the amount of users running Linux, or derivations thereof, could be good for Linux in general. Wider use = wider support. Not to mention that it could help to make porting games for Linux more lucrative.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[gbjbaanb]

'm willing to bet that if they make their own version it would be designed to be difficult to move to other systems

They have one already (sortof) - HP-UX. Perhaps they're thinking of making their own Linux version to make it easier to move to other systems, like all the x86_64 boxes they currently ship with Windows on. If they stop producing HP-UX and port a lot of the code they have in it to Linux, they get the best of all worlds - fancy stuff for their fancy servers, and fancy stuff for their mass-market servers and workstations.

They can also slap the Linux brand on it, so everyone becomes more comfortable running it.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[rarel]

Indeed. This would mean official support and official drivers on a wide range of machines, even if they're only HP-branded ones.
Any support from major manufacturers can only lead to increased acceptance of alternative OSes in general. If they're working on one I think it's great.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[spintriae]

I don't see how HP could do any more for Linux than OSX has done for FreeBSD. I doubt very many Mac users even know what FreeBSD is. HP is building on a Linux because they can, and it's better solution than writing a new OS from scratch. They're probably not doing for the Linux community. The best thing Linux users can hope to come out of this is better driver support, if not open-source drivers, for HP computers. That's good enough for me.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

Does that matter? Say they make something that looks and runs like Mandrake but doesn't mention Linux anywhere - full HP branding, and a few proprietary & licensed apps to make it slicker for their users & on their machines. Host their own software repositories. The works.

There's nothing in the GPL that says you have to decorate the OS with penguins and the Linux name is there?

What would we have? A bunch of consumer machines that are very like Linux, and anyone with a clue will know they essentially are Linux. Does that hurt Linux on the Desktop somehow? I don't see how this embrace, however tight, could manage extinguish. Overall it'd be a small help. A dissappointingly small help to fanboys (me) for sure, but a help none the less.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Narishma]

The difference is the license. With the BSD license, Apple can do whatever they like and aren't required to release their modifications.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[fudoniten]

Well, that's where the GPL trumps the BSD license.... :)

Apple doesn't contribute code back to BSD because it's not required. If they'd built OSX on top of Linux, it would be required, and Linux would have benefited. That's likely why Apple didn't use Linux. But HP cares less about locking down their shit, and more about moving boxes, so Linux would be a logical choice for them.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[wanderingknight]

Umm, you know... this little thing called the GPL perhaps, just perhaps, has the key to the hypothetical boost of Linux were IBM to implement their own customized version.

Perhaps.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[YrWrstNtmr]

I don't see how HP could do any more for Linux than OSX has done for FreeBSD. I doubt very many Mac users even know what FreeBSD is.

Precisely. Users do not care. Windows/Linux/OSX/whatever...they do not care. As long as the UI is relatively easy, it makes no difference.

recently, I had my daughter and her roommate living with us. A couple of 20somethings. I gave them an older VAIO with Ubuntu on it to use. No instruction, no notification, nada. After a few weeks, I asked "how do you like that new operaing system? It's not Windows, ya know"
'Huh, what do you mean?'

They never knew, nor cared, what the underlying susbsystem was. All they saw was a different wallpaper, and slightly different menu location. They found everything they needed to do, and simply got on with it.
of course, without a geek (me) setting it up, they would have been lost. No printer, no network, etc.

Linux needs better 3rd party periph hardware integration (camera/WiFi/printer-scanner, etc), better 'applications', and games. Given that, and no one in userland will notice the difference.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[jopsen]

You can also build a closesource app onto of linux... There's an exception in the kernel GPL license... So building everything ontop of the linux kernel from scratch is possible... But that would take a long time.. And that's probably not what they're doing... OS X didn't get where it is today from one release... HP maybe just playing around with a simple linux interface for netbooks..

Re:Lest we get excited.

[TheRaven64]

Apple doesn't contribute code back to BSD

Yes they do, but since most of their improvements are in the Mach and IOKit layers, there aren't many improvements for them to give back. They give back huge amounts of code to LLVM, which has a similarly permissive license.

That's likely why Apple didn't use Linux

No, they didn't use Linux because it didn't exist in 1986 when they (they being NeXT, at the time) first released the OS that would later be re-branded as OS X. They didn't use Linux in 2000 after the Apple purchase because the internals of Linux and 4BSD are very different, while FreeBSD and NetBSD still retain a lot of overall structure inherited from early BSD releases, making it easier to import their code into the XNU kernel.

Apple released a lot of patches for Linux when they ported it to the PowerPC architecture in 1996 and ran it on top of the Mach microkernel. Apple even shipped a Linux distribution for a while, although it never came close to A/UX, their own UNIX (which only ran on m68k machines) in terms of user friendliness.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[MarkvW]

HP has the Stallmanesque "freedom" to make and sell any kind of hardware that it likes. If they make hardware Linux-friendly, that is excellent--pure and simple. At least that software will be available to HP users so that they can tinker on their machines AND other users can look at what HP has done to Linux and can build on that.

I see no downside here. Who cares if HP's Linux is difficult to move to other systems? (1) "Generic" Linux will still almost surely be portable to the HP systems; and (2) if HP's Linux fork is better, then the LINUX community will follow it.

Lastly, any kind of good open source operating system is one more bit of competitive pressure to push Microsoft to develop a leaner, cheaper, and friendlier operating system.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[davidsyes]

Well, look at some of their latest laptops. Maybe if they \can\ do an end run around vista, they can take a page out of Apple's book: "The HP Store", and showcase some of their shiny black-shell gray-wrist-area laptops... Hopefully, they're "remember where they came from" and allow some Linux on the showroom floor, though.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[2nd Post!]

Except that Apple does release their modifications... and they've opened up other projects as well.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[2nd Post!]

Excuse me?

What about this?

Or the fact that Apple regularly contributes back to WebKit, KHTML, GCC, and other various (Apple or not) open source projects?

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see how HP could do any more for Linux than OSX has done for FreeBSD..

*cough*GPL*cough*

Re:Lest we get excited.

[amirulbahr]

A bit like Sun running Solaris all the way from their very high end SPARC systems to their lower end x86 based systems.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[2nd Post!]

You mean like release and host repositories for their base OS?

Or contribute code back to various open source projects they depend on (GCC, LLVM, KHTML)?

Or maybe release code? (WebKit, Darwin Streaming Server, Bonjour)?

All of that would be great if HP did it; then we would have HP, Apple, and IBM being major open source advocates.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[nine-times]

Just to go a little further, most people do not understand the concept of "operating system". I've tried talking to people about it before, and it's weird, but and I've even had to explain to people before that there's a difference between "the system" and "an application". In other words, not all computers have Microsoft Office, because that's an application that needs to be installed. Some people don't understand the difference between "the Internet" and a web browser.

When you talk about "the system", it can be pretty hard to explain to people what an operating system is, because they don't have a very good idea of what's done by the hardware and what's software. Some people think the "My Computer" icon is somewhere in the computer, almost physically, and they don't have a very good concept of how it can go away. Hell, in the early days of my desktop support, I had to explain to a couple people that "that box" was the computer, and without it "the computer" (i.e. the monitor) won't work.

I know it's sounds crazy to people here, but lots of people don't know and don't care. At most, they know how to use a computer for the things they want to use it for. At long as they can do that without too much hassle, you can give them any OS you want.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Abreu]

Are you sure they did not install a bootleg WinXP on it?

(only kidding!)

Re:Lest we get excited.

[spintriae]

I was speaking more in terms of helping Linux to become a household name. I guess people misread that. I'd certainly expect them to give back to the community, I just wouldn't expect them to emphasize their Linux roots in their marketing strategies.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[YrWrstNtmr]

Quite sure.
The vast majority of people never install an OS. Ever.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[2nd Post!]

Ah. I can't see why they would want to, there is no marketing cachet to Linux.

It would make more sense though to license OS X and say, "Powered by Apple" than to re-invent the wheel with Linux...

Re:Lest we get excited.

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Well, that's where the GPL trumps the BSD license.... :) Apple doesn't contribute code back to BSD because it's not required.

Who mods this crap "insightful?" Apple has continually released the BSD subsystem of OS X as Darwin, despite the BSD license not requiring them to. They do this because it allows others to fix things for them and help create interoperable systems. They understand the benefits of an OSS license and want to gain those benefits (for areas outside their core competency and value propositions).

But HP cares less about locking down their shit, and more about moving boxes, so Linux would be a logical choice for them.

Actually, HP is probably not willing to spend the time or expense to develop their own GUI and Linux is the best bet to provide one. That doesn't mean HP won't develop closed source drivers and end-user software and services on top of Linux in order to help motivate users to stick with their hardware.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

They can also slap the Linux brand on it, so everyone becomes more comfortable running it.

How times have changed.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[mrsteveman1]

Yea but what BSD code has Apple locked away?

Re:Lest we get excited.

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Ah. I can't see why they would want to, there is no marketing cachet to Linux. It would make more sense though to license OS X and say, "Powered by Apple" than to re-invent the wheel with Linux...

So your business move would be to stop having the huge liability of having to license Windows from Microsoft (who does not compete in the desktop computer space) and instead license OS X and have the same liability with Apple except also be directly competing with Apple in the desktop computer space? And you think this would be a good strategy why?

Linux is not owned by anyone. It commoditzes the OS so no one party can hold you hostage or charge you for each system sold or kill your business by refusing to license to you if you do something they don't like.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Jorophose]

Well, I think it's fine that way.

But for us geeks, HP Linux means less bugs, more cool features, and likely more acceptance from our fellow geeks.

If 90% of computers were running Linux tomorrow but only 3% of those computers had users who were aware that it's linux, it's still an improvement. Linux breeds change.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

It occurs to me that they aren't going to do this because they love Linux. They would do it to make money and I'm willing to bet that if they make their own version it would be designed to be difficult to move to other systems.

So what? Most Linux development is done for profit because people want it to work so they can make money from hardware or services or closed source software that runs on Linux. So long as it is another company dumping resources into improving Linux, it benefits all of us.

Apple sure doesn't contribute OSS code out of altruism. They don't implement open standard protocols in order to benefit society. Yet they do both of these things and both benefit the OSS community and help thwart MS's lock-in strategies. I don't really care why HP contributes, so long as they do. Scratch that, I prefer they contribute because they see a profitable business venture, because that makes it more likely they will continue to do so.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Pig Hogger]

Just to go a little further, most people do not understand the concept of "operating system". I've tried talking to people about it before, and it's weird, but and I've even had to explain to people before that there's a difference between "the system" and "an application".

It's easy. The application is the piece of machinery you're using to do your work, and the operating system is the whole factory building and infrastructure, supplying the machinery with power and raw materials, and taking out the finished work.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[dslbrian]

They have one already (sortof) - HP-UX ...

We used to run all our devel software (IC design) on HPUX here, but AFAIK all the major software vendors are end-of-life'ing on HPUX. Cadence and Mentor have already dropped it and now we run on Redhat on top of HP hardware (definitely better and faster - of course now we have a whole storage closet crammed full of obsolete C3700s).

I don't know why HP would ever want to fork Linux other than to break stuff and annoy the software vendors. They hate supporting multiple derivatives, in fact we are stuck on RHEL4 because parts of the toolset aren't up to date on the existing distros (much less some wannabe HP variant). HP may try to push a custom Linux to common users, but I'm pretty certain Cadence would tell us to buy the machine, wipe the drive, and install Redhat.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[slimjim8094]

None. The entire graphics part of the system (you know, the Mac OS X part) is closed, though.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Tubal-Cain]

I think most OEMs would license OSX if Apple were willing, but Apple has been burned by that in the past.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Warbothong]

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)

"OpenDarwin was a community-led operating system based on the Darwin platform. It was founded in April 2002 by Apple Inc. and Internet Systems Consortium. Its goal was to increase collaboration between Apple developers and the free software community. Apple theoretically benefited from the project because improvements to OpenDarwin would be incorporated into Darwin releases; and the free/open source community supposedly benefited from being given complete control over its own operating system, which could then be used in free software distributions such as GNU-Darwin.[11]

On July 25, 2006, the OpenDarwin team announced that the project was shutting down, as they felt OpenDarwin had "become a mere hosting facility for Mac OS X related projects," and that the efforts to create a standalone Darwin operating system had failed. They also state: "Availability of sources, interaction with Apple representatives, difficulty building and tracking sources, and a lack of interest from the community have all contributed to this."[12] The last stable release was version 7.2.1, released on July 16, 2004. [1]"

WebKit was a massive code dump of KHTML, modified so much that merging those changes would require more effort than starting a whole new project.

Whilst I think that all open source code contributions are a good thing, to me Apple's policy seems to consist of fork-by-default, then contribute back anything for which that would be too costly.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[davolfman]

But where are the cars in your metaphor?

Re:Lest we get excited.

[TemporalBeing]

Well, that's where the GPL trumps the BSD license.... :)

Apple doesn't contribute code back to BSD because it's not required. If they'd built OSX on top of Linux, it would be required, and Linux would have benefited. That's likely why Apple didn't use Linux. But HP cares less about locking down their shit, and more about moving boxes, so Linux would be a logical choice for them.

uh...not necessarily. Apple does release quite a bit of what they do to the underlying OS that is Mac OS X (e.g. Darwin, OpenDarwin - OS X minus the Apple Mac GUI). However, the GPL (and LGPL) does not necessarily require the contributions to be released back to the original author - e.g. if a manufacturer mods the Linux kernel, the do not necessarily have to make it available to Linus, et al. They do have to make it available to anyone they distribute the Linux Kernel to.

Really, the only difference between BSD-style licenses and GPL-style licenses is the requirement to release changes back to the users receiving the distributed binaries. And Apple's open source license (APL?) requires that modifications actually be contributed back to Apple as well (and possibly ownership...it's been a while since I've reviewed it...) so Apple actually has a better chance of providing everyone a change by a third party than Linux does...

