Slashdot Mirror


Why Linux Vendors Need To Sell More Than Linux

jfruh writes "Mandriva, a venerable Linux distro, is on the verge of shutting down. One of its main problems is that it never grew into more than just an OS vendor. The big players in the commercial Linux space — Red Hat, SuSE, Canonical — all built Linux into their larger computing visions. Is there any room in the marketplace for just a straight-up Linux distro anymore?"

60 of 290 comments (clear)

  1. the one and only by h2k1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    slackware!

    1. Re:the one and only by Noryungi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yup, Slackware. Still the best after all these years.

      --
      The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
    2. Re:the one and only by WhiteK · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No please. I fully understand that it may please some "I'm so good" geek, but it's not nice for people. This is the problem with Linux in general. It is fully done by people who cannot market themselves or their products. As much as geeks hate marketing, it is needed. Not only for products, but also to other people. You want to know why geeks lack with women? Because they cannot market themselves. And no, that doesn't mean only pushing yourself. Bad marketers do that. It is about making yourself more likeable and subtly noting what user gains (be that either from using Linux, or being your girlfriend). Yes, you may think it sucks. But people in general are just for thinking for themselves. Sooner you realize this the sooner you enjoy living. People are self centerous. That does not mean it's bad - it just means they're human.

      So what the hell does "Slackware, still the best after all these years" tells me? Nothing at all. Why is it best? What do I gain by using Slackware? How would it be better for me than using OSX? Steve Jobs understood this. He cared about user experience and clearly told people why it is good. Even Ubuntu fails to do this. And no, people aren't going to spend time trying to research such things unless there is absolutely need. I enjoyed tinkering with these things as teen. Now I have better stuff to do. Either tell me what I gain from using Linux, or I'm not even going to try it.

    3. Re:the one and only by icebike · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No please. I fully understand that it may please some "I'm so good" geek, but it's not nice for people. This is the problem with Linux in general. ... Either tell me what I gain from using Linux, or I'm not even going to try it.

      Actually Slack is never intended for the entry level user.

      Ubuntu is. 98% of the time anyone who has ever used Windows or Mac can install Ubuntu and have it fully functional out of the box, or bittorrent.
      They do market themselves, and have done well with that over the years.

      Ubuntu is the Gateway Drug for Linux. It might not be where you end up, but its where most new users start out.
      Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of others that install and run fine out of the box or the download. But Ubuntu you have heard of. The others, maybe not.

      Further, Ubuntu, SuSE, Red Hat have a business plan, a way to make money. Even the most die-hard fan gets tired of working for nothing, and gets tired
      of doing everything the hard way.

      As to what you are going to gain, its an easy sell for the home user who has ever even once lost his entire computer drive to malware or viruses.
      If everything works the same, no learning curve and the malware risk is virtually gone, you'd be surprised how many will use it, if someone else
      installs it. (Which, by the way, is exactly the same as windows. Most Windows users never install their own OS).

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    4. Re:the one and only by mSparks43 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most female geeks I know take home 6 figure salaries..
      Most Male geeks I have met struggle to make rent.

      imho, the reason most male geeks don't meet female geeks is women on 6 figure salaries don't mingle with guys who struggle to make rent.

      How the world has changed.

    5. Re:the one and only by epyT-R · · Score: 2

      the problem is that most people are unable or unwilling to look past the surface, and people with above average intellect are usually less tolerant of willful ignorance than the average. I don't worry when someone doesn't take my advice when I know it is correct. sooner or later these people will either learn the hard way and take my advice. or just keep looping through the causality until circumstances change and they no longer need whatever it is that needs to be fixed. I used to care, I really did. nowadays I don't, because I don't need the stress of living two lives for the sake of placating others willful ignorance and insecurity. I state a suggestion once, and only once, usually in writing. if I'm asked again by the same person as though he never read/heard me/didn't like the answer, I forward my already stated email/write up on the subject. the whole 'market yourself better' rhetoric is really just a plead to tolerate the laziness of people who cant' be bothered to learn their jobs...or the details of how to do whatever it is they want to do.

      Steve jobs knew how to build a personality cult. apple is not unlike scientology in many respects, except that instead of manipulating people to give them their money and serve the cause, apple manipulates people to give them their money and....errr hmm.. lets walk through the process

      1. convince people that every other vendor is 'the man' but apple is different. this captures most peoples' interests because most people are insecure children who want to be different (just like everyone else). sell them on the idea of a 'lifestyle' that they can buy into which gives them 'superior' methods for doing the techy things their friends do 'the hard way.'
      2. sell them 'easy button' devices which hide rather large assumptions. these work ok for the first few attempts at advertised functions because the targeted users have never done them before.
      3. user goes out into the world with his iThing and things go well until he has to interface with the masses. user assumes the problem is with them because he was told that task X is really easy and simple by the marketing. meanwhile reality is not so black and white.
      4.the non-apple users grow to hate his arrogance. undaunted, he continuously reminds them of the superiority of his iThing and apple in general, unmindful of the fact he has become a real-life popup ad who everyone wishes would just go away.

      as far as women go, I have found that it's expressions of power and dominance that they like the most, not over people necessarily (but that does turn some of them on) but in terms of capability. wealth generation, followed by prowess in bed, followed by unique talents, followed by looks are generally how they size up men. basically, real men dont' have to advertise anything because women will see they are capable by seeing them in action, if they are indeed capable of anything worthwhile. the ones who have to 'advertise' are just bullshit artists.

