Perceptions: Is Linux a suitable desktop platform? (DesktopLinux.com) [LWN.net]

Perceptions: Is Linux a suitable desktop platform?

Posted Feb 28, 2003 23:51 UTC (Fri) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

It seams, without meaning disrespect, that the author have being running around is tail to conclude the obvious.

I'm not a statistics expert, but it seams that questions like that, due to time constrains and likely human biased(choice) opinion, would always end up concluding one of the most obvious general perceptions.

Remember that Microsoft grew from nothing, and if you had asked Bill Gates what deed he wanted to achieve, he probably would had said:-"the world". And obvious, as usualy things dont fall from the sky, there he went, deceiving, lieing and setping on everybody faces.

I think in large proportion linux achieved today position, and not GNU, because top kernel hackers, if not mistaken Linus himself, talked about world domination, and that is what has being ticking secretly in the heart of the best and most "agressive" Linux coders and warriors. GNU/FSF talked, very well, about "free" open source software everywhere, but when people start thinking about atomic devices, airplains, powerplants, that seams foolish.

If you ask if "today Linux is the best desktop", of course the answer woud be "no". But than again, usualy nothing falls down from the skys!

So one of the most interesting polls, if not the most, would be asking top Linux coders (Linus of course) and warriors if they still want "world domination", without the "deceiving, lieing and steping on face" part, of course. And if they are willing to do everything to achieve it,... and that without the "lieing and deceiving" would have to do without question with building the most secure, best user and hardware frendly, best looking and best performant desktop ever...

Are you John H. Terpstra willing to do everything at your reach helping build the most secure, best user and hardware friendly, best looking and best performant desktop ever build, achieving so, whitout question, world domination?

Or is Linux slipping to be only a server (server=slave) system, and end up serving the server side disk storage and DRM(palladium) authentication and authorization system of the world dominante M$ .NET/Palladium/Next-generation Secure Computing Base, probably running on top of server hardware build by IBM or HP?

Irony of ironys or not, would be interesting to know if Mandrakesoft should have gone for a liquidation party instead of financial protection!

Perceptions: Is Linux a suitable desktop platform?

Posted Mar 3, 2003 7:41 UTC (Mon) by Nikolokolus (guest, #9916) [Link]

no disrespect to the previous poster, but I'm going to assume that English is not your native tongue . . .that said, I'm unsure of what you were trying to say? However to comment on the viability of Linux on the desktop, I'm a relatively new Linux convert; seven months with the the SuSE 8.1 platform; and loving it. Linux is definetely differnt than MS windows, not all of which are entirely transparent at first. However none of the hurdles I encountered caused me to abandon my efforts to teach myself something new. I just had to divorce myself from a notion of a purely "mouse driven" OS, now that the command line has become comfortable I find the old point and click method of windows mgt. clunky and unwieldly. Linux currently is a force, and and has alot going for it right now, with major companies like Oracle, IBM, and even Intel putting resources towards supporting GNU/Linux I can see continued growth. Desktop environments like KDE and Gnome seriously put to question the notion that Linux is "just too hard". Whenever I mention that I use linux at home I either get looks of wariness (as if I just mentioned that I like to burn buildings in my spare time) or looks of awe, as if I'm going to mention in the next breathe that I like to hack the dept. of defense's web site. Linux still suffers from a case of perceived eliteism, and radicalism that, in all likelihood deters many PC users from making the switch. I guees time will only tellif that perception can change. My advice to anyone still on the fence is try it; with a few caveats: First, get yourself a good Linux book; Running Linux by O'Reilly press is very good, Secondly, give it at least 2-3 months of tinkering before making up your mind, thirdly, accept that you are going to make mistakes, some which may require you to perform a complete re-install, and lastly remember that the TCO for a retail distribution like redhat, SuSE, mandrake, et. al. is only about $40 US. and that includes a full fetured software set, that if you were to purchase commercially available software for a windows platform could easily reach a thousand dollars or more.

Perceptions: Is Linux a suitable desktop platform?