Still...Linux is king, though Mac OS X might end up being queen. Windows will forever remain the joker, and DOS the executioner. UNIX will be the old guard - the most loyal of knights, and everyone else will be the new guard...ok, ok...enough with the analogies...

Re:Lest we get excited.

[that this is not und]

Except they kept the OS closed enough to it killed OpenDarwin.

I used to run Darwin on a Beige G3 that wasn't powerful enough to run MacOSX. But it's an abandonware OS now, largely because Apple shut them out.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[ozmanjusri]

HP maybe just playing around with a simple linux interface for netbooks..

HP has supported Linux on its laptops for a long time. I have a NC6400 laptop which came with SLED10 installed on it, even has a nice green and silver SUSE logo badge.

What we're seeing here isn't just one hardware maker toying Linux, there are dozens of them - Nokia was an early adopter with Maemo/OS200x, but Asus, Everex/Wallmart, Dell, etc, etc are all jumping on the bandwagon. Even Intel, Microsoft's long-term partner in crime, has it's own Linux plans. And the important point these early adopters have demonstrated is that it isn't hard.

Microsoft's monopoly has been an immense roadblock for computing progress for decades now, but Vista's failure means there are cracks appearing in their Windows, and both competitors and partners have a scent of the fresh air on the other side. That's why the commentators are all calling HP's efforts an end-run around MS.

It's not a fait accompli yet, but with Adobe reinventing Flash as an application platform, Google poising Chrome/Gears in a similar role and Linux being adopted by most major hardware makers, Microsoft is looking more and more like losing control of the computing world.
And not before time.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[afabbro]

If they stop producing HP-UX and port a lot of the code they have in it to Linux, they get the best of all worlds - fancy stuff for their fancy servers, and fancy stuff for their mass-market servers and workstations.

Except that all the fancy stuff is written by Veritas - the filesystem, the VM, the cluster, etc. HP-UX is just a moldy old SysV codebase. It's still ksh88 for pity's sake.

HP has thrown/pissed away more good code - DEC, Alpha, Tru64, Tandem, etc. - than most companies have developed.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I think people notice annoying things like intrusive UACs, and crashs/BSODs. But you are right in many cases they don't care as long as things "just work". At this poin tmost Linux distros come a lot closer to "just working" than Vista.

If Linux were offered as an option to be preinstalled on more computer systems, and those systems were priced accordingly (no MS TAX) , more prople would probably be using Linux, and not caring because it just works.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[calidoscope]

And they did a pretty nice job with the GUI, compare VUE running on HP-UX 8.07 in early 1992 to the then current version of M$-Windoze (3.1). In addition, HP put a lot of work into the design of Motif, which may not have been up to par with the then Mac GUI, but was a lot better looking than Windoze 3.x.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi,

Could I come over too?

Thanks,

Anon

Re:Lest we get excited.

[xenocide2]

"They do this because it allows others to fix things for them and help create interoperable systems."

Fix things for them, that might happen on occasion, but has anyone created an "interoperable system" based on that source?

From what I've heard, OSX isn't very POSIX smart (sync is implemented as noop) and behavior changes dramatically between releases. I also recall reading that the macFUSE /proc implementation was based on unpublished APIs. I don't think it was the Darwin source that made it work.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[tyrione]

WebKit was a massive code dump of KHTML, modified so much that merging those changes would require more effort than starting a whole new project.

Horsecrap. The WebKit project completely dwarfs the KHTML/KJS original beginnings.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[cymru_slam]

Errrr - yeah, you can run VxVM and VCS if you like but they do have their own LVM and Clustering (MC-Serviceguard or whatever they're calling it these days.) Interestingly enough Linux LVM looks just like HP-UX native LVM - even most of the commands are the same. I was once told that a bunch of HP engineeers wrote it in their spare time - never found out if that was true or not.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[DrSkwid]

Asus distro of Xandros on my EeePC is great. It's the perfect little Linux system for the job in hand. I expected I would wipe and re-install something else until I fired it up the first time. Though I did add the Debian repositories to /etc/apt/sources.list so I could get extra stuff (Wireshark, dsniff, kismet - the WiFi does rfmon - sweetness).

That said I don't like the XP styling, I must get round to changing that but that's the only cosmetic quirk that jars.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[DrSkwid]

Plan 9 is the Lord Protector and we'll see you in the Court of Star Chamber.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[DrSkwid]

> helping Linux to become a household name.

Sounds like you go to the wrong houses. Though it jars with me when people pronounce it Linn-ux rather than Lie-nux - and yeah, I know, I know but I'm old school.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Lennie]

I'm guessing it's a carfactory ?

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Hognoxious]

1986 when they (they being NeXT, at the time) first released the OS that would later be re-branded as OS X.

Witness the amazing poewer power of the RDF! Apple were able to relabel a 20 year old OS and market it as the great new shiny thing.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Lafeek]

You mean... it's the year of Linux on the desktop?

Re:Lest we get excited.

[TheRaven64]

So did Sun, with Solaris. And Microsoft with DOS and Windows (well, they only managed 15 years). In all of these cases, the product has been developed in the intervening period, just as NeXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Mac OS X was.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[couchslug]

"Indeed. This would mean official support and official drivers on a wide range of machines, even if they're only HP-branded ones."

We can also look forward to the usual bundled crapware.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[mikael]

Where I am, HP seem to have the edge over other suppliers like Dell for the academic market. All of the new purchases for our labs have been HP systems. Given the problems Vista has been performance issues, HP would be only too happy to regain full control over the design of their systems and purchasing/support contracts.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[afabbro]

Errrr - yeah, you can run VxVM and VCS if you like but they do have their own LVM and Clustering (MC-Serviceguard or whatever they're calling it these days.)

Last I heard, they were using rebadged Veritas stuff. i.e., they call it their own fs and lvm, but it's just VxVM and VxFS.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[corstar]

Totally agreed. About a year ago I was "asked" (being the allocated family nerd) to get rid of some m$.viruses.m$ and "it stopped working" type nagging. As I was told all backups were done (thankfully I taught them about that) I just installed Linux on my Mothers and my Sisters pc's. So, a year or so later after no crashes, viruses and an apparent abundance of magically free software they asked me what Linux was! I was delighted to tell them they have been using it for around a year. At first I had Ubuntu but have settled on Fedora 8. If they were asked today what a "cli" or even an "os" was, I'm sure they couldn't tell me. They're not stupid, it's just not their forte. So, in my opinion "the average user" just doesn't care or more to the point doesn't even know.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[g0dsp33d]

Vista's failure means there are cracks appearing in their Windows

Don't get too excited yet, remember they have a huge ad campaign that may mention their company or products directly if they become popular.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Fix things for them, that might happen on occasion, but has anyone created an "interoperable system" based on that source?

Sure they have. Unsanity created APplication Enhancer (APE) which opened up cool new ways to do things (and broke stuff occasionally). Security geeks in my office wrote some cool kernel extensions for locking down specific processes that would not have ben possible without the source. Would KDE even have been able to port their kit to OS X in a reasonable amount of time without that source? It helps certain developers quite a bit.

Then look at other technologies like Bonjour, Apple's ZeroConf implementation. It sure helps to have that source if you're writing zeroconf for Linux or even for an application on Windows, like CS3.

I also recall reading that the macFUSE /proc implementation was based on unpublished APIs. I don't think it was the Darwin source that made it work.

I bet they did look at the source and almost certainly for the SpotlightFS support and the like.

In any case, having the source is always preferable if you're trying to create an interoperable system because when it comes right down to it, all documentation has deficiencies and sometimes the easiest way to resolve an ambiguous part of a standard or poorly explained interaction is to look and see how the other party actually coded that part.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[rtb61]

It has far more to do with the expandind school notebook market, a notebook on every students desk. Globally tens of millions of units and for government to avoid spending billions of dollars to do it, notebooks will be required to be supplied with all necessary software, operating system as well as applications and even digital texts.

No PC manufacturer can ignore this market and open source software provides the only cost effective means by which to achieve a competitive solution. Linux as it turns out will win on the school desktop.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

Shut them down?

You can still run Darwin, right now.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Hognoxious]

So, a tiny bit more than rebranding going on?

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

On July 25, 2006, the OpenDarwin team announced that the project was shutting down, as they felt OpenDarwin had "become a mere hosting facility for Mac OS X related projects," and that the efforts to create a standalone Darwin operating system had failed. They also state: "Availability of sources, interaction with Apple representatives, difficulty building and tracking sources, and a lack of interest from the community have all contributed to this."

You're damn right it failed. Why would anybody want to run a bloated kernel like Darwin if they didn't have the rest of OS X on top? Not only that, but Apple had absolutely no use for the conveniences that make Linux distributions simple and powerful, like package management. So that much was up to OpenDarwin. It reflects more on them that they failed than on Apple. It's not even "hard" -- Debian happily runs over Darwin.

Also, getting Darwin's source is trivial. I don't see how "availability of sources" is a valid complaint at all.

WebKit was a massive code dump of KHTML, modified so much that merging those changes would require more effort than starting a whole new project

Yes, and now WebKit is a superior product to KHTML, to the point that KDE 4's Konq can use it, and will soon begin using it over KHTML by default. Google's Chrome is also WebKit based.

Admittedly, WebKit's evolution caused some friction between the KHTML team and Apple -- mostly because Apple hosted the changes on the WebKit site instead of submitting patches piecemeal. But they were always available. And in any case, WebKit development was much faster paced than KHTML development. Now that the KHTML/Konq teams understand that, they see that Apple was right, from a practical point of view, all along. KDE didn't have the manpower to keep track of Apple's changes.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[mikechant]

No PC manufacturer can ignore this market and open source software provides the only cost effective means by which to achieve a competitive solution. Linux as it turns out will win on the school desktop.

Except that MS will almost give away their software in particular contexts rather than lose market share. I believe they're only charging something like $5 for Windows XP on netbooks, for example.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Narnie]

I know what you mean, my gf's mother likes to refer to "that box" as the hard drive. Explaining that the computer works fine, but the hard drive failed and all your data is gone, was well over her head. I didn't even bother trying to explain the difference between AOL, Windows, and the internet.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think the initial emphasis will be monetisation. This sounds like a skunkworks project by some people within HP, not an official initiative. Kind of like Google's 15%-of-your-time-for-personal-projects thing. I believe these are people who think that Linux will truly cut costs for both HP and customers.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[sciencewhiz]

I know you want official drivers, but the unofficial HPLIP printer drivers are far better then the windows drivers, in my experience.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[MBGMorden]

I've found it fairly common for people to call the system unit the "hard drive". And what's weird is they act as if I'm making a minor quibble when I point out that the hard drive is actually a part inside the "big box".

A comic tie-in story was that years ago (I think it was around 2002 or so) when I was in college, I had a part time job doing tech support for the faculty computer systems on campus. One me and a few other techs (3 of us) were having a slow day and just sitting around talking. All of a sudden this professor comes bolting into the door frantic exclaiming "someone stole my hard drive!?!?!?!" over and over. My boss started talking with him (almost counseling him - he seemed to need it) and walked out to go to his office. The suddenness of it all caught us off guard. We just kinda sat there for a second and then everyone was like "That might have been a dedicated person to go in there and actually take out the hard drive.". After about 30 seconds though it just kinda clicked that "Oops, he doesn't mean someone stole his hard drive; somebody stole his whole computer).

Where the confusion on the issue originally started I'm not sure. When I was in grade school I remember the computer classes stressing the difference between a hard disk and a floppy disk, and back then most people though "floppy disk" meant 5.25" floppies while "hard disk" meant 3.5" floppies. I think so much time was spent explaining what a hard disk *wasn't*, compared to what is was, that people just kinda took the term and assigned it to something they could physically see.

Of course, I've also seen them refer to the system unit as their "modem" as well (more than once). I have no idea where that one would have come from.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[rtb61]

Exercise in futility, give away M$ Windows and M$ Office and M$ Server and M$ Exchange and all the M$ Services kits and M$ Manuals, which of course you don't with $5.00 XP not even in digital format. The customer is no longer gullible and has long ago woken up to all the endless costs post OS OEM purchase and repurchase and well, ad-nauseum, of not only the OS but also the rest of it and under M$ OEM rules to be repurchased over and over again with hardware failure.

It is always interesting how M$ always pretends the rest of those costs do not exist and where it makes a substantial portion of it's profits and the means by which it forces it's lock in. So a Linux based system, is a complete system not just the students notebook and, provides all of those for free, not as Linux of course but all as part of the greater global community effort that involves, individuals, governments and of course major corporations like HP, IBM, SUN etc. that work together to create the FOSS environment. Now this versus the one, just one, myopically focussed on monopoly and greed company M$, face M$ is the problem and FOSS is the solution.

Re:Lest we get excited.

[JasterBobaMereel]

My experience is the same

Q: What version of Windows are you using
A: Word 2000

To open a document (any document) they open Word and navigate to it using the open file dialog they assume you mean IE when you say explorer since they have probably never used Windows Explorer

Note these are not stupid/dumb people they are just non technical and do not care ...

Weak

[Anonymous Coward]

If anyone can kill Linux its HP

Re:Weak

[moose_hp]

If it runs with GNU tools (as most, if not all, non-embedded Linux distributions run with) then it won't be much diferent that what we already have.

Maybe a custom installer, packager, device discovered, etc. But I expect the cores (gcc, bash, X, etc.) to be like all the GNULinux distros out there.

Re:Weak

[morgan_greywolf]

So I take it you've never actually seen HP-UX?

Re:Weak

[Hognoxious]

If unix was a family, HP-UX would be the red-haired stepson.

Re:Weak

[katchins]

This is so so true...