  2. If you want the short answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No.

    The long answer:

    No. There is no viable desktop market for Linux currently, and probably never will be, and that is pretty much the ONLY market where a just OS approach may have even had a tiny amount of a possibility of succeeding.

    1. Re:If you want the short answer by X10 · · Score: 2

      No. There is no viable desktop market for Linux currently

      I disagree. There is a market for a linux distro like Ubuntu 10.04. Just a bare bones linux distro with some gadgets and some UI fringes, but basically a linux that you can use for work. Ubuntu has moved away from that. I have to find another linux that gives me just a shell and apt-get and some more. I am a programmer. I don't want my linux to become windows because I want to be in control.

      --
      no, I don't have a sig
    2. Re:If you want the short answer by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2

      Kubuntu 11.10 is perfectly usable for development.
      Unity and Gnome 3, of course, are pure horror now.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    3. Re:If you want the short answer by stevenfuzz · · Score: 5, Informative

      I am sitting at work using Ubuntu with Unity as we speak. Honestly, I like that I can do everything in 1 or 2 clicks or with the keyboard. I think it's ironic that there is this rally cry to evolve Linux into some more usable and advertise-able OS, yet when someone like Canonical decides to go for full-out evolution, those same people immediately reject it. So it goes...

    4. Re:If you want the short answer by Shikaku · · Score: 2

      I have to find another linux that gives me just a shell and apt-get and some more.

      http://www.archlinux.org/

    5. Re:If you want the short answer by dudpixel · · Score: 2

      Whoa, there are several million linux users worldwide, and that's a conservative estimate.

      When you claim there is "no" desktop market for linux, wouldn't YOU like a business with this many potential customers?

      I'm not claiming it would be easy to sell a product to these people (you need to create enough value that someone would consider paying for it, rather than use free alternatives), but you need to stop looking at the linux market in percentages of the total PC market.

      Yes its a small percentage of the overall market, but on its own it can be a rewarding market for some.

      Even Apple's percentage share of the market is pretty small, but you would never claim that they dont have a viable desktop market.

      Making money on linux would be no different to any other venture. Find something the users need, cater to that need, offer real value at a price users will pay for, profit. Difficult? yes. Impossible? no.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    6. Re:If you want the short answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ... to go for full-out evolution, those same people immediately reject it. So it goes...

      Because it's not their idea of evolution.. Some would want third hand instead of second pair of ears for example ;)

  3. No by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Someone will clone the distro and everyone has the bandwidth to download it.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  4. Depends on your definition of "marketplace" by zooblethorpe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is there any room in the marketplace for just a straight-up Linux distro anymore?

    That depends on what you mean by "marketplace". If this includes free, then sure -- we've still got Slackware, Debian, Mint, and I don't know what all else.

    But then, the question is loaded, and presumes that Mandriva's fall is solely due to the marketability of a Linux distro. But looking at the history, Mandriva was never that well run as an organization, with fits and starts and general policy confusion. For all its warts, Canonical's stewardship of Ubuntu at least has a direction. I suffered through many months with broken repo settings and no clear fixes as Mandrake/Mandriva went through a couple of its identity crises and infrastructure paroxysms, and these ultimately prompted me to leave them behind.

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
    1. Re:Depends on your definition of "marketplace" by Jurily · · Score: 2

      But then, the question is loaded, and presumes that Mandriva's fall is solely due to the marketability of a Linux distro.

      They are trying to sell something that's free, and adding nothing of value in the process. Of course they're going to fail.

      Linux is marketable. I can wholeheartedly recommend Debian for data centers or Ubuntu as a non-gaming desktop. However, I have no idea what Mandriva is trying to be, much less why I should pay them for.

    2. Re:Depends on your definition of "marketplace" by torgis · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not to mention market saturation. In all seriousness, how many linux distributions is "too many"?

    3. Re:Depends on your definition of "marketplace" by Richard_J_N · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Indeed - Mandrake made stupid decision after stupid decision. For example, when they were doing really well at the dotcom boom, they wasted all their money on a failed diversification into e-learning.

      Then they asked the community for support, which many of us gave, by selling club membership and DVDs. The stupid thing was this though: I had to pay $60 for a DVD I didn't want (after downloading the release ISOs weeks earlier), and I suspect Mandrake only got about $10 of that. I would have been happy to give them $20 for every release, if I knew that the money would go to more than just production and shipping of DVDs, and the included "commercial apps" which I also didn't want.

      Another problem was lack of support of the released distro. For example, if you wanted to run the latest stable release (not cooker), but happened to purchase a printer with support in upstream CUPS, you couldn't always get it to work in the stable release. Bug fixes rarely got backported either, so the stable release that everyone was supposed to run always had bugs in it that were fixed (but only in the cooker release, which was frequently broken).

