Slashdot Mirror
Oracle Rolls Out Latest NC - With Linux
pants95 writes "It looks like Larry and the folks at Oracle are having another go at the world of Network Computers for $199 a pop. This time, they will run Linux and come with Navigator. Is it just me, or does the term `disposable' computer not sit right with you? I still get plenty of use out of a few old 486s!"
I hope these is one of the right questions that the GUI researchers you mention are asking. Sometimes they seem to make decisions about what people like wihtout asking them first.
Microsoft does have (smart and worthy) people doing GUI research, but I think many people would argue that this is more of an art than a science. The *nix world now has thousands of people doing practical research by releasing themes to the several existing desktop environments. You can choose how you want your computer to look and act, starting from any of many decent possible points.
People have different preferences and find different things "intuitive," not to mention their practical needs! So there are still "geeks dragging buttons together and calling it a browser," although probably with mandates for finishing dates, corporate aesthetics, etc. And while their result may be an acceptable choice (a lot of people like IE, say), expertise among designers does not equal acceptance or agreement of users. (Think Edsel.)
MS is probably a good fit for some people; sounds like it is for you. Great! I wish I was as happy with my computer
I honestly don't see asking the questions is "a clear demonstration of the arrogant attitude of software developer: "shut up you stupid user, we know what's best for you"" -- I'm not a developer by any means, but I actually would like those who are developing software (for any OS!) to both pay attention to users and create programs which respect what they want. If the original poster were to do say what features he likes best / dislikes most in the browsers he's used, it might help create a better browser.
I think failing to ask enough people those questions, or expecting users to like software or live with it anyhow is a more arrogant attitude.
And regarding the end-userness of UNIX / Linux
Good question, but it demands a response of "Good enough for what?" X is Good Enough to run high-end graphics programs on workstations. I see comments on improvements to / problems with X all the time here on Slashdot, am unfortunately not savvy enough to understand most of these complaints -- but X has been refined over many years and (like I said, with my midle-to-low-end ATi video card) works charmfully.
That there are fewer cards supported than under Windows is the biggest complaint I can see about X Window (and for many of them, the "lack of support" is not utter, but only of acceleration and other proprietary features). This is changing rapidly, though -- look at the support Linux has gotten from ATi, nVidia, Matrox
True that neither provides this at the moment, but then again, neither does Apple anymore, with the exception of the iMac. Apple's HI is leagues above MS's, but really
If it works for you, it works for you. We all have different needs. I'm not much of a gamer, and I hate the way Outlook and Word seem to crash all the time, not to mention how Word creates documents in inherently non-portable documents by default, has poorly chosen default "fuzzy-logic" settings for grammar-checking, capitalization, bullets, etc.
And as to whether StarOffice or WordPerfect are alternatives for "serious users," what do you mean? For several reasons, I don't agree, but what makes you say it? Some people may prefer the look / feel of WordPerfect to Word (I certainly do), but that aside there are alternatives of all sorts, and think one good clue of a user's seriousness would be his attention to portability and future cost. If I were to use Word for documents I wanted to share, I would be saving them in RTF or as HTML
I've got no real trouble with MS as a company -- selling whatever they want to whoever wants it. Some of my favorite people work there, too. I object to threats and intimidation as poor sportsmanship and in some cases they seem to have broken contracts, reneged on promises, etc. (Ask anyone who bought an Alpha to run WinNT.) but my beef with Microsoft is mostly that they sell products which I find irritating and crash-prone. (I have no sympathy with AOL or Netscape whining that MS included a Web browser that they wrote and didn't want to install the competitors' products. That's not suprizing or immoral. Neither is integrating a Web browser with the OS. I also have no problem with them insisting resellers who want to load their OS. Tough cookies, contractural obligations, etc.)
Cheers,
timothy
(all of this on the assumption that this was not flamebait
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
My university currently has a large NT network deployed, all authenticating and file serving off 2 servers (for 10,000 students). It takes upwards of 15 minutes to log in -- the 486s that were hanging around when I started here actually let me get my work done faster (but God do I feel old saying that).
Anyhow, this NT network doesn't do this (unfortunately, neither does Linux yet). I still have to close my apps before I can log out and start them up again when I log back in. I *like* the idea of just sitting down anyplace and picking up exactly where I left off - the same documents, the same web sites, the same work.