Over time, HP has killed more than their share of OSes. Here is a list (feel free to chime in)

Apollo Systems Domain/OS
Compaq/DEC Tru-64 UNIX (OSF/1)
Compaq/DEC OpenVMS

I remember the last OS they killed, Tru-64. When the purchase was made, the news was posted to Slashdot. I made the predictive post "Read My Lips - HP will kill Tru-64". I got flamed beyond recognition, mostly by programmers on Tru-64 and SysAdmins and Tru-64 affectionatos. Now, some 10 years later, as Tru-64 has been EOL by HP, my prediction rings true and those flamers, well, were WRONG.

I don't think HP can kill Linux because Linux is Open Source and not owned by any single company. However, the poster is right...if anyone could kill Linux, it would be HP. Note that HP could kill Linux quicker than SCO or Microsoft, and they've tried and failed.

Server Division Uses Linux

[mpapet]

For their quick start CD, firmware update CD's etc. System Insight manager and their other management tools are full of GPL software.

It's not rocket science at this point and I'm sure they have enough market data at this point to see that it's a viable niche. After all, a low price is always a viable niche.

Re:Server Division Uses Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Who said it was about low price? Sounds more like they want better touch features than Vista can deliver and that's the motive.

Re:Server Division Uses Linux

[Russianspi]

You are right. And hey, look: TFA tells us that "Dell (DELL) just introduced a mini-laptop that can run Linux". Wow. Dell put out a laptop that is actually capable of running linux. What will they think of next with this newfangled Linux thing?

Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never heard of HP having its own unix-based OS.

Oh... wait: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP-UX

Old news.

Re:Really?

[larry bagina]

And via DEC via Compaq: Tru64/Digital Unix/OSF

Re:Really?

[xSauronx]

right, but if they want to compete on the desktop, it'll need a snazzy look and a new name. They can call it OS Eleven

It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be working with OS X. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your computer. Where can you go from there? Where?

Re:Really?

[morgan_greywolf]

Or, they could pick a different number. They could do OS-9...errrr...uhhhh...OS/2, welllll...noooo....

uhhhh.... maybe they could think circular! Like OS/360! Yeah! 360 degrees of OS fun! Oh, wait was that the Nazgul again?

Re:Really?

[Tubal-Cain]

Hp Accessible Linux 9000
Or HAL 9000 for short.

Year of the Linux Desktop

[Iberian]

If Linux is going to make it on the desktop this is the way it will happen. Now there is a concentrated effort of programmers (paid ones at that) with a large amount of financial support from a major player in the desktop market.

HP wins because they can now ship a desktop for less and they have more control over the quality of the product which they ship. Win-Win for them unless MS decides this won't do and threaten to increase prices. It will be a long time before a corporate provider of desktops/servers can say no to MS.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[rickb928]

The real question is, does HP need Microsoft more than Microsoft needs HP?

The answer is not entirely obvious to me.

Easy to say that Microsoft could make HP very uncomfortable with abusive pricing, support terms, and general sabotage.

HP could, however, deprive Microsoft of easy revenue.

Or this could be the first step towards a serious anti-trust case, with Microsoft being charged with monopolistic practices, punishing hardware vendors for even tolerating competitive operating systems. Which they are pretty much avoiding right now, since Linux is such a small fraction of the OEM pre-installed market.

But let a HP-Linux get 10% of the home market, and maybe Microsoft decides it needs to spank HP and teach it a lesson? And HP has almost as many lawyers as Microsoft. I;m counting the DOJ. Though they aren't very motivated most of the time, if the DOJ gets fired up, they will win.

Interesting. Match this up with Ubuntu's new emphasis on being useable, and this could be pretty cool.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[erroneus]

That is the main question and recent research and polling is showing that most people don't actually care about the OS they are running. They may find it difficult or frustrating when they find they can't run "setup.exe} and especially infuriating when they clearly have a virus and can't install Antivirus XP 2009 to clean the infection.

I once set up a linux desktop for an older family member and it had been running well for more than a couple of years... (It has been years since I checked on it) and he was just fine... browsing the web, checking email, chatting online... last time I checked, though, he had a few setup.exe files and similar on his desktop. But other than that, when you set up a desktop and it has an answer to every need or want they would have, then they will be happy.

And these features are all readily available for the majority of these users. This excludes gamers and people who "work" using their PCs, but still... once there is a tipping point on the mass of desktop linus users, the commercial apps will come. Because aside from people like me or you, most people actually will buy software off the shelf.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[Enderandrew]

The moment that major manufacturers stop preinstalling Windows is the day Windows officially starts dying.

Microsoft needs HP more.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[Chyeld]

When the lease to the space the company I worked for was about two years away from expiring, there was a huge and fairly public campaign launched to 'find a new location'. The company wasn't the only in the building, but they did lease about 15% of the floors.

There was much excitement, employees were given surveys and polls. There were even a few... disagreements between people who were for locations closer to home that ended in one or the other no longer working for the company. The Business Journal even ran stories about it.

The company sold the idea heavy for almost the entire year, to the point where everyone was excited to find out where we would be moving to.

A year away from the date the lease was going to expire, the company announced that after exhausive study, it was determined that our current location was the best suited site, and that we had signed a new lease with the building. In consideration for signing the lease early, the building announced that our company's logo would be on the building and the upper management would have reserved parking spaces near the garage elevators.

Take this for what you will.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[Bill_the_Engineer]

The moment that major manufacturers stop preinstalling Windows is the day Windows officially starts dying.

Wishful thinking.

Being a OS X / Linux person myself, I still have to admit that:

Windows will remain the dominant operating system as long as the majority of the mainstream software (productivity, games, etc) requires Windows.

HP needs Microsoft more.

Of course Gateway/E-Machines and Dell would love HP to leave the low-cost windows machine market, and HP knows this. I don't see HP having much leverage against Microsoft at the moment.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[Bill_the_Engineer]

Having posted the parent.

I do see a future where Microsoft Windows will become weaken due to web-centric applications. Regardless of my opinion on web apps...

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[Bill_the_Engineer]

Yep. An oldie but goodie tactic...

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[2nd Post!]

That already happened once 10 years ago. Look up DOJ, IBM, OS/2, and Microsoft.

They held IBM hostage by withholding Windows licenses until IBM stopped developing OS/2 (they found another agreement with higher prices, I believe).

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[2nd Post!]

Or the day Apple becomes a "major manufacturer" is the day Windows officially starts dying. It's getting awfully close at 8% in the US.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[nine-times]

The real question is, does HP need Microsoft more than Microsoft needs HP?

I think either way, major PC vendors would have to be a bit stupid to not have some kind of plan for an alternative to MS. Regardless of how far along they are into the implementation, they should at least have a plan for what happens if they were to stop using Windows.

That's just the sort of thing that you do when your business is dependent on another company. If you're running Dell or HP, that should be one of your big concerns. What happens if Microsoft somehow goes belly-up? What OS do we use if we decide we're tired of using Windows? Even if they don't intend to put the plan into action, it still helps their business. The more feasible the plan is, the more leverage they have when negotiating with Microsoft.

If I ran one of these companies, I'd be looking to Apple's recent success and wondering if I could try something similar. Using an open source base gives you a head start and lets you avoid reinventing the wheel. Making your own version means you have complete control for anything you want to do, and you don't have to rely on any other companies.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

The moment that a major vendor stops preinstalling Windows is the day that vendor loses 98%+ of its PC business.

HP needs Microsoft more. So much more it isn't even funny.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

The moment that major manufacturers stop preinstalling Windows is the day Windows officially starts dying. Microsoft needs HP more.

History will probably show Microsoft officially started dying the day Vista was released to market, irrespective of HP or anybody else.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[MBGMorden]

Apple is a "major manufacturer". Apple generally hovers around the #3 spot for top computer manufacturer in the country. Normally, only Dell and HP beat it in units sold. The thing is that all the OTHER computers run the same OS, so the Apple OS as a platform is a minority, but when comparing to other manufactures instead of lumping them into one camp, Apple is really high up there.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop

[MBGMorden]

HP needs Microsoft more.

I think that at the moment, you're probably right, but we're on the very of that shifting. We really are at that point when people just don't seem to care anymore what the computer runs, as long as it works.

There are several contributing factors to this that I see. #1, is that more and more people that traditionally wouldn't have used a computer are now doing so. That might seem counterintuitive (afterall, those were always the people that WANTED Windows), but it's changed a bit. Those people now largely don't understand what an OS is. The computer is just a tool, and they'll kinda stumble around and figure out what they want to do regardless.

And part of that attitude of "figuring it out and not caring", I attribute to cell phones. Think about it: a cell phone is a small computer that lots of people tinker on and play on. Not the geek sense of tinker, but they always want to send messages, get on the web, change their ringtones, etc, etc. They change out cell phones on a very frequent basis though (almost everyone I know changes out at least every 2 years, with many changing out even more frequently). It's not uncommon for you do get a completely new interface each and every time a new phone arrives. I think this has largely pushed people to realize that as long as you know what you want to do, it's not too hard to figure out how to make an interface do it. The computer screen looking a little different isn't going to terrify them like it once did.

The other big factor is obvious to most here: web apps. I know people who use the computer almost solely for MySpace. Apparently it even has an instant messenger "thing" that works through the browser now. Most people I know that were still using AIM are using that instead now. Most people are using web based email services now (surprisingly I see way more non-geeks using Yahoo Mail or Hotmail over Gmail though, which baffles me given how much cleaner the Gmail interface is). Even a lot of casual games are now flash games played online. All in all, as long as people have a working web browser, they're probably good to go.

All in all, I think that a lot of computer manufacturers are going to start shipping Linux not for geeks, but as a low-cost OS that does everything the user needs. The user gets their computer, it works, and nobody cares. It's running Linux but the computer company might not even mention that fact. It's just another generic OS.

One thing that I think would REALLY spur this on would be if Apple released iTunes for Linux. As much as some people hate the app, a lot of people use it to load songs onto their ipods, and the convenience of the Apple store for buying music is something many people just like. Apple has a slight conflict of interests there though (THEY want to be the shiny alternative to Windows, and I don't see them giving any advantages in that game to their feisty little OSS competitor).

Nothing to see here. Move along.

[BitterOldGUy]

I didn't see anything concrete in the 'article'.

Here's my take: it's a press release to put the fear of Jebus in MS. That's all. There's nothing concrete. There's no explicit description of what exactly they're going to do - all HP would need to do is just ship with [insert your favorite distro here]. But instead they make this BIG announcement of how they're going to have their 'own Linux flavor' to 'replace' Windows.

Yawn. Negotiating strategy and they're bluffing.

Re:Nothing to see here. Move along.

[compro01]

If HP is making a version of Linux, I'd put more bets on it being in the vein of HP-UX than as a replacement for windows.

Re:Nothing to see here. Move along.

[overtly_demure]

being in the vein of HP-UX than as a replacement for windows

What's the point of that?

• HP would have to spend money on development and management of a separate distro (potentially nightmarish)
• They would bear the burden of making it user friendly
• It would be to a greater or lesser degree non-standard

For the consumer market they'd be better off giving some money every year to Ubuntu and using a branded version of it on their cheaper boxes. HP-UX makes them money, because it has features that run on and exploit the capabilities of their bigger iron.

I agree with BitterOldGUy that it's negotiating strategy and bluffing to get a better deal from MS.

I'm for all for it

[eclectro]

If it would help any, they can reduce the amount of ink in my printer cartridges by 1/8th.

Re:I'm for all for it

[Anonymous Coward]

That presumes they are more than 1/8 filled now.

Worst euphamism ever

[Weaselmancer]

...stating their main goal is to innovate on top of Vista.

Could we please stop referring to programming as "innovating"? Not every single piece of code anyone writes is a breakthrough.

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[Creepy Crawler]

---Could we please stop referring to programming as "innovating"? Not every single piece of code anyone writes is a breakthrough.

Bittorrent is. I still have the first torrent from my rusty python script.

100MB porn vid.

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[Anonymous Coward]

Not every single piece of code anyone writes is a breakthrough.

Of course it's not. But they want it to sound that way so people will buy their crap.

So, no, they will not stop referring to programming as "innovating."

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[BitterOldGUy]

...stating their main goal is to innovate on top of Vista.

Could we please stop referring to programming as "innovating"? Not every single piece of code anyone writes is a breakthrough.

I'm the exception. I wrote 'Bon jour World!'.That's innovation - at least according to most marketing professionals who sell software.

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm the exception. I wrote 'Bon jour World!'.That's innovation - at least according to most marketing professionals who sell software.

Hey, that's true - it's neither "Hello, World!", nor "Bonjour, Monde!"

Quick, patent it before someone else does!

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[TeknoHog]

"Hell, Word!"

Now that's a true Microsoft innovation...

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[uniquename72]

Judging by this thread (which I've contributed to), maybe they could use Linux to get their higher end 64-bit systems to actually run for more than a week without horrific slowdowns.

I would consider that a great innovation (though not necessarily a breakthrough).

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[Anonymous Coward]

Could we please stop referring to programming as "innovating"? Not every single piece of code anyone writes is a breakthrough.

It is for me. What's your fucking problem?

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[morgan_greywolf]

Yeah, I hear that program really Excels. Why, people are just dying to get Access to it! Imagine the Power....Point....errr...nevermind.

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[Anonymous Coward]

Dood, dawg!
You need to send me the filename of that hawwwwwt porn vid!

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[dynamo52]

...stating their main goal is to innovate on top of Vista.

Could we please stop referring to programming as "innovating"? Not every single piece of code anyone writes is a breakthrough.

What is worse is that none of it is "innovation". Do manufacturers really believe that their redundant interfaces are actually helpful in any way. The perfect example is wireless network card utilities. I have yet to find one that is not more counter intuitive and less stable than the basic windows application. Most of the time it is simply better to wipe the system from the start and only load the raw OS & drivers.