      It's a shame: Mandrake did some really good stuff, including excellent documentation, a good set of KDE and Gnome defaults (including a unified theme), they supported i586 while most Linuxes still optimised for i386, had a really outstanding graphical installer (back in 2001 and before), and were deservedly at the top of the list for newbies, with tools that provided help, rather than dumbing down.

      Mandrake also improved several defaults, for example in Debian/Ubuntu, the Webroot is "/var/www". In Mandrake, it's "/var/www/html". When serving a simple file, this means /var/www/myfile.html (Debian) vs. /var/www/html/myfile.html (Mdk) - but it puts the webapps in a sensible place: Mdv use /var/www/mediawiki, /var/www/bugzilla etc, whereas Debian have to put it into /var/lib/ iirc. (On the other hand, Mandrake's Postgres configuration is weirdly in /var/lib/pgsql/data/postgresql.conf, whereas Debian put it in /etc/postgresql, where one would expect it. )

      Hopefully Mageia can do something exciting; personally I've been running Mageia 1 for 8 months, and it's good, but not yet revolutionary.

  5. If its not RedHat... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    then its not worthwhile in the commercial space. SuSE marketshare is dropping and when did canonical every really have marketshare? Either you're big enough to do your own, have enough skills to maintain your own, or you buy RHEL.

    Peter.

    1. Re:If its not RedHat... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why?

      Forced at current job to use RH for one of our boxes (we are a Debian shop). RH is inferior in EVERY way. Few packages (a few percent of what Debian packages), upgrade hell (RH recommends a clean install + migrate config + data; WTF?!!! Debian, apt-get dist-upgrade... done.)

      Really, can't see any reason to use RH other than when some commercial entity forces you to in order to have support on that 3rd party product.

      RH really is shite. Hell even AIX, the bastard child of commercial UNIX can at least handle an in-place upgrade.

    2. Re:If its not RedHat... by Junta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      RedHat can (mostly) handle an in-place upgrade. Sufficient numbers of RH users *cannot* when something 'weird' happens, therefore it is simpler for them to tell everyone to clean install since RH actually has to answer the phone and handhold all the users and can't tell them to go away when they lack the resources to sort it out on their own.

      Debian can (mostly) handle an in-place upgrade. When a debian user can't figure out how to make it work again after dist-upgrade breaks it, well tough. Google and forum around, and no one *has* to deal with it, even though usually someone does. If debian were forced to hold the hands of some of the users I've seen, they'd stop talking about dist-upgrade too.

      AIX is extermely conservative, moreso than *any* linux distro will ever get away with. Given the scope, conservative development, the expected customer skill level, and the resources behind it, of course they can achieve *both* commercial support *and* robustness of in-place upgrades.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  6. OS's are... by blahplusplus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... the most boring part of the computer for 90% of the population. You have to have something your end customers actually care about. I look at things like steam and I don't know why Linux devs didn't think of creating a platform around linux to begin with. While power user computing is great for the power users, the great unwashed really just want something ridiculously simple and easy. There is really no real reason to use linux. If I were trying to sell linux, I'd create a plaform like steam and sell non-drm'd software. Open source really has to start 'charging' for it's software if it hopes to be sustainable in creating apps/things people want in the future. Money is not a dirty word. You can still make money with open computing. With all the copyright bullshit linux could have a good opening if they'd just get on the ball and create a business out of it.

    Linux suffers from being suffocated by geeks who really don't grasp that the user doesn't want to have to think, the user wants a magic box that adds value to their lives. This is why things like Steam took off and 'app stores'.

    1. Re:OS's are... by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > There is really no real reason to use linux.

      apt-get install xbmc
      apt-get install mythtv

      No dickering around with packages with names like "shark007".

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re:OS's are... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You see that? That thing that just passed? It was the point - and you missed it. What is an apt-get? Why is it called that? Why is there a "get" and then an "install?" Where do I type that? Oh, in the console? It's not working. Why is it not working? Why does it tell me it can't "resolve the hostname" of the repository? Oh, the whitespace matters?

      Ubuntu Software Center et al mitigate these issues to a degree. Too little, too late though.

    3. Re:OS's are... by Korin43 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is why things like Steam took off and 'app stores'.

      This is why Linux has has "app stores" for over ten years. Users didn't like package managers until they had to pay money to use them.

    4. Re:OS's are... by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wow. Sounds like you're still running a Linux distro from 1993.

      I liked the Windows update thingumy recently when I booted into Windows for the first time in ages. Even though I waited over ten minutes, Windows wouldn't connect to my Wireless LAN that Linux connects to in a few seconds, but it was bugging me to install upgrades, so I said yes because I assumed it must have previously downloaded them and I might as well do something useful while I was waiting... but once I told it to install them it tried to download them and then told me it couldn't download them, which should have been obvious because there was no network connection.

      What a horrible excuse for an operating system Windows is...

    5. Re:OS's are... by Fri13 · · Score: 2

      Tell me, how Linux operating system can be boring only for 90% of people? I would say it is 99.95% of people.

