Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat CEO Questions Relevance of Desktop Linux
snydeq writes "Red Hat CEO Jim Whitehurst questioned the relevance of Linux on the desktop, citing several financial and interoperability hurdles to business adoption at a panel on end-users and Linux last night at the OSBC. 'First of all, I don't know how to make money on it,' Whitehurst said, adding that he was uncertain how relevant the desktop itself will be in five years given advances in cloud-based and smartphone computing, as well as VDI. 'The concept of a desktop is kind of ridiculous in this day and age. I'd rather think about skating to where the puck is going to be than where it is now.' Despite increasing awareness that desktop Linux is ready for widespread mainstream adoption, fellow panelists questioned the practicality of switching to Linux, noting that even some Linux developers prefer Macs to Linux. 'There's a desire [to use desktop Linux],' one panelist said, 'but practicality sets in. There are significant barriers to switching.'"
The things that stand out in the linked article are:
My verdict: Desktop Linux is a great choice for many regular Joes with basic computer needs ... ...
In fact, I found that it makes a lot of sense to standardize office workers on desktop Linux.
Let's face it: The app selection for desktop Linux -- especially those designed for regular folks -- is very thin. You won't find BI tools, database apps, media creation apps, and so on, as you would for Windows or the Mac. If you think the Mac has too few apps to be used in business, you'll downright dismiss desktop Linux.
The author completely fails to support his verdict, preferring instead to focus on Linux as a business desktop and even then admits it is not really suited for the role due to lack of apps.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
O RLY?
Answer the following questions for both Mac OSX and Linux:
How many window managers are there?
How many different window manager STYLES are there?
How many desktop environments are there?
How many applications are there that use their own UI widgets (think Xine)?
Here is a little experiment for you: run FireFox, Evolution, Xine, XMMS, a GNOME app, and a KDE app on a Linux box and see how many different libraries with duplicated functionality are loaded.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
I'd wager that for most people that are content to use a Mac as their desktop computer, Linux is a viable alternative.
Face it, the main app (that lots of people use) that's available on the Mac that isn't available on Linux is Microsoft Office. And I find that to be one of the easiest apps (as a casual Office user) to replace. In fact, I haven't used Office on a home computer since 2005, and haven't missed it at all. I use OOo on Linux and XP and am happy with the results (and the price).
Sure there's other stuff you can get on a Mac, but my point is, once you choose Mac, you've given up the ability to 'run any software out there'. Well, that's also true once you choose Linux. You get lots of great stuff bundled, but you can't just run any piece of software. And yes, the level of polish may be inconsistent.
So? Nobody's saying the Mac isn't 'ready for the desktop'. And Linux is in a similar position. It's ready for me. Don't I count?
Of course this RedHat honcho may be right in the sense that it'll never be ready for RedHat to make lots of money off of. Making money selling a desktop OS requires huge volume, and that's a long way off. Apple has their hardware sales to pay the bills. That doesn't mean RedHat can afford to ignore the desktop, because if Ubuntu becomes the desktop Linux of choice, and they ever start getting serious about servers, then RedHat has a problem.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
When I got to college, I spent a whole semester writing term papers on my Apple computer before switching. I never looked back.
Second semester I got access to engineering's vaxstation 2000's running ultrix. It took a couple weeks to get over the whole applesoft basic to tcsh hump, but a few judicious aliases to spare me frustration while my fingers relearned, and away I went.
Vi plus latex is light years ahead of that silly wysiwyg "ScreenWriter II" word processor on the apple, and I don't see much advancement over that in the current crop of word processors.
Yes, I'm sure every app runs flawlessly under OSX, the operating system never has problems, everything is just roses and wine and little fluffy bunnies.
Let's be clear here, no one fucking believes you. We know you're lying. Like your operating system, hell even love it, but please, don't act like we're a bunch of mental retards who'll lap up any old pure bullcrap your fanboish nature feels compelled to vomit up.
Wanna know what the best computer in the world is? The Slackware Linux install I had running on a 300mhz Pentium II with 256mb of RAM, 500mb hard drive and two ethernet cards that acted as my Postfix proxy for our internal mail system. No amount of joe jobs and dictionary attacks could take it down, if I SSHed into in th emiddle of a huge attack, the login popped up nice and fast. And I only rebooted it maybe three times in two years; once to install a kernel with an iptables update, and twice because I needed to move stuff around in the server room.
So take your "my Mac is wonderful blah blah blah" and stick it up your ass.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
> There is simply no way to recalculate all that in a way that closed source equivalent
> functionality / capabilities comes out cheaper, without using pirated software.
Oh that I won't argue. I'd even argue that you would probably pay more than OSS even by going pirate just because you still need more support manpower, beefier hardware, virus scanners, etc. It was only the magnitude of the annual number that sounded a bit high.
> I am not even sure where I would find a licensed copy of windows server, let alone any
> other common advanced server apps.
Microsoft doesn't have a local office? Seriously, if you are in a country where the piracy rate is that high you probably wouldn't have to worry unless you are high enough profile to made an example of. Microsoft knows people will pirate in certain parts of the world and is just waiting for those places to get a pot to piss in first before they expect to cash in.
> One competent full time IT person to do all the above (chances I would need way more)
> if I could find them, would run me an easy $80,000 US to start per year.
Eh? Just where in Latin America are ya at? Last I heard most of that area has a pretty good cost of living so if a MS server herder is starting at $80K USD mebe I should learn a new language and escape the Obamanation while I still can.... before the bastard builds himself an Iron Curtain.
But I thought the argument in favor of MS infrastructure was you could use cheap trained MCSE seals instead of real admins that cost serious coin. :)
Democrat delenda est
You know, reading comprehension makes the world a better place. Maybe you should try taking a class or two in it, dumbass.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.