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm, looks you had a peek at my 'Bon Jour Monde' source after all.

Re:Worst euphamism ever

[Blakey Rat]

Could we please stop referring to programming as "innovating"? Not every single piece of code anyone writes is a breakthrough.

Especially when you're talking about Linux. :) Innovation-- hell! You're lucky if they've managed to duplicate the features of Windows 95.

Build upon debian?

[miffo.swe]

I think the smartest route would be to build on debian in this case. While they could cram whatever they like ontop the OS would still both benefit from and contribute back to the community.

Whatever they build upon i hold my thumbs its something new because if one thing is needed today its more OS out there. More diversity demands more standards and interoperations and that would be very good for IT as a whole.

Re:Build upon debian?

[darkmeridian]

While I generally believe that new forks are good things, I think that HP should work with Dell on Ubuntu. Hardware manufacturers would have to support Ubuntu if they want to get Dell and HP business, which I would have to guess is a lot of money. We would have better hardware support.

Re:Build upon debian?

[nurb432]

The smartest thing to do would be build upon FreeBSD, then they wont have that pesky GPL getting in the way of their work.

Re:Build upon debian?

[MMC Monster]

I'm an ubuntu user for three years, but I think it would be smart for any company that large to go with Red Hat for the better corporate penetration.

Re:Build upon debian?

[witherstaff]

That wouldn't be surprising as it worked so well for Apple.

Re:Build upon debian?

[nurb432]

And i wasn't slamming the GPL, it has its place. But in a corporation that wants to make lots of $, it isn't there.

Re:Build upon debian?

[DogDude]

Whatever they build upon i hold my thumbs its something new because if one thing is needed today its more OS out there.

Let me guess... you're in your 20's right? Nobody who was around for the Commodore/Apple IIe/Tandy/IBM PC/etc. days would want to deal with the mess of 17 different platforms again. That was a real headache back in the early PC days. The market will naturally go to just a few options (which it did). It works better for suppliers and consumers.

Re:Build upon debian?

[Anonymous Coward]

More diversity might also imply no standards. For example, HP would be set if there was only one Linux distribution in the world, and the entire Linux community would benefit from their contributions right away. However, since this isn't the case, every company that thinks of distributing Linux must first patch together their own distribution, get all the drivers and software to work, etc. This is also partly why there's less commercial software for Linux than for Windows and Mac OS X - Windows and OS X are single platforms.

Re:Build upon debian?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

And i wasn't slamming the GPL, it has its place. But in a corporation that wants to make lots of $, it isn't there.

So IBM isn't a corporation? Sorry, in my experience most Linux development is done by corporations looking to make a profit. Why would HP copy Apple and be later to market and have less of a software base to start with? Even Apple releases all their changes to BSD code back, so they're not making use of any of the so-called advantage of BSD over GPL.

Using Linux would allow HP to undercut Apple's development costs by having more code to make use of and more ongoing development from other companies. It's clearly the best starting point and nothing stops HP from preventing user migration with closed source end user software and services, or simply by selling the best, cheapest hardware (they are the number one vendor already).

Re:Build upon debian?

[Tubal-Cain]

Any improvements to Debian would propagate down to all of it's decendants. It's much easier than pushing improvements back upstream.

Re:Build upon debian?

[miffo.swe]

No im not 20, i was in on the first days of home computing. All the way from my first Sinclair ZX and forward. It wasnt a "mess" at all as you try to imply. Rather an era of rapid development and great progress.

With the standardization on the PC platform and Windows, development grinded to a halt and everything onwards has been about getting more speed out of the same crap as ten years ago. Speed thats then eaten up by the same OS as the last, but with new and shiny colors!

The consumers don't naturally go with less choice, corporations themselves create less choices by buying and canning competitors products. Ive seen this countless times in the thin client market where some big corp buy a much better product and then scrap it.

Suppliers don't profit from few choices at all. When you have one big supplier of operating systems you have very small margins. Its not like you have any bargaining power.

Re:Build upon debian?

[arose]

Lock-in isn't the only way to make money.

Re:Build upon debian?

[jonaskoelker]

Whatever they build upon i hold my thumbs its something new because if one thing is needed today its more OS out there.

I would like to emphasize that what the world needs is not more OSes (think about what the concept "distro chooser" implies); the world needs the "out there" part. In other words, we don't need more OSes in the ecosystem, we need more OSes in the marketplace.

And I would suggest that HP base their linux on Ubuntu. Debian is, at least to a larger part than ubuntu, made "by geeks, for geeks" and doesn't value ease of use as highly as Ubuntu. To make the hypothetical HP-LX usable enough to be competitive, were it based on debian, HP would have to duplicate a lot of the work of Ubuntu (wasting resources). Patches on the Ubuntu side would propagate to HP through Debian, introducing a delay.

Simply put: the goals of HP match those of Ubuntu more than they match those of Debian. By basing HP-LX on Ubuntu, HP will have to work less and can save some money, some of which will passed on to the consumer and help make HP more competitive.

Re:Build upon debian?

[Lennie]

Dell already choose Ubuntu as it's Linux supplier, it would be good if HP did the same (they already have a good relationship with Debian). But I think HP want to distinguish themselfs from Dell.

Just guessing, could also just be they want a better deal from MS.

Re:Build upon debian?

[nurb432]

But its the safest way

Re:Build upon debian?

[nurb432]

The rest of their business is what holds them up. For them linux is a tool not an 'end game' for them.

Wowee

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, everyone knows how hard it is to create a new Linux distro!

Re:Wowee

[xSauronx]

no kidding. its a lot of work to take ubuntu, change 17 of the packages, 2 of the default backgrounds and the default theme. its like...3 hours of work, and you dont get paid for it. :(

Obligitory Yoda Quote

[MasterOfGoingFaster]

And so begin, the Linux wars...

Re:Obligitory Yoda Quote

[Creepy Crawler]

But in the Linux wars, we all win.

The bazaar is selling the steeple from the cathedral on eBay

Re:Obligitory Yoda Quote

[Anonymous Coward]

That's got to be a quotable quote! ...
When it becomes a reality... hopefully soon.

~AC

Funny, they've had Unix for years with HP-UX...

[Assmasher]

...and I've got it right next to me on an Intel machine. I guess they aren't having too hard a time 'getting around Vista.'

Re:Funny, they've had Unix for years with HP-UX...

[Trashman]

Intel Yes, but Itanium HW w/ EFI is not quite the same.

Re:Funny, they've had Unix for years with HP-UX...

[cymru_slam]

That an Itanium box or have I missed something?

good!

[FudRucker]

I hope HP has lots of success in this venture in developing a Linux for their PCs...

honest competition is good, maybe it will cause other OEMs to raise their eyebrows and pay attention. IBM are you listening? you should have done this with the Thinkpad laptops and desktop PCs (alternatives are good)...

Re:good!

[CautionaryX]

AFAIK IBM doesn't do laptops anymore and licensed their laptop business to Lenovo. It's been awhile since I've been working in the industry but I think it happened a few years ago.

HP Double speak

[arizwebfoot]

Executives at HP deny that any meaningful amount of resources are being directed into plans for a mass-market operating system

Translated, a bunch of guys are working on this by themselves and if they ever get something marketable, HP will steal it from them claiming that since they (the employees) already work for HP, that HP owns anything they might tend to create and thusly, will market it to its fullest potential.

That translated means that HP really means Hefty Profit!

Re:HP Double speak

[ciggieposeur]

HP will steal it from them claiming that since they (the employees) already work for HP, that HP owns anything they might tend to create and thusly, will kill the project and notify all HP employees that similar skunkworks will get them fired.

Fixed that for you.

Applications are the key.

[xzvf]

For both Dell and HP the allure of Linux is no need to be dependent on another company to innovate the OS to drive Laptop and Desktop sales. If they are willing to take a short term loss supporting two operating systems (Don't fool yourselves, OEM's support Windows for end users, not Microsoft) then they get to keep another $30-$100 bucks to add to their profits. Until the promise of cloud computing materializes, it will be difficult to sell consumer Linux without setting expectations that you will be using free versions of software or provide the software and support like Apple does. Plus be willing to stick out the growing process until you get 2-3% of the market. By the way, the model has worked for the big three of servers (IBM, HP and Dell) and now Linux is decent, higher margin revenue driver for all three companies.

Re:Applications are the key.

[nurb432]

I disagree. At this phase usability and guaranteed support is the key.

Re:Applications are the key.

[Anonymous Coward]

Just out of curiosity (since I don't use application programs), what is Linux missing besides Adobe and games?

FWIW, I installed OpenOffice on a Windows computer that she was using for a consulting job and she used them heavily for a few years always referring to them as Word and Excel.

Re:Applications are the key.

[Anonymous Coward]

Operating Systems do not drive hardware sales no matter what Apple and Microsoft want to tell you.
Applications drive hardware sales, if the apps you want to run only work under Windows than you will buy a Windows PC.

People can cry all that want that this is the year of Linux on the desktop, but until applications that people know and want to use show up to the party, it's never going to move beyond the desktop niche.

HP could do this, I personally think they should ditch X but that's just me, they are, i believe, the number 1 pc producer at the moment.

And I really doubt it will be open source. I would look more to an OS X / Darwin type system, proprietary on top of OSS. That's pretty much the only way they will get the big software houses to develop desktop apps for them.

*sigh* what a waste

[DeepCerulean]

It would be nice if more companies would spend their resources improving linux projects as a whole rather than trying to roll their own distributions. I see HP spending a lot of time reinventing several wheels here when their developers' time could be put to much better use in the community.

Re:*sigh* what a waste

[DaveWick79]

Just where has companies spending their resources improving linux projects as a whole gotten us? We have barely improved linux desktop adoption over the past several years, as millions of PC's are sold with windows.
Ubuntu has been by far the most successful approach to desktop linux in the past 2 years, and they are doing it by rolling their own distro and concentrating on making it work for the desktop. If only a company with the financial resources to do so would make it a goal to make a linux distro with a top of the line GUI - a viable OS that could directly compete with Windows, for a profit, at a price in the $50-$100 range. Lack of profit is squeezing innovation, or at least catch-up, for linux. Apple managed to do it with OSX, somebody needs to do it with mainstream linux to make an OS that can be widely used on PC. The ultimate prize would be a linux distro that seamlessly integrated windows app compatibility - but I'm sure MS would never really allow this to happen.

Re:*sigh* what a waste

[ClosedSource]

Apple was able to make a business case because of the BSD license. If they had built OSX based on Linux they would have to provide the source and profit would become the proverbial question mark.

Re:*sigh* what a waste

[DaveWick79]

And that, my friend, is the basic problem with the open source model. Nobody can really make money doing it. Profit drives real development. People won't buy crap, thus it forces you to develop something worth purchasing. How much would you be willing to pay KDE or Gnome in their current state? You have to do WAY too much stuff in a terminal window for it to be a viable competitor to Mac OS or Windows.
The workaround is, distribute the free GPL'ed kernel, and sell your own closed source shell on top of it. IANAL, but if you can't do this, linux is never going to gain any significant ground because development is much slower than focused projects by for-profit companies. Hopefully this is what HP can accomplish, though truth be told, I'd rather it wasn't HP doing it.

I've been saying this for years...

[not already in use]

I don't know if this is what HP is speculated to be doing, but if Linux were to ever be successful as a desktop OS, they would need to do the following:

• Determine which components are going to be part of the system.
• Fork every single one of them.
• Tightly integrate them
• Do not call it a "distro" but rather a "linux based desktop OS."
• Brand it without the word "linux"

If desktop linux is ever to be successful, there needs to be a standard and tightly integrated stack. The choice and openness that makes linux so great in the eyes of some is it's bane in the desktop market, and for software support as well.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[wigaloo]

• Tightly integrate them
• Do not call it a "distro" but rather a "linux based desktop OS."

libidOS, the "linux-based integrated desktop OS". Does it come with the milfs filesystem?

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[nine-times]

Why would they have to do that? It seems like they'd gain more fans and get continued community support by not-forking.

I agree that it might be to their benefit to go their own way and optimize for their own purposes, but if they start from Linux, they're going to have release the source code anyway. Purposefully making it hard to patch those improvements back into the vanilla code is going to piss off a bunch of potential customers, and make it harder to port community improvements over to their version.

Linux will be a successful desktop OS if someone can put enough pressure on major desktop app developers to release their software to on it. Or, depending on your criteria, Linux is already a successful desktop OS.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[DogDude]

If desktop linux is ever to be successful, there needs to be a standard and tightly integrated stack.

You mean like Microsoft....? I'm not saying it's good or bad, but that's part of why MS is so successful. It's easy for developers and users to integrate everything.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[Britz]

"it's bane in the desktop market, and for software support as well."
That's probabely why Debian has so few programs...

Maybe I am dumb, because I am not a developer, but AFAIR someone already stated that Linux now supports more hardware in existence than any other os. It might have not been established as a fact, but I suppose in hardware support Linux can compete with the rest of them. Your comment was not about hardware though, it was about software.

No one can argue that the number of programs released for Windows is much, much higher than for Linux. But the reason for that is mainly the difference between open and closed source. In the closed source area there are many, many programs for the same purpose. In Linux when you want to develope something you can help in an already existing one making it better, or just use existing code and libs and build something on top. With closed source all unmaintained programs die. I do believe that the number of actively maintained programs in Windows is much much lower, but still larger than for Linux. But when you take into account that there is more cooperation than competition in the oss world (competition still is strong and healthy, see Gnome vs. KDE, RedHat vs. Suse vs. xBSD) more people work together on one projet instead of alone on their own.
Now my guess would be that Linux and Windows are about equal with respect to how many programs are out there that fulfill different purposes. And by making that guess the derived guess would be that software support in Linux is pretty good. But then again I am not really a developer, so maybe this is all just bs.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

I don't know if this is what HP is speculated to be doing, but if Linux were to ever be successful as a desktop OS, they would need to do the following: Determine which components are going to be part of the system. Fork every single one of them.