It seems to me that these things are mistargeted. They should be all about seamless desktop computing at an enterprise scale, not a "cheap" computer targeted at people who can't afford a machine. Chances are that if I can scrape together $200, I can afford to do something else (like one of those pimp-myself-to-Prodigy deals). After all, if I'm dropping my hard-earned cash on a computer, why not get one that my kids can play Quake on?
NCs belong in the office. The first business that really seriously starts targeting them as such will make a killing.
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
...they're missing that critical element: usable application software.
Let's face it, the most viable NCs possible right now are stripped-down Linux/*BSD boxes that act as X-Terminals on steriods. The hardware and the base OS/operating environment (think GNOME/KDE) is there and ready-for-prime-time. However, think who the real end user is and what they want: Stupid User Apps.
That's right. These things go on the desktop of secretaries, marketing droids, and PHBs. People who need really-simple-to-use software that allows them to do they're job in a completely non-technical way.
In other words, they need a good Office Suite, a fully-integrated mailer/calendar/meeting planner, a reasonable draw/paint/photo editor, and random small apps that aren't immediately obvious, but nonetheless important (Quicken, anyone?). There are apps in all the above categories available for Linux (StarOffice, Netscape, GIMP, XPaint, etc.), but let's face it, none of them can really be considered ready-for-prime time. In a year or so for several, but not for awhile for many others.
Also, there are all those nice little specialty programs that people need that aren't available yet. I mentioned Quicken. A good D-P program like PageMaker is also a need. As is something like Visio and MS Project. These are things that the target audience uses on a daily basis, and until 1st-rate programs are available for Linux NCs, the NCs are doomed to fail.
A long step in the right direction would be for Oracle to seriously fund the Blackdown Java project (I mean, to the tune of a dozen developers and a $1m or so). Having a seriously good JVM for Linux would really help - it would stimulate the development of Java-based apps, since the ISVs could count on having both the NC and PC markets to sell to.
The concept is sound. If Oracle really wants it to sell, then they need to either (a) create an evnironment that ISVs will willingly plug the needed holes, or (b) fund development of such work themselves. I don't see either happening, though I could be wrong. Until then, NCs will be a curiousity.
-Erik
There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened.
One thing I have noticed is that Communicator crashed regularily under Enlightenment 0.15. This was a fairly common event when closing a window when several browser windows were open. I first put this down to Communicator bugs, but when I switched window manager to Blackbox, the crashes were markedly decreased. From suffering a crash roughly three or four times a day, now I'm down to one or two crashes a week.
Communicator is definitely crash prone, but I put this down to the difficulty in maintaining the 'classic' version. In fact, the convoluted nature of the classic code is what prompted the drastic rewrite of Mozilla (and the consequent ignorance about why Mozilla deadlines slipped).
As for Network Computers, they are simply a repackaged version of things like X Terminals - and could even be seen as anextension of the old dumb terminals connected to a mainframe.
Whether we really need dedicated NC's is questionable. A friend who works runs a medium sized PC and network installation asked me just this weekend about how viable stripped down PC's running Linux would be. As recently reported on Slashdot, a UK based financial firm did just this, so now my friend wants to try it as well.
Chris Wareham
Sean:
What exactly do you like better about IE / Windows than Netscape / Linux?
Why do you like IE better? What features would you like to be supported in a browser for it to be as good as you find IE? Have you tried any of the other browsers available for Linux, and if so how did you think they stood up either to Netscape or to IE?
What makes Windows more efficient for you? (Desktop style? Inter-application consistency? Does it crash less for you? Better applications available for what you use your computer for?) It would be helpful for developers reading this list to know what users would like to see. [Note: I fall only into the second and not the first group.]
I think slashdotters in general (oh what a dangerous way to start a sentence!) do think Microsoft has a "damned tight" desktop, but that's not necessarily a compliment. It's so tight, in fact, that it can't be extended or modified as extensively as Linux or other GPL'd / UNIX-based system
Also, a lot of people would point out that "the days of X Window" are still in full swing -- XFree 4.0 is coming soon!
In contrast, my own experience is that Linux circa mid-1999 is easier to install and more easily supports both my video card (ATi Xpert@Play 98) and my modem than Windows 98 or NT did. [Another disclaimer: I'm supremely non-intuitive with computers in general; if I weren't maybe I wouldn't note that difference.]
Cheers,
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5