      As you should know, Linux kernel is a monolithic operating system. 99.95% people does not even understand or know that.
      Operating Systems has from the begin being boring... What is exiting (or boring) is the graphical or textual user interfaces and programs and application programs what users can use to get their wanted things done.

      Only a true geek can get exited what new features operating systems (like Linux aka 'Linux kernel') offers when they get new versions. Like how many user would be exited btrfs or better process scheduler? A improved network stack or new I/O scheduler? I haven't even ever head someone would had parties with hot girls dancing around when Linus released a new version of Linux operating system. Have you?

    6. Re:OS's are... by loufoque · · Score: 2

      You do realize all Linux distributions already come with an equivalent of an "App Store" which contains tens of thousands of up-to-date high-quality software packages?
      It's usually called a "software repository" or "software center"

      It even has user ratings and lists of "what's hot", "what's new", "top rated" etc.

    7. Re:OS's are... by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 2

      I was especially thrilled when I installed Windows 7 for the first time recently and it spent around twenty minutes rebooting no fewer than 6 times before I could actually use it.

      I find it equally pleasing when it downloads updates in the background and then spontaneously reboots 5 minutes later, particularly when it does it behind a game and I lose my online match.

      Really, the only mitigating factor is that I no longer attempt to do any useful work with Windows.

    8. Re:OS's are... by Beelzebud · · Score: 2

      For a computer genius I'd think you would have figured out that you can set up the OS to update how you like, and not have it intrude on what you're doing.

    9. Re:OS's are... by Telvin_3d · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Users didn't like package managers until a couple companies had the bright idea to make versions that were more than a glorified command line.

      Steam and the Apple App Store are to dpkg (and similar tools) what an office suite is to notepad. Things like visual previews, robust searches and categories, and comprehensive descriptions are more than cosmetic improvements. They are the difference between a good idea and a mature implementation.

    10. Re:OS's are... by greg1104 · · Score: 2

      To support the idea that BSD wasn't a critical component here, it's worth pointing out that Apple considered several alternatives to the BSD derived NeXT the birthed OS X from. BeOS, Solaris, and even Windows NT were all considered at some point. Had the owners of Be lowered their financial expectations, it easily could have been OS X derived from Be instead. The main benefit of basing things on NeXT instead was that it brought Jobs back into day to day operation again. He was the right guy to be heading the expansion into friendlier consumer electronics that revived Apple's financials, and that mattered quite a bit more than the origin of the kernel.

    11. Re:OS's are... by oakgrove · · Score: 2

      Apparently Google, Facebook, Amazon, and a plethora of other large internet companies have found a compelling reason to use Linux. It can't just be the price as those companies make more than enough money to buy Windows licenses yet they choose not to. Furthermore, what's wrong with people using something different than you? Do you feel threatened in some way by choice?

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    12. Re:OS's are... by Tastecicles · · Score: 2

      YaST

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    13. Re:OS's are... by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, yes, you can configure it. But I would have thought the default settings would be something less annoying than "update automatically then show a popup-dialogue and spontaneously reboot in 5 minutes. Do not offer an option to not reboot - make the user keep deferring it in chunks of between 5 minutes and 4 hours". If the updates happen at lunchtime and you left a bunch of windows open while you stepped out for lunch, say goodbye to any work you haven't saved.

      Whereas the default on my other OS is "open the update manager, present the available updates list, and wait for user input". And when it's finished updating, it colours one UI element red to let you know that a reboot would be good, but it's not going to force you. You can configure this behaviour too.

      My gripe is that the default settings on Windows cause you pain - at the very least, they force you to save your work and reboot, or constantly poke at a nag-box to prevent it rebooting, whereas the default settings on my chosen working OS don't even force you to update, and when you do, you can carry on working as long as you like before you reboot - I typically just shut down at the end of the day and consider that the first half of my reboot cycle.

  7. Diversification by girlintraining · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Oh, you mean like how Microsoft bundles Office with it's distro? You know, the one they call Windows.

    I can see an argument being made that people don't want an "operating system", they want a computer. And when most people say computer, they don't mean the box. That's what geeks say. When an average person says computer, they mean all the applications, peripherals, internet access, etc., that all gets packed into the magic box.

    Linux and its supporters have never quite managed to grasp the Magic Box school of thought. Until they do, they'll never be a competitor. This is a cultural problem, not a technological one. Look at Apple. First we ignored them, then we laughed at them, then somehow, overnight, OS X became a contender and Apple became a massive corporation. How did that happen?

    Hint: Apple doesn't sell 'operating systems' or 'ipads' or whatever. They are selling an experience. And if you ask the average person what the Linux experience is... they'll look at you, facepalm, and say flatly "I couldn't get the damn thing to work."

    Linux vendors need to sell an experience, not a product. It needs to be well-supported, preconfigured with everything the average person wants on a computer (or whoever their target demographic is... IT managers, server lackies, whatever...), so all they do is push the button and there it is. It. Just. F*cking. Works.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Diversification by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apple don't sell computers, operating systems, ipads, iphones or experiences, they sell social status.