That's a pretty lousy idea. That gets them a start, but loses them all the free work others are doing on Linux going forward, while still not stopping people from directly copying the work they do. If HP uses their hardware and services as differentiator, as well as some closed source end-user software, they could partner with someone like Canonical and gain huge amounts of development work/dollars free of charge, while still earning goodwill in the OSS community and maintaining compatibility with Linux so they have a software development base. They just have to accept their investment dollars in OS development as adding to a commodity (a sales incentive) without lock-in. They can still have lock-in elsewhere.

Alternately, they could grab OpenStep and try for binary compatibility with OS X, leveraging those technologies and Apple's software development base, which would make them even more mainstream on the desktop than Linux. Or, if they're really willing to go for the gusto, they could do both and try to sell their systems as OS X and Linux compatible, a best of breed. Done well and marketed well they'd make a mint. Done poorly, well they'd have a mess on their hands. Still they could invest in it and only release if they were confident and otherwise stick with Windows and be conservative (but make less money).

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that's what Ubuntu is gearing up to do, right?

Ever heard of bzr?

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

No one can argue that the number of programs released for Windows is much, much higher than for Linux. But the reason for that is mainly the difference between open and closed source. In the closed source area there are many, many programs for the same purpose. In Linux when you want to develope something you can help in an already existing one making it better...

Yes, I can help out but 99.99% of desktop users can't, because they aren't programmers. The reason there is so much less software for Linux on the desktop is because there is less financial incentive to create it due to the smaller install base. That's it. There's plenty of OSS projects on Windows people can and do contribute to, but commercial developers are mostly closed source and mostly aim for where there are lots of established users. That's really Windows right now and to a lesser extend OS X. Some day it will hopefully be Linux, but not so much right now. OpenGL and other cross platform technologies are helping and OS X utilizing them is helping, but Linux doesn't aim for complete OS X compatibility and vice versus, so until they do, Linux has to stand mostly on it's own market share, which to date is not big enough to motivate a lot of desktop end-user offerings.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[not already in use]

Even if linux had an equal market share to Windows, it would still be far more difficult to develop for. Which window manager are we using? Which sound library? Which directory layout? Which [insert library that has a zillion different implentations]? "Linux Desktop" implies very very little, whereas "Windows XP SP2" or "OS X 10.5" tells you everything you need to know regarding what stack you're developing for. Even if the market share were equal, it would not be cost effective to develop for Linux, not to mention support.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[not already in use]

Why would they have to do that? It seems like they'd gain more fans and get continued community support by not-forking.

/quote> Linux is controlled chaos. It is a million different pieces written by different people all over the world and put together to create a fully functioning desktop operating system. While this is cool in its own right, there is no single mindset or direction. IMO, to truly be successful there needs to be a "dictator" for lack of a better term who has the right vision. It would be necessary to have a fully cohesive system.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[pembo13]

Then the licenses would adapt to this threat.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Even if linux had an equal market share to Windows, it would still be far more difficult to develop for. Which window manager are we using? Which sound library? Which directory layout?

You're assuming the market share was split up among many different distros and there was not one major winner (which there could be). If there was not, technologies would emerge to make it easier, either Java VMs, cross-platform/distro dev kits, or another technology. If there is profit to be had, there will be solutions.

It'd not like users of Windows aren't spread across different versions with different libraries you know.

Even if the market share were equal, it would not be cost effective to develop for Linux, not to mention support.

I disagree. The market would make it effective by heavily rewarding technologies that make it so. Heck if Windows was reduced to 40% of the market and the rest was split evenly among OS X, Linux, BSD, and Plan9, cross platform development technologies like Java, VMs, or just really good, portable cross platform dev tools would become hugely popular and very slick and easy to use.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[Al Dimond]

Brilliant idea. Just fork everything. It's easy for the first couple years when you can just make superficial hacks to make it work on your narrow hardware selection.

Then eventually major changes have to be made. None of your programmers actually wrote this code or have a deep understanding of why it is how it is, and the people that did are actively hostile to you for trying to usurp their role in the project. A community with real responsibility and leadership isn't compatible with the kind of tight control you want. You'll be writing everything from here on out.

At this point you've either become Microsoft or Apple. Microsoft probably has the hardest job in software: making Windows run well on all those PCs. Without economies of scale and a stranglehold on the market that allows you to charge real money for licenses you won't be able to hire all the programmers you need to be Microsoft.

Apple only has to make their OS run on a few computers, but you can't really succeed doing that unless they're a few computers that really matter. To be Apple you need a buzz machine on the order of Steve Jobs, maybe even bigger because you're burdened by your company's existing stodgy reputation. This buzz machine can't just be the head of marketing, he needs to run the damn joint. Both because you need the buzz and mystique to pervade the company internally as well, and because a guy >= O(Steve Jobs) simply isn't going to accept being your sniveling underling.

And then what if you succeed at doing that? Either one of those things, take your pick. You've technically made a desktop success out of some of Linux's code. Who cares? There's nothing magical about the code that makes up the GNU/Linux desktop. Most of it has commercial counterparts with important advantages. The reason we care about F/OSS is because of the community processes that generate it. The people of Linux will carry on in the frustration of hacking their xorg.conf files. Not that it's a very enjoyable thing to do on a Friday night, or even that it's something that human beings running standard PC hardware should have to bother with in 2008, but because the software is documented, not marketed. Because there's a community there that's honest, open, and passionate (for all its flaws it surpasses what any corporation will ever put out in these quantities). Because they don't just want to consume, they want to understand. And because hacking the xorg.conf sure beats going out and talking to people. Ew.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[DerekLyons]

Why would they have to do that? It seems like they'd gain more fans and get continued community support by not-forking.

HP isn't interested in gaining fans or community support, at least not in the (relatively small) geek community. HP wants to sell lots, and lots, and lots of machines and support contracts - which they can't do without proceeding as the grandparent describes.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[Lennie]

You are missing one thing. 95% of the software people use is probably pretty much the same (yes it maybe Safari or IE or firefox or Google Chrome or Opera, but they all have milions of users). The other 5% is specialised software. Software that was created for the business or industry. Lukily a lot of it is moving to a webbased system, hopefully not the IE-only kind, but it's moving in the right direction.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[Lennie]

KDE/QT, Java, .Net/Mono it is then.

Re:I've been saying this for years...

[nine-times]

Losing community support means spending more money on development. Not courting geeks means losing sales-- and not just sales from geeks. All the various geeks have a pretty big impact on what people use. People who don't know what to buy or whether something is good often rely on the advice of geeks. I know people ask me all the time what kind of computer they should buy.

I'm not saying that can't or shouldn't fork anything, but rather they should only fork when they community for a given project is unhelpful towards their goals. But I don't see a good reason to force the issue and fork everything, making a big schism between themselves and the open source community.

Re:SLASHDOT WAS DOWN - WHY?!

[uncle slacky]

Umm, it got slashdotted?

Ubuntu

[spandex_panda]

Since there is already a great effort to make one linux distro 'easy' why would HP want to reproduce all the same efforts? They should at least take Ubuntu and build upon it, but really... Why bother? They may as well just work on developing hardware drivers for all their hardware and support Ubuntu as an install option (like Dell does). I think Linux is bloody good! The only holding it back now is aplications, wine is a good start, ensuring many existing windows apps will work on Linux, but a beautiful movie maker, photo manipulation, music maker et.al like Apple's iDVD, iPhoto and Garageband are something that Linux could do with. Maybe HP could sponsor one of these?

Re:Ubuntu

[Creepy Crawler]

Simple enough.

repository.ubuntu.hp.com With all the required drivers for hardware along with setup scripts. Just aim HPuntu at HP's repository and it does the rest. They could even provoide the i386 and 64 binaries on a DVD for a apt-cd repo.

Dont repeat what Ubuntu does. Add to it.

Re:Ubuntu

[Myopic]

Maybe call it Uhpuntu, and make the 'hp' a different color in the logo.

Re:Ubuntu

[Anonymous Coward]

Yawn... Ubuntu is far behind Mandriva and Suse in terms of usability. It seems that Mark finally realized that and is now spending more money on trying to correct the discrepancy. If I was a common user, then I would not use Ubuntu - Mandriva is way better and more mature.

HPUX

[ireallylovelinux]

Could we see more HPUX computers soon?

Market differentiation

[fishthegeek]

HP needs what most all of the other OEMs need and that is some market differentiation that isn't based on price. No one wants a perfectly commodotized market to compete in. Windows for all of it's possible benefits carries a huge burden in that when you wish to sell a product built around it your product ends up looking an awful lot like everyone else's product. Leaving price (and profit) as the only real difference

In the end I think that this is survival for HP because I think MS has jumped the shark.

Hpix. or Hippix ? Hippix would be a killer

[unity100]

i think im liking this idea.

Re:SLASHDOT WAS DOWN - WHY?!

[JustOK]

thought it was the Greeks

Last hurdle for adoption

[Amuro-Ray]

I don't know what to think of this. On the one side, I wonder if HP would be able to overcome some limitations that Linux has out of the box. From my experience, the things that push people away from Linux are generally summed up as: Driver support (Wireless, usually), Software support (fixed with VMware), and most importantly of all, issues involving web browsing (flash and java). The problem will be that if HP wants to give the user the ability to listen to mp3's / watch movies / browse youtube right out of the box, you can almost bet there will be some conflicts with some of the Linux purists out there not wanting tainted distros. I'm all for it though. :)

Re:Last hurdle for adoption

[Anonymous Coward]

>Driver support (Wireless, usually),

Pro audio is a far worse situation than wireless drivers.

>Software support (fixed with VMware),

VMWare only "fixes" software support to the extent that you can run Windows software.
What software is out there for Windows that anyone cares about anymore?

> and most importantly of all,
>issues involving web browsing (flash and java).

When has Java ever been a problem?

The Geek In Fantasyland

[westlake]

vondiggity writes to tell us that HP is working on several different ways to make an end run around Vista
.

Vista doesn't seem to be hurting HP's bottom line:

After the bell, Hewlett-Packard reported a 14.0% increase in third-quarter profits on strong laptop sales and growth in its international markets.

Investors have been worried HP was losing market share to rivals Dell and Apple but so far that has not happened. The company has been helped by cost cuts and strong sales outside the United States.

But nothing in the company's numbers speaks of a downturn. HP reported fiscal third-quarter net earnings of $2.0 billion, or 80 cents a share, up 14% from $1.8 billion, or 66 cents a share, in the prior year. HP Holds Its Own {August 19]

HP seems to showing more interest in European styling:

Instead of building workhorse machines in utilitarian cases, Hewlett-Packard strives to create sleeker, more stylish PCs by looking to the fabrics and shapes in Italy's furniture showrooms, said Stacy Wolff, director of notebook-computer design.

Putting form and function before component costs mirrors a strategy by Apple Inc. Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs, whose aluminum-clad desktops and notebooks have propelled the company to its highest PC market share in at least a decade.

Hewlett-Packard had 19 percent of worldwide PC shipments in the second quarter, compared with Dell's 16 percent, according to technology researcher IDC in Framingham, Massachusetts. Hewlett- Packard has increased its share every quarter since taking the lead from Dell in 2006. Apple had 3.6 percent. Hewlett-Packard's Cues From Milan Lift PC Profit [Updated August 19]

Re:The Geek In Fantasyland

[Paradigm_Complex]

Irrelevant, they've got an unnecessary dependency on someone else. If MS does screw up (or just acts nasty) sufficiently to hurt HP's bottom line, it'd be quite helpful to have something else to fall back on. If HP has they're own distro they're set until they screw themselves over.

It'd be silly for companies like Dell and HP not to regularly consider non-MS options. Plan B.

When it comes to HP, I bite!

[bogaboga]

First off, I must say I love HP and its products. I have never been disappointed by any of HP's printers, scanners or complete computer systems both desktop and notebook.

So it's my hope that a Linux OS from HP will continue to "deliver" on my part.

HP will find most of the "infrastructure" in Linux already in place. What is required is to add some polish and sensible [meaningful] defaults to GNOME or KDE for desktop environments. The areas in which I find these environments still wanting are the following:

1: Let's be able to configure shares easily. Right now its a mess and as a matter of fact, KDE does not seem to have something to represent Microsoft's "Add network places."

2: Fonts still terrible on Linux. I will jump with joy the day fonts on a Linux machine will look beautiful bey default. Right now, one has to install Microsoft's TT fonts and/or do some compilation. This is a non starter.

3: Software installation is still a mess. The other day, I tried to get Adobe's Flash player installed on a Debian system and I was not that successful till I installed from source. I do not see Joe Six Pack going through this.

This is what I hope HP will consider...

Put more resources to help the KDE folks with their product. It looks very very promising.

My 2 cents.

Re:When it comes to HP, I bite!

[AndyCR]

1: Let's be able to configure shares easily. Right now its a mess and as a matter of fact, KDE does not seem to have something to represent Microsoft's "Add network places."

This seems to work fine under Ubuntu.

2: Fonts still terrible on Linux. I will jump with joy the day fonts on a Linux machine will look beautiful bey default. Right now, one has to install Microsoft's TT fonts and/or do some compilation. This is a non starter.

I agree fully. Installing msttcorefonts is one of the first things I do before I get a headache trying to read text. This needs serious work. Surely someone in the Linux community can draw fonts?

3: Software installation is still a mess. The other day, I tried to get Adobe's Flash player installed on a Debian system and I was not that successful till I installed from source. I do not see Joe Six Pack going through this.

Software installation works perfectly for me. apt-get install flashplugin-nonfree. I don't know how you installed Flash from source, since it's not Open Source - I assume you mean you had to run their installer.

Re:When it comes to HP, I bite!

