Slashdot Mirror
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."
They could name it HP-LX!
If anyone can kill Linux its HP
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.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
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.
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.
...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.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
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.
The Long Now Foundation
'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.
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.
Similes are like metaphors
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.
load "$",8,1
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.
The difference is the license. With the BSD license, Apple can do whatever they like and aren't required to release their modifications.
Mada mada dane.
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?
By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
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.
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.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
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.
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.
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.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."