    2. Re:Diversification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have never seen Office bundled with Windows, not a full version anyway. If it comes with a prebuilt computer, it's usually a trial version that the user will have to pay for, or a copy that the user ordered with the computer. If it didn't come with it, it'll typically get installed after the fact.

      Contrast that with Ubuntu, Mint, or any number of distros. Most of them come with some form of OpenOffice, LibreOffice, etc. installed by default. In fact, they do come with nearly everything someone would want: office suite, web browser, email client, chat client, music player, video player, ad nauseum.

      Add to that, most people I've shown Ubuntu or Mint have marvelled at how everything "just works," moreso than Windows. The biggest hurdle I've seen is that nearly everyone I've talked to hasn't even heard of Linux, or they only have a vague idea of what it is.

      I agree with you on the "selling" part. People are bombarded with Apple and Windows ads everywhere they go. I can't recall the last time I saw a Linux distro ad.

  8. Lack of a business model by vakuona · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most Linux distros lack a sustainable business model. They expect people to pay for something they can get for free.

  9. Not in the business place by s.petry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    RedHat and Suse are both a success because it's not just a distro. It's also a support structure for the OS, which is what businesses need.

    Many times, a technical person looks at it and does not care. "Let me use my favorite distro this week.". But what happens when that person leaves the company and a new guy comes in with experience in a different distro? Sure, we can catch on as techies.. it's what we do. But it's a gap to get there in time, which can cost a whole lot of money.

    I'm sure Redmond does not mind as many fragments as possible. Honestly it's hurt Linux much more than it's helped as far as business adaptation.

    Lets face facts: Execs want numbers, not quirks. Show them how much money they can save by going with RedHat, response time on support issues, security information for SOX and E&Y auditors, etc.. and that's your ticket in. "My Gnome tool bar roxxors in Favlinux 6.0zers" is not something businesses want, need, or look at.

    Frags are fine for the geeks that want to play. I'm sure there are some good things that come out of those and get added back in to the stream for Business Linux. I can't count any, but I'm sure someone has some. Just keep it out of the VP's office, and get them a supported version of Linux.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  10. It's not the code, it's the talent by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is not about "cloning the distro". Anyone can download the tree in its current state. The value added is in the talent that maintains the codebase, makes improvements, applies the latest security updates, implements bugfixes, and helps the product evolve. In the case of Mandriva, there is Mageia, which is made up of many of the maintainers from Mandriva who have anticipated trouble and decided to break away from Mandriva. In other words, Mandriva the company can die, and Mandriva the product essentially lives on as Mageia.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    1. Re:It's not the code, it's the talent by Dahamma · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your reply really reinforced the GP, not contradicted it.

      He's right, there isn't a market for a *commercial vendor* selling a desktop Linux distro only (which was the question), because people can just copy it for free.

      Your example just explains how you can not only copy the resulting distro, but the source as a new project. It's yet another reason a commercial desktop Linux vendor is doomed - any derivatives get the aggregate efforts of the original without paying for those efforts, meaning they can distribute it for less with only as much additional effort as they want to put in (down to zero in both cases if they choose). The original vendor makes no money for their "value added", and doesn't survive.

      That may sound like a knock against open source projects, but it's not. It's a knock against people who naively think they can make money selling the open source software itself, rather than support, training, enterprise integration, etc that a company like Red Hat does to earn their income...

    2. Re:It's not the code, it's the talent by Dahamma · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think you are totally misunderstanding the OP and me... breaking it down, it is that simple:

      1. Mandriva wants to sell a desktop version of Linux with various minor support features no one cares about.
      2. People (probably you included) decide that's really not worthwhile to pay 50 euros for it, and instead download it for free.
      3. Mandriva now has no revenvue to pay the developers, etc. and goes out of business.
      4. As you said, developers leave to a derivative distro they work on as *volunteers* (and probably go find another, possibly unrelated job to pay the bills).

      In the end, without significant value add that can't easily be copied, it's not going to work out. Net result: commercial Linux desktop venture ist kaput...

    3. Re:It's not the code, it's the talent by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Actually WITH the value add its still kaput, the market is just too small. look at all those retailers that tried selling Linux, Walmart, Staples, best buy, they all bailed because it ended up being a money loser because ordinary folks don't buy support contracts, only corps do. look at Xandros which had the XMC which despite the hate the community threw at them if you had to work in a mixed office it was great, it played nice with AD and Exchange, Xandros server played nice in Windows server domains, but again the market was simply too small and now they are also kaput.

      The problem is your competition has MASSIVE economies of scale on their side while you don't. the reason Linux works in servers is because MSFT charges assrape prices on Winserver and their licensing is a fricking maze so even with a support contract RHEL will more often than not be cheaper than Windows when it comes to any decently sized corp. but for the desktop you have to support the consumer and as a retailer i can tell you Linux is NOT consumer friendly, sure the GUI is nice but a good test of an OS is what happens when something goes wrong and on Linux that's when it all falls down. go from regular to regular or LTS to LTS and often drivers get totally borked, it has ZERO in the way of friendly driver help, like "find drivers" or "rollback drivers" buttons, instead it has a DIY forum system that unless you know your hardware as well as you do your social security number good luck buddy, because you have to know make/model/rev for most hardware. Is there a simple "last known good config" or other easy way if something goes wrong? nope your ass had damned well better know how to fix it or have a spare on hand for Googling buddy!