[bmcage]

. The areas in which I find these environments still wanting are the following:

1: Let's be able to configure shares easily. Right now its a mess and as a matter of fact, KDE does not seem to have something to represent Microsoft's "Add network places."

Euh, Places --> remote places ? Never had problems, all is available as far as I see.

2: Fonts still terrible on Linux. I will jump with joy the day fonts on a Linux machine will look beautiful bey default. Right now, one has to install Microsoft's TT fonts and/or do some compilation. This is a non starter.

Euh, compile fonts?? You download them, just as in windows, and install them in the appropriate place. If too difficult, check http://www.linux.com/feature/133559

3: Software installation is still a mess. The other day, I tried to get Adobe's Flash player installed on a Debian system and I was not that successful till I installed from source. I do not see Joe Six Pack going through this.

Install Adobe flash from source?? It is a closed source program! You download it and run whatever they say in the documentation to extract it and move it to the correct folders. Anyway, Ubuntu has a package for that.

Re:When it comes to HP, I bite!

[Abreu]

2: Fonts still terrible on Linux. I will jump with joy the day fonts on a Linux machine will look beautiful bey default. Right now, one has to install Microsoft's TT fonts and/or do some compilation. This is a non starter.

I agree fully. Installing msttcorefonts is one of the first things I do before I get a headache trying to read text. This needs serious work. Surely someone in the Linux community can draw fonts?

Microsoft did everybody a huge favor when they gave away their "core fonts for the web"

Easy to read serif and sans-serif fonts are really valuable and not easy at all to design, even for an accomplished graphic artist.

That's why quality fonts are so expensive

Mind you, I am not talking about "cool-looking" or "funny" fonts, almost everyone can make one of those... While a fancy font might work for a logo or maybe a few words in an ad or a poster, anything more than a few sentences becomes unreadable.

HP treads lightly

[PPH]

Executives at HP deny that any meaningful amount of resources are being directed into plans for a mass-market operating system

HP is proceeding with the same trepidation that Iran is while trying to build a nuclear plant within range of the 5th Fleet.

I can't wait...

[spywhere]

How will Yahoo sell these computers without all the crapware kickbacks they accept?
Will all those companies create open-source crapware to clutter up the desktop?

Will the Firefox title bar say "provided by Yahoo!"?

Re:I can't wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

There is nothing about Linux that prevents crapware from being written and shipped on new systems.

Punchline

[Pinback]

The bad news is that the new HP Linux will only run on PA-RISC.

Re:[OT] Linux newbie question

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the best distro for breathing life into this old but still perfectly good laptop? Xubuntu?

There are better places to ask this question than here.

Having said that, xubuntu would be a good choice, if the laptop is really underpowered try http://fluxbuntu.org/ instead as it is even more lightweight.

Re:[OT] Linux newbie question

[Anonymous Coward]

"I thought Linux was supposed to a be fast, lightweight OS good for older machines. "

You need to run a lighter desktop manager than Gnome for slower hardware. And KDE won't fair any better. You can choose which desktop manager you want to run. But lighter ones will lack "bells and whistles". There was a time when Gnome was pretty light and snappy on older boxes.

Re:[OT] Linux newbie question

[Anonymous Coward]

Retarded mods at it again. Parent is not a troll, he's offtopic. FFS, how difficult can it be to mod properly?
Anyway, DamnSmallLinux (DSL) would be something, PuppyLinux, Slackware (not the easiest, but solid), possibly ArkLinux etc...
Ask at linuxquestions.org and check out distrowatch.
You'll find your answers and a lot more help there.

Re:[OT] Linux newbie question

[scrum_hp]

Odd place to ask but look at Arch or Vector those distros are pretty, lightweight, and modern. http://www.archlinux.org/ http://vectorlinux.com/ And in my experience a fresh carefully done fresh XP install will feel pretty quick. But once I have used it for a bit it always slows down.

And now for something completly different

[timberwolf753]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwwztaZUkUw

Here's the key phrase...

[Mad Merlin]

Executives at HP deny that any meaningful amount of resources are being directed into plans for a mass-market operating system...

A meaningful amount of money for a big corporation is very different than a meaningful amount of money for an individual. HP could easily invest several million in Linux without batting an eye (and without making the above statement false).

why does this surprise anyone?

[DragonTHC]

HP has had a lion's share of the market in servers by merging with the compaq company. Proliant servers sometimes ran hpux. This only makes sense now with the adoption of linux.

Just think of the new service contracts they'll be able to secure?

HP, Debian, Software in the Public Interest

[Krishnoid]

Wasn't HP a major sponsor of Software in the Public Interest, Debian's parent organization, a couple years back? If they backed it substantially (they seemed to have featured prominently on SPI's sponsorship pages), would anyone here know if that was part of their strategy to eventually build a distro on top of Debian? Having both Ubuntu and HP contribute packaging fixes upstream to Debian would be great.

Re:HP, Debian, Software in the Public Interest

[Jorophose]

Yes, and I think they released a whole bunch of drivers for debian, or work closely with it, or something.

Maybe even preinstalled distro of choice on their servers?

HP and Debian have always been close. If Ubuntu hasn't drifted too far, I wouldn't doubt seeing Ubuntu preinstalls on HP stuff. It would be a serious spit-in-the-face move to MS.

Re:HP, Debian, Software in the Public Interest

[Lennie]

HP does service & support & all kinds of contracts for Debian on HP-hardware.

HP already has good Linux driver support

[dave562]

Take a look at the available operating systems that you can get drivers for if you're running a Proliant.

http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/DriverDownload.jsp?prodNameId=3279719&lang=en&cc=us&prodTypeId=15351&prodSeriesId=1121474&taskId=135

Why would HP get into the business of building their own operating system? They already make good servers that run every popular OS out there, including Linux. What's the point of throwing a whole bunch of R&D into making ANOTHER operating system?

Re:HP already has good Linux driver support

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Why would HP get into the business of building their own operating system? They already make good servers that run every popular OS out there, including Linux. What's the point of throwing a whole bunch of R&D into making ANOTHER operating system?

They have good choice of OS's in the server market. They are also the largest seller of desktop computers pretty much all of which ship with Windows right now... which is both a huge expense and a huge liability for HP. If they aren't at least looking into the possibility of contributing to Linux and making it into a competing desktop OS (like all the other major PC makers are) then their CEO should be fired pronto.

That's not to say I think H will pull it off and make Linux good enough and well supported enough for he average, desktop user. They probably won't, but they certainly should be investing in projects that explore that idea.

In short, server and desktop OS markets are different markets. Linux is a potentially disruptive offering and no major vendor has any excuse for being caught flat-footed given the number of Linux based phones, tablets and mini-laptops making waves in the industry right now. No one expected OS X, everyone expects Linux on the desktop eventually, including HP.

Re:HP already has good Linux driver support

[dave562]

I understand where you are coming from. There will be people who want Linux on the desktop. It probably won't happen in the United States first. I don't understand why HP would develop their own flavor of desktop Linux instead of offering a product from RedHat, SuSE or whoever else. I realize that RedHat and SuSE are Linux tailored to the server environment. But if there is ever a real demand for desktop Linux in the enterprise, it seems like an already established Linux vendor will come up with a flavor tailored to that market.

I could see it happening on the thin-client front for specific jobs, like call center/tech support for example. As more and more apps are moved onto web servers, the time is approaching where it won't make sense for a company to spend money on Windows licenses when all their employees really need to get their specific job done is a web browser.

Flash from source, give me a copy...

[jopsen]

3: Software installation is still a mess. The other day, I tried to get Adobe's Flash player installed on a Debian system and I was not that successful till I installed from source. I do not see Joe Six Pack going through this.

You got flash from source... Please give me a copy... don't blame the community for that one... That's adobes error... And software installation sucks on windows... Really have a package manager is a killer app. It provides automatic system wide update, where else do you find that?

Re:Flash from source, give me a copy...

[bogaboga]

I used a tar.gz archive...I thought that was source..may be I was wrong. But you can grab a copy here:

http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash&P2_Platform=Linux

Re:Flash from source, give me a copy...

[pizzach]

That link is not source. The dead giveaway is that they are giving you the "x86" version on the download page. If I remember correctly, the tar.gz file is an interactive installer that asks where your plugins folder is. Adobe includes the tar.gz download because not every one uses a package manager that supports rpm/yum. Debian/Ubuntu uses deb.

You probably should have just installed the deb from the Ubuntu repositories since I don't think Debian has not-free repositories. Go to http://packages.ubuntu.com/gutsy/web/flashplugin-nonfree , download it to your desktop, double click it, and it will install. Since you are using a deb file, it should integrate better with your package system too.

If some Debian guru knows a better way, don't be afraid to tell me I'm wrong/stupid ;-p My main system is gentoo so debs/rpms/yum aren't my specialty.

Re:Flash from source, give me a copy...

[bogaboga]

How is Gentoo these days? Does it have a full install ISO "bootable" CD? Is it easier to install these days...or does one have to compile stuff overnight as it used to be? One thing I liked about it were the beautiful KDE implementations it showcased.

Re:Flash from source, give me a copy...

[pizzach]

How is Gentoo these days? Does it have a full install ISO "bootable" CD? Is it easier to install these days...or does one have to compile stuff overnight as it used to be? One thing I liked about it were the beautiful KDE implementations it showcased.

Meh. The Live cds for gentoo are very similar to Ubuntu now. They boot up to a Gnome environment where there is a double clickable icon labeled "Gentoo Linux Installer" on the desktop. The GUI install makes it easier, but in the end it really is just the old procedure. Another words you should be familiar with the gentoo handbook, but you don't have to reference it every 5 seconds like before. I believe the full install cd includes some precompiled binaries for at least gnome/kde. It's been at least a year since I have done an install, so don't quote me on it.

Compiles are still a pain in the butt. I personally renice emerge in make.conf so it doesn't hog the CPU and just hibernate when I shut the computer off. It's kind of like background updates that way. Gentoo still provides binaries for Firefox and OpenOffice.org which is nice. Firefox 3 hasn't been stabilized which is starting to get grating.

Gentoo has some very handy community sites nowadays, even if they are unofficial.
http://gentoo-wiki.com/
http://gentoo-portage.com/

I'll probably be switching linux distros eventually. I don't use gentoo so much because I like compiling things. The key is it's so customizable...which is exactly the reason I don't use Ubuntu. It peeved me how it loved to overwrite my configuration files. I wonder if Arch Linux would be most appropriate for me?

Re:Flash from source, give me a copy...

[jopsen]

Last time I installed flash using the ubuntu package. It contained nothing... But it executed a post installation script that downloaded the binary tarball from adobes website and extracted it... I guess that why the packages breaks so often...

HP is irrelevant

[Colin Smith]

The only reason you'd buy Linux systems from HP is if you are already an HP shop and need the badges to line up.

 

Re:HP is irrelevant

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

HP is irrelevant. The only reason you'd buy Linux systems from HP is if you are already an HP shop and need the badges to line up.

HP is the largest PC seller, bigger even than Dell right now and growing. That does not really make them irrelevant. Anyway, they look a lot like Apple did before OS X was introduced... having a bit of a comeback because of their hardware offerings and looking to invest some of that cash into something to differentiate them from others. A smooth and well built Linux distro could do for them what OS X did for Apple (and undercut Apple and most everyone else at the same time.

I doubt it will happen, but then I figured a BSD based version of Mac OS was a pie in the sky project that would never hit retail too.

Ummm why?

[Maestro485]

What does debian have to do with anything? They already own a UNIX, and they can already use linux code if they want.

Unless they're trying to make hupuntu...

History says you are wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

With all due respect, you are absolutely dreaming. You have no idea what HP at the top level is like. They are complete, total cowards. They will take the path of least resistance if a big company shouts "Boo!".

This is best examplified by the recent tempest-in-a-teapot between Platform Solutions (PSI) and HP and IBM.

PSI basically took an Intel CPU, modified the microcode, added a Linux-based embedded IO subsystem, and had an instant compatible IBM mainframe. It was even better than most mainframes, as the CPU was faster than what IBM was shipping. Needless to say, it was much cheaper, IBM was not pleased.

PSI was in close alliance with HP, mainly using HP's Itanium boxes and turning them into completely compatible mainframes.

A couple years ago, HP was all set to buy up PSI for a rumored $200 Million. IBM came along and slapped a bogus software patent lawsuit against PSI (yes, even though they were using Linux - go figure).

HP absolutely didn't want to get involved. They dropped PSI very fast and I heard that they wouldn't even sell them any more systems. They had absolutely no balls when it came to standing up to IBM. In fact, it really looked like they went running as far and as fast as they could.

Long story short is that IBM recently decided to buy up PSI rather than proceed further with the lawsuit. So what's left of PSI is now apparently a part of IBM.

The moral here is that if you're betting on HP standing up to any big player, you're betting against a proven track record of absolutely no guts. HP will go running again. And trust me, the potential Linux PC market is much, much smaller than the Big Iron datacenter market.

Lest M$ gets excited.

[twitter]

Let me reword what you said to show how silly it is:

It occurs to me that they aren't going to do this because they love Windows. They would do it to make money and I'm willing to bet that if they make their own version it would be designed to be difficult to move to other systems. They won't want to develop something at any expense and have someone else under cut their prices. It might be nice to have the average user know what Windows is though.

Motives are less important than the freedoms provided. If HP offers the four software freedoms, I hope they make buckets of money. Good faith contribution and use are always welcome, both strengthen software freedom.

"Undercutting" in the free software world is as preposterous a notion as Windoze OEM installs that really don't transfer to other systems or run without permission. Software freedom is about cooperating to meet user needs. No one cares who provides the eventual solution and who profits from it because everyone wins anyway you look at it.

For all of that, I have to agree with your last assertion. It would be good if more people understood software freedom. When that is clear both GNU/Linux and Windows can be seen for what they are.

I really doubt it is more than just

[gertam]

I doubt that any project inside HP on Linux is anything more than a specialized distribution for High Performance Technical Computing. Whatever they put together will NEVER see the light of day on a consumer desktop. If I'm wrong, it would be one of the biggest shocks in my life, after finding out that Compaq was merging with HP.

Rob Enderle

[Anonymous Coward]

From the article: "It's an endrun around Windows," says Rob Enderle, president of tech consultant Enderle Group.

Referencing Rob Enderle?! Good $deity, that's like mentioning Nazis in an internet discussion. Credibility meet window (no pun intended).

This has failure written all over it

[LaughingCoder]

Does anybody remember NewWave (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewWave)?

How about the Open Software Foundation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Software_Foundation)?

Face it, HP is a hardware company. Their two previous attempts at something like this were abject and expensive failures. Dell, Gateway and Acer must be licking their chops.

IF they really wanted to compete with windows...

[Eravnrekaree]

They would work on developing WINE. Just another Linux distribution would only be another OS that cant compete with Windows because it cant do wht most people need to do, run windows apps. If HP really was interested in defeating Windows it would help develop Wine, so everyone would be able to compete in the OS marketplace on an even playing field. Microsoft only keeps its market share because apps and drivers which only run on Windows. Allow people to run Windows apps and drivers and then you have an OS that really can make headway against MS.

User means ignorant, not stupid

[ancientt]

Being ignorant, that is to say, having little or no knowledge of a subject, does not mean that someone is incapable of learning (stupid.) I have two users I support on a regular basis who know how to do their jobs well, and complicated jobs at that, but don't know much at all about the computer they're using. One was recently quite frustrated that they weren't able to open PDF files with Word, the idea that files required specific applications to be used was a revelation. (Yeah, I might have been able to get it to work, but simple is better.) Another was only vaguely aware that they could navigate to files outside of applications, starting with My Computer was a novelty.

Both have the capacity to learn how to use their computer for more than they have, and they are both capable of doing complex work very well. That said, there is some basic knowledge that IT professionals take for granted. The concepts of files and programs is a distinction that many computer users never make. The OS is a concept that both could grasp, but neither has any motivation to learn since it doesn't help them accomplish their tasks any faster or easier. It proves a distraction in fact to learn the things that they *could* do, since actually doing those things would cut down on their production and learning how to do them would take valuable time.

Just to underscore the point, I recently put in a call to tech support for a complex application that was not functioning correctly. The subject matter was one of moving significant amounts of money that belong to other people, so we're not talking minor stuff. The support technician told me to open up "your Internet" and was quick to blame the oft maligned Microsoft Updates for the problem (and no, it was not an update at fault.) Granted, the reference to Internet Explorer, which is what they really meant, and the assumption that updates applied flawlessly to millions of computers would mysteriously make one machine malfunction did nothing to improve my assessment of their knowledge, but in the end they knew all they needed to in order to fix the issue. Their SOP was sufficient without real understanding of the underlying technology.

The computing industry is still in infancy. Like a two year old taking first steps, the industry has collectively leaned a tremendous number of things and started to make huge headway into new areas. Like a toddler, we are proud and excited and tend to think that whatever we're currently doing (cloud computing, virtualization, ajax, xml) is the coolest thing ever. Often we have no idea what we're going to be excited by next. Note that none of this is bad, but perhaps a little perspective is called for.

In the not too terribly distant future, the computer may be unimportant, the OS may be unimportant and the particular applications may be unimportant. It doesn't take a tremendous leap to imagine systems that look and feel pretty much like a browser but handle any type of content we want to throw at it and can analyze faster and better than we've grown used to expecting. Imagine an AI that could do all the tasks for you, which currently require "basic" computing knowledge. I submit that we'll soon look back on the days of files, applications and operating systems like we do now on the different types of engine building knowledge of a hundred years ago. It won't be unimportant, but users soon really won't need to know and when they don't, and they won't, it will be the most efficient tools that are used, not the best marketed.

Re:User means ignorant, not stupid

[Tubal-Cain]

One was recently quite frustrated that they weren't able to open PDF files with Word, the idea that files required specific applications to be used was a revelation. (Yeah, I might have been able to get it to work, but simple is better.)

I feel the same way when I see people pasting screenshots or saving pictures in Word rather than Paint or a real graphics program. My web design teacher does this.

Re:User means ignorant, not stupid

[that this is not und]

Sometimes when I am on a friend's computer or a back-room system at work or somewhere, the easiest way to 'collect' screenshots is to paste them into WordPad.

I certainly wouldn't do that by choice, but ya gotta do what you've gotta do. And really, the applets in the 'doze are adequate for many purposes if you know how to get around in that environment.

'Paint' used to be much more crippled that it is in XP, though. It used to crop graphics you'd paste into it to whatever the default frame was. Maybe your teacher learned those tricks back with the old crippled Paint.

Re:User means ignorant, not stupid

[nine-times]

Being ignorant, that is to say, having little or no knowledge of a subject, does not mean that someone is incapable of learning (stupid.)

I didn't mean to imply that these people were stupid. I was saying that they don't understand how computers work, and they don't necessarily want to. And I don't blame them. I find it hard to imagine not being interested in how computers work, but then there are plenty of things that I'm not interested in that other people are. I don't want to be talked down to because I'm not interested in your job or hobby.

Idiots?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not partner with an already made and a very usable distribution? Too much ego or what?

Re:[OT] Linux newbie question

[Alaska Jack]

I'M NOT A TROLL; I'M OFFTOPIC. Sheesh.

      - AJ

Re:[OT] Linux newbie question

[Alaska Jack]

"Odd place to ask..."

Actually, a thread with a bunch of hard-core linux users talking about distros struck me as a perfect opportunity :^). Also, good point about XP; it is indeed a new install. I thought I'd take the opportunity to dual-boot XP/Ubuntu.

    - AJ

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

successful troll is successful

Re:[OT] Linux newbie question

[Alaska Jack]

I will check it out. Thanks!

      - AJ

Re:[OT] Linux newbie question

[Alaska Jack]

"Ask at linuxquestions.org and check out distrowatch."

Sweet -- I will! Thanks!

    - AJ

And yeah - troll? Like what, am I suppose to be trying to ignite some giant flamewar just by asking for a distro suggestion? I would have at least thrown in some reference to the fact that I believe in God, or something.

Push on Wine!

[feranick]

To be really successful, HP-Linux needs to have a strong Windows binary compatibility. You simply can't sell your full line of PCs without compatibility with Windows. As much as /. crowds would love to be MS free, users still demand windows, not even mentioning businesses and enterprises. Alternative to commercial products may be a good start, but sometimes people want to be able to install the real deal (Photoshop, Office, etc). The only way I see this possible in the short term is by pushing on Wine, until at least users make the transition to native programs or these program are ported to Linux.

Re:Push on Wine!

[dbcad7]

until at least users make the transition to native programs or these program are ported to Linux.

Screw the wine push.. push the porting.. Wine is nice in a pinch, but it's a hack.. and really, some of the better Windows applications that have been around awhile, just might find some cash flow if they take a chance and try porting them to Linux. As it stands for me 100% of what I need to do, I can do with Linux.. but that's me.. I am not a gamer, and I don't have any proprietary or specialized applications that have no equivalents.. but yes, I know that some people do. Companies that sell generally available software like Photoshop.. these should be ported.. companies that sell some proprietary program (perhaps something that controls a machine like CAM) it will only be hit and miss in getting wine to work, and I wouldn't expect a company like that to port until the writing was on the wall that there was a good demand.

This is not to say that wine should not continue to be improved.. but getting the bigger players to port is a much more important goal.

Seriously...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there any possibility of a corporation like HP, Dell or Google *not* investigating releasing their own operating system? They want to be ready to take advantage of circumstances in the OS market. They are huge and can allocate a team to customizing Linux.

That doesn't mean we will see "HP Linux Desktop" tomorrow, in the next year or the next decade but the article just states the obvious.

dumbazzes

[Anonymous Coward]

there is already hp-ux witch is hp's version of unix

Hubuntu

[Spacejock]

They don't have to develop an OS, just a pretty front-end. You have Xubuntu and Kubuntu, and I'm guessing you'll see an HP branded Hubuntu before very long.

Interesting

[motang]

Interesting, I would like to see what comes out of this. I like HP products as they are good quality...oh please make is based on Debian!

Innovate my nVidia

[notknown86]

Maybe they could "innovate" a version of Linux which stops a laptop booting after a year and a bit of use . Just a second... my HP DV2000 already does that. Thanks assholes.

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

Ackbartender, aka John Marriot, is a loser who never got a job.

HP already has...

[milatchi]

HP already has OpenVMS, MPE, Domain/OS, ULTRIX, Tru64 UNIX, and HP-UX.

Do they really need to work on another OS?
How about using some of that existing OS technology?

If they don't do it another PC vendor will..

[w0mprat]

I was wondering how long before we start hearing rumours about OEMs developing their own OSes to make up for the underwhelming underpeformance of vista.

PC retailers large and small depend fractionally on the sucess of the OSes that will run on them. Especially in light of the competition offered by to Apple which is stealing sales off Dell, HP etc.

If Microsoft's blundering starts hurting the bottom line of these big companies, they will take matters into their own hands

Re:If they don't do it another PC vendor will..

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

If Microsoft's blundering starts hurting the bottom line of these big companies, they will take matters into their own hands

MS's bundling and gouging has been hurting these companies' bottom line for many years. The real question is, will any of them be able to create a valid competitor and will any of them trust the court system to stop MS from killing them for offering an alternative and do so in time to make any difference. The fact that no major OEM has tried to sell a mainstream desktop OS (aside from Apple) is basically a vote of no confidence in the US court system. Heck, most American companies go straight to the EU courts these days and even there they have to wait many, many years for little compensation. So far there have been a few niche products outside the mainstream and that's about it. Vista isn't the real problem for OEMs introducing Linux, inefficient courts and murky, incompetent bureaucracies that are very conservative are. The best, practical hope is *shudder* Walmart who is not scared of MS and will hit them hard if given reason.

NewWave mark II

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they'll resurrect some NewWave code?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewWave

Wow

[Burz]

I cannot believe the pipedreams being purveyed in this thread. One would think after all these years that people would learn there is no where for Linux per-se to go on the desktop. It is a kernel (or kernel + GNU toolchain).

Other than that, there is very little that an application developer can easily grab onto and then maintain a solid footing. i.e. there is no defined platform encompassing desktop functionality.

Thus application developers try a Linux-based distro out for a while and go back to Apple or MS because those companies offer platforms that engender a certain kind of confidence and peace of mind (and simplicity). Let's say you're contracted to write an app. and can choose "Linux" because its easily obtained - If you write the app for "Linux" how do you even know if it'll run on your client's distro of choice?? How about writing a Linux-native app for class? Oops, the teacher and classmates' distros don't come with the same set of libraries, or even package-naming.

The fluidity and fragmentation with all this higher-level Linux-ish desktop software is repelling 3rd party application developers (ISVs). How do you tell a user to install your software?? How does your tech support staff cope with providing troubleshooting and instructions for distros A-Z in an efficient manner?

Applications are all-important for selling a platform. Its not so much a chicken-and-egg problem, because budding new authors and startups will code some great apps for their favorite platform regardless. In this case, the chickens simply have no stable place to lay their eggs.

Linux itself only really matters to sysadmins and system-level coders and hobbyists. Even web authors are mainly concerned with the "AMPP" in LAMPP; they have a platform that matters to them. For nearly everyone else, what you are trying to sell is just a mirage.

With that said:

Ubuntu has a chance. They actually paid attention to autopackage's platform concerns, they have reorganized their development around real use-cases (instead of going "use case-what?"), and they have gotten a clue that a simple UI is worthless without plenty of vertical integration (UI complexity is a balancing act).

What they still don't have is an SDK or a portal for application developers. Nor do they have an easy way for hardware shoppers to check compatibility. Nor can they really attract 3rd party hardware vendors to write drivers, unless FOSS drivers become industry standard (and I'm betting they won't).

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

who is this total babe?

Applications

[Anonymous Coward]

Regardless of the OS, people want/need easy applications they can use and are comfortable with.

We use Debian

[Anonymous Coward]

As a currently employee at HP we use Debian for almost everything we can. While I havn't heard about this project at all I am willing to bet if anything it will be Debian based. HP currently employs many Debian developer and requires many manufactures to provide Debian packages for use with HP products. Internally most HP GNU/Linux development for non-server stuff(think ThinClients, NAS, etc) are all Debian.

Re:We use Debian

[TuxGrep]

Hah. True as this might be, this fact is not reflected AT ALL when looking at HP's driver support. Basically, if you're not using Redhat enterprise linux or Novell enterprise linux you are plain and simple out of luck. Reference: daily life and this site http://h71028.www7.hp.com/enterprise/cache/433096-0-0-0-121.html
Note the vast differences between this page and the redhat matrix.
Sorry to say but this matrix underligns for me the sad truth, that is that HP advocates linux by mouth perhaps, but not by actions.

Re:[OT] Linux newbie question

[chubs730]

Like what, am I suppose [sic] to be trying to ignite some giant flamewar just by asking for a distro suggestion?

We can tell you're new to the scene ;). But ignoring that, as you've said yourself it'd be flamebait, not troll. Jeez, even the mod-criticizers need a lesson.

Steps

[deanston]

HP has the resources to do it, but the question is do they really have the guts, plus the advertising creativity down the road to switch average consumers to its Linux? Linux traction has always been a chicken-egg problem: if your PC customers are conditioned to use and demand (because they've grown dependent on) Windows software, how do you convince entire government and enterprise contracts to just switch to a Linux desktop? Seems like a 12-Step program for Windows addicts is what the FOSS community really need to develop to popularize Linux.