      Personally I wish it weren't so, as I have maybe another 6 months I can just wipe and reinstall XP on these off leases before i'm gonna have to scramble for a source for Win 7 Starter, but I've tried every so called "user friendly" Linux there is and every single one ended up breaking and requiring a bunch of CLI mess to fix it. That simply won't cut it with home users so I either have to 1.-Tell them "too fucking bad, all sales are final" and screw my rep and any hope of repeat business, or 2.-Give away lifetime support and lose money on every machine. Neither one of those is acceptable so I simply can't carry your product. Oh and before someone brings up Dell i would point out since its Internet sales ONLY you are dealing with 1. because most won't keep paying for return shipping, and I'd point out dell will NOT tell you what the numbers are on its Ubuntu sales. I'd be willing to bet my last dollar because they are having to pay a dev team to run their own repo they are losing money on each and every Ubuntu sale. As everyone knows you can't lose money on every sale and make it up in volume, but since Dell also sells servers i think they are willing to take the hit in the hopes the one buying the Ubuntu box might look at a Dell server. That's good for Dell but consumers don't buy servers which MSFT found out with WHS.

      So the simple fact is the market is too small for alternative OSes to really make any decent money on the desktop. I predict Canonical will bail on Ubuntu, giving it to the community, and focus on Ubuntu One within 2 years, why? Because they aren't making any money, at least not enough to pay expenses and Shuttleworth made it clear he isn't giving them more scratch. I bet when it comes time to sink or swim they'll admit just what I am saying now, that even with selling their searches and Amazon MP3s there simply isn't enough money in the desktop to allow them to break even, much less profit.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  11. Re:Fragmentation again by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > Theres a reason that after 20+ years Windows has won.

    Yes. The market was already dominated by MS-DOS.

    All of these "helpful suggestions" are just total nonsense that tend to ignore the actual facts.

    The differences between the various flavors of Linux are mostly overblown. They all use the same basic core components. Although some are better at "packaging" than others, libfoo is still libfoo whether it's Ubuntu or Mandrake.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  12. Stealing markets by Fri13 · · Score: 2

    One big (should I say HUGE) reason what cause someone drop out from markets is that someone else enters to same market and is not depending sale income like the others already on market.

    Example. Canonical would not exist if Mark Shuttleworth would not be spending his personal money to artificially maintain Canonical up.

    The situation is exactly the same as someone is selling handmade product A on corner of street and every penny what is gained, is needed so the production can be maintained. Then one rich guy choose to drive that person away from the market. So he use money what his daddy has and as his daddy is millionaire, the new kid on the block can lower the street price and steal customers. No one can not compete against that one.

    Same problem is with stock markets... Not all people can get enough loans to start a new company. Especially when there are bigger corporations with dominant market position or other way a constant incomes what they can spend.

    Microsoft can do what ever it wants with money what it gets from Windows and Office sale... And it does not need to compete to maintain that money... WIth that money, Microsoft has maintained PC dominant market position and bought the gaming console markets for itself and even is now buying the smart phone markets for itself unless customers steps against it. Sony made same thing with PS3 on the HD DVD and Blu-ray war. They bought the market with PS3 Blu-ray drive.

    Canonical has done same thing for Mandriva and other commercial Linux distributors what has been dependable of income of selling their distribution, their support, their service and maintenance tools etc.

    Starting a company first by gathering funds for it, is needed when everyone are small on market and there is space for everyone. But when you are competing against big corporation, they can just wipe their asses and light their cicarettes with bills and laugh doing it while driving competitors away.

    If Mark Shuttleworth would really want to support Open Source, he would have spended money directly to different Open Source projects, instead starting a own company in tax paradise (Man Island) to avoid taxes and starting a own distribution while same time stealing name of Linux operating system and promote their own Ubuntu distribution as "new Operating System". And while doing that, Mark has blessed the actions to steal income from other upstream projects like Banshee.

    And the goal of the Mark was to gain enough fanatic Ubuntu followers who would support and price Canonical like it would be Apple 2.0 and that way to drive everyone out of the markets by giving the false information how Canonical is making a own OS, how they are the developing party of Open Source Projects and how they have managed to get everything up what they include in Ubuntu, leaving the upstream, original developers and communities without mentioning.

    All that is legal, but it is not ethical or anyway related to Open Source honorable ethics. It is like stealing others fame and doings by presenting them as own...

  13. Selling Support and Services by xzvf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    RedHat, Suse and Canonical all sell support, not Linux and other Open Source software. You pay for RedHat (the most successful FOSS vendor) to have access to RHN for package updates, someone to call for support, training and certification, and a conduit back into the FOSS community. Suse is similar. Canonical still has a way to go in the enterprise space but has a solid financial backer, and is making money using FOSS to provide services. In fact you can include Amazon, Google and a host of others as successful companies that leverage FOSS to provide services.

  14. I've been using linux for years by stevenfuzz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And every major version update still fucks up all my video card configurations (not to mention a bunch of other stuff). Try explaining to your wife over the phone: "Sorry baby, you shouldn't have hit update while I was at work. It's simple, just open up the terminal on the desktop, SSH to the laptop and replace xorg.conf with xorg.conf-backup". Her responding being, "This computer is stupid. Why can't we use windows like normal people?".

  15. Education by jbolden · · Score: 2

    The whole premise of this article is wrong. During the time when Mandriva was Mandrake, the Linux OS part of Mandrake was profitable. However, they diversified into Educational Products, that were going to be sold to European schools. That business lost a ton of money. They went bankrupt and reformed as Mandriva.

    Ubuntu sort of took the power user desktop niche away and I don't know if Mandriva could have been successful with Ubuntu there. But Mandrake did exactly what the article suggests.

  16. The obvious answer is... by stevenfuzz · · Score: 2, Funny

    No. People universally distrust penguins. They are too cocky and pretentious in their little tux's. If only penguins were sweet and juicy like an apple and translucent like a window. Instead we get these little bone and blood filled over-dressed pests that you can't see through at all.

  17. Re:well not exactly by sconeu · · Score: 2

    Did you try urpmi? That's the equivalent to apt-get for Mandriva and Mageia.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  18. Re:ummm... who cares about commercial linux by Junta · · Score: 2

    Redhat for instance only has a few percent of the packaged apps of Debian.

    To be fair, the 'core' RHEL packages are a bit more thoroughly tested than Debian's universe. There are also add-on repositories, though RHEL doesn't make it quite as trivial to add. An example of it not being so rosy on the debian side, the roundcube webmail package was (still is?) completely unusable as it calls out a php configuration that will not be implemented by the current php packages. An upstream update to roundcube was available to work with the newer php situation, but debian had packaged the newer php and older roundcube, making things *not* 'just work' and indeed forcing you to leave the .dpkg versions behind if you wanted it to work.

    The package manager for Redhat is inferior.

    I have no qualms about rpm compared to dpkg. With yum, I also have no qualms compared to apt. I will say rpm more elegantly coped with the i386/x86_64 mix than I saw .dpkg based distros achieve.

    Upgrades are a non-event with Debian, Redhat recommends a clean install and migrate data for every upgrade.

    You *can* upgrade RHEL in pretty much the same way. Just like debian, however, there are some awkward scenarios when you do it that way on occasion. For example, my php install was hosed on my last dist-upgrade. Some stale config files for a formerly external module (IIRC, sqlite) brought all php scripts to a halt. It wasn't difficult for most skilled admins to identify the issue and resolve, but it represents an unknown/unexpected delay and there are many Enterprise IT shops that would actually be stopped in their tracks until someone came and bailed them out.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  19. Mod Parent Up by dead_cthulhu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'd have done it myself if my mod points didn't vanish yesterday. I've certainly been the sort of geek who hasn't done well in communicating with others when it comes to technical matters. Despite years of bugging friends and family members to "just get a Mac" every time I had to give out free tech support, no one ever did because I didn't/couldn't articulate the reasons why this would be a good idea. I think I've learnt my lesson, and have been able to get people to at least start playing with *nix by actually *showing* how it's not so scary to use and how easy it is to run plenty of Windows software through WINE.

    1. Re:Mod Parent Up by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd have done it myself if my mod points didn't vanish yesterday. I've certainly been the sort of geek who hasn't done well in communicating with others when it comes to technical matters. Despite years of bugging friends and family members to "just get a Mac" every time I had to give out free tech support, no one ever did because I didn't/couldn't articulate the reasons why this would be a good idea. I think I've learnt my lesson, and have been able to get people to at least start playing with *nix by actually *showing* how it's not so scary to use and how easy it is to run plenty of Windows software through WINE.

      But showing users that it's (almost) as easy to use as Windows isn't good enough. You have to convince them that it's enough *better* for *their particular use case* than Windows and MacOS.

      For most users, the fact that a whole bunch of stuff works right out of the box with little or no effort to bring it up is a huge selling point. The ability to buy almost any software title and have it work on Windows is a huge selling point. What's a few hours of lost work (or play) time worth to you? To the average user, it's worth more than the price of a commercial OS.

    2. Re:Mod Parent Up by unrtst · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For most users, the fact that a whole bunch of stuff works right out of the box with little or no effort to bring it up is a huge selling point.

      I honestly thought that was the start of a list of things you could say in favor of a linux desktop, but, by the end of your paragraph, I'm starting to think you actually meant Windows just works right out of the box. Is that what you meant? And, if so, have you setup either Ubuntu or Windows from near scratch recently (near scratch, as in, bought a new pc even)?