Re:Steps

[Lennie]

Step 12 would be "Profit !" ?

Re:IF they really wanted to compete with windows..

[Paradigm_Complex]

As much as the 1.0 release was exciting, that doesn't mean it's anywhere near 100% yet. Updates - both to WINE or the win32 programs - break things regularly. Many legitimately purchased programs need cracks. Some things just don't work yet. As much as I love WINE, the support calls for it would be outrageous.

Just a simple Gnome or KDE desktop with Open office and Firefox is all HP really needs to push. Anything much beyond that targeted at Joe Sixpack will not be worth the effort.

OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

who mods these types of comments up...

HP should focus on getting GAMES to work on Linux

[jvin248]

Then they would get everyone to switch.. "I'd switch if I could play my favorite game (insert here)". HP did buy VooDooPC to get into the gaming market so this would be a great step toward that end.

However, HP is most likely just looking at Linux because it is slim enough to offer reasonable computing on the netbook market - tiny cpu's and ram but made for portability and the non-performance requirements of wifi and internet browsing... to better compete with EeePC and the other similar offerings launching this year.

If HP is modifying Linux it needs to be for GAMES

[jvin248]

Then they would get everyone to switch.. "I'd switch to Linux if I could play my favorite game (insert here)".

HP did buy VooDooPC to get into the gaming market - which is about building really fast machines. Linux is lighter weight than Vista so a high end gaming rig running Linux would blaze.

Apple isn't noted for strong gaming - so HP launching a tweaked version of Linux (probably Ubuntu as it's closest to offering mainstream user OS needs) or Wine so "all popular games" will run on it, turn on default eye-candy in the standard Ubuntu Desktop and HP will be there!

This should be an interesting next couple of years.

Re:If HP is modifying Linux it needs to be for GAM

[DrSkwid]

Yeah, they have to port SecureROM first. Do you actually use Wine? We have to keep a Windows 2k box around to run Movie Magic and Final Draft because it can't handle INT13 requests properly.

Susie Wee?

[Anonymous Coward]

If Nintendo ever decided to use Linux on their games console then Susie Wee is someone they absolutely must poach from HP.

Re:HP should focus on getting GAMES to work on Lin

[Talar]

This is highly unlikely to happen, but IF they are planning a Linux computer that can run Windows games (or even Mac games) right out of the box I would like to know were to place my preorder.

Perhaps focusing on support for Mac games would be easier? And there is already a big enough market there to support some Mac ports. Adding Linux users to that market would improve the situation for both linux and Mac gamers.

We do not need more distros damn it!

[Anonymous Coward]

If anyone at HP is reading this, please don't do it. We do not need another no-brainer Linux distro.

There are over 300 Linux distros already (are you seriously telling me that not one of thoase caters for your needs?), if you want a user friendly one why not just use Ubuntu or openSUSE or Mandriva or PCLinuxOS or Debian? It'll benefit everyone if efforts like this were channeled more towards improving existing distros than creating even more new ones.

They have a decent Debian on their thin clients...

[Lazy Jones]

Their t5735 thin clients (and others) come with a properly configured and visually appealing Debian. It makes a good TC but can run a lot of software locally as well (I run Gnome, Iceweasel, audacious and xterms locally). While stock Debian always looks absymal wherever I try it (the fonts are badly configured etc.), HP's version looks really nice. They also use their own package repository for updates (ftp.hp.com/pub/tcdebian).

Re:Idiot! This. Is. Slashdot!

[Anonymous Coward]

You really don't know jack shit about Greece do you? I suppose for you it would be between Eyeraq and Mykonos...

You will never see that day

[Salvatori]

I'm more or less happy with my HP hardware (not manufactured by HP by the way) However I've never seen an internal application of HPs that was ever more than 'blah'. I have yet to see HP produce any software product for the consumer market that would merit a footnote in a footnote. To be fairly direct I dont think HP has the software engineering acumen to be competitive in that kind of a market and I think it proves that every day when it meets the real world. The problem is the companies management culture, its inability to create a tradition a software engineering excellence and the belief that its management and engineering processes lead the industry. Not close, so not competitive.

Re: Final Draft and Movie Magic

[jvin248]

Ok, I dabble with some writing, so your question prompted me to do a quick survey.. maybe there is some interesting stuff out there now?...

Here are a couple of options I found:

http://www.celtx.com/features.html
http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/project/scr2
http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/node/909
http://www.write-brain.com/power_structure_main.htm (notes that it works under Wine)
http://www.writerscafe.co.uk/
http://www.spacejock.com/yWriter4.html (under Wine)
http://openoffice.blogs.com/openoffice/2008/03/an-equivalent-o.html (How to get "outline mode" in Open Office)

The other route, that will help if you don't want to keep a second machine around to clutter all that desk real estate, is to install VirtualBox under Ubuntu (easy under 8.04) and then put Windows inside that with FD or MM etc on it.

Buying something from HP? Better be a printer!

[scherrey]

Have you EVER used HPUX? Be afraid - be very afraid!

HP has never produced anything worth a damn except for an RPN calculator and a laser printer. Avoid anything else with their name on it at all costs.

They should just write some good OS device drivers and ship with Ubuntu or something.

Dell and HP should unite...

[tonymus]

Dell and HP have been minorly annoyed by Microsoft over the years, but the way Microsoft screwed the Vista release has to have both companies majorly pissed off. Especially irratating has to be that they're not supposed to sell Windows XP anymore to corporate accounts that insist on it.

If either one of these companies produce a commercial Linux on their own, they will fail miserably, because they will just be one company v. the rest of the industry. But if HP and Dell could pool resources to create a commercial Linux, they would almost immediately become a major force. Developers would gladly follow to give them another avenue besides Microsoft to sell their wares.

Microsoft will really need to watch its ass in the near future in order to avoid becoming irrelevant.

This is a good start

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems that the hardware manufacturers are starting to clue-in. They gave MS its power by pre-installing their OS on all their hardware. And now they have to dance to its tune.

I always felt that they should start cluing in that Linux et al. gives them the option (paraticularly with the likes of HP and Dell that like to sell branded products) to choose and refine those software bits that they want to work just so with very specific hardware. By concentrating on a small subset of software they can get the Mac type of integration. All they need is pour some reltively limited amount of manpower into building tailor-made drivers, and tailoring some of the software that they like most. They have all that collective effort already invested that they can use, and just add a little bit more to make an integreated experience.

They would have much more control over the finished product than with Windows, where the sum total of their contributions is historically adding crapware. True, they would have to contribute back their software improvements to the community, but it is a small price to pay compared to the enormous wealth of contributions they get from it. Besides, adding a bit of work to tailor a few bits of software to their specific needs allows them to really brand a computer produt as their own.

They'd have their own OS at a fraction of the price of trying to build it from scratch, and compatibility with the rest of the Linux ecosystem, so that the end users who so desired could add-on whatever they feel like. And those who don't would be happily trodding along with a robust, integrated user experience of the hardware maker's choosing. It's a win-win scenario.

Debian?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm, HP already work in and support Debian, maybe they are just secretly working inside Debian?

Tran$lation

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me reword what you $aid to $how how $illy it i$:

It occur$ to me that they aren't going to do thi$ becau$e they love Window$. They would do it to make money and I'm willing to bet that if they make their own ver$ion it would be de$igned to be difficult to move to other $y$tem$. They won't want to develop $omething at any expen$e and have $omeone el$e under cut their price$. It might be nice to have the average u$er know what Window$ i$ though.

Motive$ are le$$ important than the freedom$ provided. If HP offer$ the four $oftware freedom$, I hope they make bucket$ of money. Good faith contribution and u$e are alway$ welcome, both $trengthen $oftware freedom.

"Undercutting" in the free $oftware world i$ a$ prepo$terou$ a notion a$ Windoze OEM in$tall$ that really don't tran$fer to other $y$tem$ or run without permi$$ion. $oftware freedom i$ about cooperating to meet u$er need$. No one care$ who provide$ the eventual $olution and who profit$ from it becau$e everyone win$ anyway you look at it.

For all of that, I have to agree with your la$t a$$ertion. It would be good if more people under$tood $oftware freedom. When that i$ clear both GNU/Linux and Window$ can be $een for what they are.

--
Friends don't let friends install Microsoft Corporation disagreeable softwares

Linux...

[java.bean]

..."almost" ready for the desktop for 13 years and counting.

More likely..

[aliquis]

their own distribution with Linux hidden underneath, I doubt they will fork the kernel.

First IBM, then HP?

[whitroth]

Heh. It's been, what, five years or so?, since IBM announced that they were going to move AIX towards Linux. So, this looks like a move on HP's part to do the same with HPUX.

As I've always said, though, Linux was IBM's dream, handed to them on a silver platter, and it looks like HP realized the same. I mean, if you're a multinational corporation, with a zillion Big Clients, would *you* want to support 5, or 10, or 15 *different* operating systems, on different platforms, with specialists for each one, including legacy specialists (does IBM still have folks to support S/38?)? Or one platform, and when you want to sell clients on bigger, faster, more expensive hardware, to be able to say, "just recompile, and everything you have will still run"?

              mark

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you considered CareerBuilder.com?

Re:HP should focus on getting GAMES to work on Lin

[grikdog]

How about just getting someone with really deep pockets to rewrite Wine or VirtualBox? It's pathetic how well Virtual PC used to run on Macs, with nothing comparable on Linux. How about something as transparent as XDarwin, and as competent as Virtual PC?

In the best of all possible well-ordered universes, how about if Microsoft could transparently emulate its own OS on top of Linux? That would guarantee sales for a century, if not the entire millenium, and cut out all the crapware hassles that come with working with OEMs (who have their own problems.)

Re:HP should focus on getting GAMES to work on Lin

[jvin248]

I like this idea.

That would be too easy for Microsoft... and too hard ("so how do we sell this other stuff now?"). It *might* save them though.

The backlash has been pretty grim for them for a while now so a creative solutions could work.

Re:IF they really wanted to compete with windows..

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft only keeps its market share because apps and drivers which only run on Windows. Allow people to run Windows apps and drivers and then you have an OS that really can make headway against MS.

How is that, exactly? HP further popularizes the Windows APIs by allowing users to use them without running Windows, making those APIs more entrenched and relevant because they're usable even outside of the Windows world. Microsoft, which designs those APIs, loses out on OS marketshare but gains influence. So they shift strategy from making money off of copies of the OS to something involving the API.

What?

You must be new here...

[rts008]

It has been 'The Year of Linux on the Desktop' for the past 10 years!

I kid! :-)

*disclaimer* I switched to Ubuntu 5.04 (?) about 4 years ago- v5.04 may not be correct- I'm getting old and senile.
It was when MS came out with WGA for XP that I switched, and have not looked back. Now I run Kubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron exclusively.

Offtopic: Looking for answers.

[rts008]

I have had this 'lie-nix/linn-ux debate with people before.

I had always assumed (yes-maybe short sighted!) that it would be 'Lie-nix' as it was written by Linus (lie-ness/nus) T., and not Linus (linn-ness/nus) T., based on Unix.
So I'm kind of perplexed where the 'Linn' pronunciation came from unless that is the customary Scandinavian pronunciation. (?)

Ahhh!
Found this:Linus Himself pronouncing it.(from the website:
torvalds-says-linux.wav (81kB).

        "Hello, this is Linus Torvalds, and I pronounce Linux as Linux!"

Also in Sun AU format (40kB) / MP3 format (82kB) / OGG format (86kB).)

It seems the Finnish pronounce it as 'Linn-ux' where USA pronunciation has it pegged as 'Lie-nix/nexx'
To take the whole 'accent thing' (Finnish speaker speaking in English) that either should be correct.

*disclaimer* I disagree (see above paragraph) with the website's author that: "This was recorded by Linus himself and should therefore be considered the canonical pronunciation to learn from. It can be said to be spoken right and correctly.", as this statement does not take into account non-native English speakers and any accent they may display due to their native language.

I would enjoy/benefit from discourse here, please and thank you. (not just parent poster)

 

Re:Offtopic: Looking for answers.

[Anonymous Coward]

--snip--- I disagree (see above paragraph) with the website's author that: "This was recorded by Linus himself and should therefore be considered the canonical pronunciation to learn from. It can be said to be spoken right and correctly.", as this statement does not take into account non-native English speakers and any accent they may display due to their native language.

I would enjoy/benefit from discourse here, please and thank you. (not just parent poster)

But linus is speaking english in the recording. If he says linn-ux then that's good enough for me. It's his call. It's is also the more popular version outside America.

Yeah!Yeah! Troll and Offtopic. Informative, tho'?

[rts008]

No, it would be more like: 'Hippie-Licks'.

Where did you find the 'ck' in HP?

*disclaimer* I don't consider myself a 'hippie' (original definition, nor HP fanboy), but I do run Linux (Kubuntu/Ubuntu 5.04 to 8.04...presently- waiting for 9.04!)

You need a lot of practice. Apparently the current moderator's also think so.
No + Funny for you!

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

i'm not sure she's "better_than_vista", hahaha

Maybe this isn't an 'alternative' after all

[Anonymous Coward]

I see a lot of these comments assuming that HP would replace Windows outright. I think it is more likely that HP would use a stripped-down Linux as an embedded, fast-booting OS for basic functions, maybe also system recovery. It could be presented as an option at boot, along with a standard XP/Vista installation on the hard drive. Thus, no need to annoy MacroShaft too much, since they are still doing the pre-installs for them, but they can offer users an 'enhanced experience' and hedge their bets on which OS will win out.

Re:Yeah!Yeah! Troll and Offtopic. Informative, tho

[Hognoxious]

Where did you find the 'ck' in HP?

I recycled the one from hockey pucks, n00b.

Don't forget...

[Anonymous Coward]

...to pay your $699 licensing fee you cock smoking teabaggers!