      Anecdotal story, but I recently setup a netbook for the girlfriend... took me weeks (prodding it here and there and letting it churn). Took me two days just to get Windows updates caught up (for the first time)... the download was plenty fast, but all the reboots and suddenly there's more to update were just crazy. Removing the bloatware... more time (and it was an asus, which supposedly doesn't ship with too much bloatware in comparison to most). Adding bog standard programs she'd need... tons more time (B&N reader; itunes; vlc; firefox; chrome; thundirbird; nero; sims3; PvZ; etc). And most of those have some silly updates that, for some reason, didn't come with it to begin with. Importing the music and video collection... holy crap that took a long time. Setting up backups... uh, WTH? why isn't there something easy to use for that shit yet? Tried tweaking Windows 7 start menu so she could find the handful of apps she'll actually end up using... near impossible (I ended up following a suggestion from MS and creating a folder/drawer thing on the start bar that listed shortcuts I put there - what a hack). Then many hours poking at the bluetooth a2dp support, and I just gave up on that one (so she could wirelessly stream to the receiver... and, fwiw, that worked plug-n-play from my linux desktop).

      And, I know this isn't really MS's fault, but to top it off... I bought Sims 3 for her (she love it); It installed, updated, and ran fine (a tad slow, but fine). A week later, and every time you start it, it freezes on the "update" screen and won't let you even click cancel! Found a work-around... disable the network, and it'll start up and run. You can feel free to say that would happen on other OS's, but I can't recall any software I got from freebsd ports, gentoo portage, debian apt repos, ubuntu repos, fedora/redhat rpm repos, etc that ended up in that situation. Even proprietary stuff like Quake 3 for Linux that I bought way back in the day... community came out with patches to keep it working.

      "The ability to buy almost any software title and have it work on Windows...", I totally agree that's a huge selling point.

      The ability to use the software you have as long as you like an however you want... well, that seems like a pretty damn good thing too.

      Being able to search/browse in one software interface (ex. synaptic), select some stuff, and click go and they'll all be installed AND UP TO DATE WHEN INSTALLED is a HUGE selling point. And debian-based distro's update - "sudo apt-get update && sudo reboot", go to sleep (or just get coffee... doesn't take that long), and it's done.

      Don't get me wrong... I'm not entirely knocking Windows. There's a reason they have so much market share, and it's not entirely due to their monopoly practices. I bought the damn thing knowing what it was, and it's what I wanted for this situation. It's the first copy of windows I've bought or used in about a decade (besides a corporate copy or two for occasional use on a vm), but the experience cemented my belief that, even though Ubuntu is jacking the shit out of what I want, it's still far more appropriate for my usage than Windows, and I can always distro hop again.

    3. Re:Mod Parent Up by timbo234 · · Score: 2

      "I honestly thought that was the start of a list of things you could say in favor of a linux desktop, but, by the end of your paragraph, I'm starting to think you actually meant Windows just works right out of the box. Is that what you meant? And, if so, have you setup either Ubuntu or Windows from near scratch recently (near scratch, as in, bought a new pc even)?"

      I have, just last week on a PC I assembled myself from decent quality brand-name (D-Link, Asrock, Saphire, AMD) parts. And yes the difference was amazing comparing Windows 7 to Ubuntu - all hardware, including the graphics card, worked out of the box perfectly in 64-bit Ubuntu.

      With Windows 7 I had to go through inserting CDs for each bit of hardware to get it working - the motherboard driver CD even went ahead and installed a whole load of crapware that I didn't ask for! Worst of all though the nice D-Link Atheros WLAN card that worked perfectly in Ubuntu failed to work in Win 7 at all, with neither the drivers from the included driver CD nor the latest from D-Link's website. I had to send it back.

      --
      Pre-canned Evolution Links for all those Slashdot holy wars.
  20. FOSS, including Linux, does have a killer "app" by quixote9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's called user control and privacy. 99.95% of people don't care about that too much, but every Megaupload that happens inches people a bit closer to realizing that no control is maybe not all that free.

    It's interesting that the Department of Defense in the US is using more and more open source software, even while lots of people are saying "My data? Who cares?" Once control is worth something to you, there's no real alternative, ultimately, to FOSS. Or writing your own custom software.

  21. Another very poorly researched article. by thatkid_2002 · · Score: 2

    Mandriva was also selling Mandriva Directory Server - which was a good product IMO. Isn't providing management/services products making them "more than just an OS vendor"?. Novell was doing exactly the same thing with eDirectory/Zenworks.

  22. Ubuntu as "the Gateway Drug for Linux" by Herve5 · · Score: 2

    Indeed I just moved from Mandriva to Ubuntu because the last Mandriva update crashed everything on my machine. And I was almost shocked to find Ubuntu *easier* than OSX on a couple of point (e. g. capable to run an external 3G modem without extra sw install, and share immediately this connection via wifi straight from a permanently visible system menu).

    So probably yes I'm among those non-geek users that have been driven to Ubuntu just because of its fame. But it works.

    Whenever I have some time I'll try a couple of other distros among those you advocate for here -but indeed this requires time. And Mandriva borking its upgrade didn't overmotivate me...

    --
    Herve S.
  23. You are part of the problem by jabberw0k · · Score: 2

    Microsoft's juggernaut rolls on your back, precisely because MS depends on geeks like you to do all the hard work that people think is free. If everyone had to pay for the $1000 of your time you gave away, they would see the advantages of Linux or even Mac. So stop insulting yourself by giving your time away for free... aren't you worth it? Let people really understand the pain of Microsoft.