Posted Mar 3, 2003 18:23 UTC (Mon) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

Well,..., my native language is not english, and sure that shows in the speech
I've being using Linux for my personal machines for almost about 5 years, since the end of 1998, and since then i begun to be a strong promoter of it.
I run a small shop that does system integration, and what you call PC "cloning" manufactoring,..., i've some very small entrepises clientes for wich i build the entire imformation system, and for wich i installed linux as firewall appliances and printer and file sharing. Like mine there must be thounsands of other small shops arround the world.
And no, i haven't and i dont have any intention of hacking anybodys Defense department, even if i knew how...or burning buildings!!!???...( what the hell do you do for living????!!!... or are payed by someone to mud waters here...or just having fun joking...???!!!)
What all resumes is this almost pathologic belive, that old time legacy corporations are going to save linux from whatever bad intention Microsoft has. Pardon the capitals "I DONT THINK THEY DO CARE THAT MUCH", is just that they dont trust M$(who does??), and linux is a hell of a good piece of code and a "horrifying good sweet business" for them. If M$ happen to swallow the IT industry, the large majority of them are going back to the old business model commanded and "supported" by M$, with a incredible small lost in the way. After all, someone is going to be left to build the hardware and implement the heavy server-side required for the .NET/Paladium/Next-generation Secure Computing Base model.

If IBM, HP, Intel, SUN,..., just want to put a stop to M$ they would just spend a few millions building a new platform chipset for cheap and common hardware, instead of billions advertising. That is, a platform for current hardware they assure will exist, for running linux or any other alternetive if M$ happen to lock everything else.

------
Mario Marques

Perceptions: Is Linux a suitable desktop platform? (DesktopLinux.com)

Posted Mar 3, 2003 18:51 UTC (Mon) by dbreakey (guest, #1381) [Link]

I've said this before, and I'll surely say it many more times…

Warning: Rant mode follows…

Linux is not quite ready for the mainstream desktop environment, although it gets closer every day. Mandrake, for instance, with the upcoming 9.1 release, has finally brought Linux to the point where the desktop is functionally equivalent to the typical Windows configuration, albeit with a much greater ability to adapt to the user's requirements (rather than requiring the user to adapt to it). Not that the Windows desktop is not configurable, but my perception, as well as that of my wife (a more non-technical person than most I have met), is that Linux, at least via the Gnome 2.2 desktop, is better able to adjust itself to the user's needs than Windows is.

As for other issues brought up both in the original article, and in the follow-up comments—most of them seem to be little more than uninformed rubbish (the author, at least, attempts to not impose his personal opinions on the matter). Mandrake 9.1 (cooker) has robust USB support; I routinely use a web-cam, scanner, printer, keyboard, and mouse. I still have not been able to get my UPS to be recognized, but I don't know whether that's a software or hardware issue. Another comment brought up by the Windows camp was that Linux did not support GDI Printers and Winmodems; is anyone here surprised at that?

Another comment stated that OpenOffice.org is substantially inferior to Microsoft Office; I'm not going to try and argue that—technically MS Office does have far more features and capabilities than OpenOffice.org; try and find someone, however, who actually uses even a fraction of those facilties, and compare it to those facilities offered by OpenOffice.org. I suspect you would find that OpenOffice.org offers, if not more, than nearly all of the capabilities that are typically exercised in MS Office.

The author did point out one valid item, however; the knowlege gap between the Linux and Windows camps does seem to be quite large. His Linux respondants consistently underrated, or simply didn't know about, available Windows offerings—his Windows respondants, however, were even worse, apparently not believing that Linux was in fact capable of several things even after he brought them to their attention (the key example that comes to mind is the network-transparency of the X server, after several respondants had claimed that Linux had nothing that even compared to PCAnywhere or Windows Terminal Services. Of course, he also pointed out that there are several Linux solutions that even interoperate with available Windows offerings, which apparently shocked them even more). Apparently, all they had known about was telnet.

Anyway, I think I'll shut up now…thank you for reading.

if ("AutoConfigureAbility" == "Functionality" then {UR_CLUELESS()}

Posted Mar 7, 2003 7:18 UTC (Fri) by torsten (guest, #4137) [Link]

dbreakey: (Mandrake 9.1) ...has finally brought Linux to the point where the desktop is functionally equivalent to the typical Windows configuration....

Hahaha. Oh yeah, baby. In Windows, I get MS Office, wget, cygnus, an X-server to leach run remote apps of the university servers, a compiler, an assembler, a complete set of cross-platform configure tools, a programming editor, a graphics manipulation package, a 3D rendering program, a quality email client with built-in spam tools, a light-weight 250kB browser to complement my heavyweight slugger, uncountable minor utilities, stability, perl, PHP, apache, a localhost mail handler (xmailer), video tools, video encoders, a system that boots in under a minute, source code, my choice of window managers, desktops from different vendors, choice of vendors, mailing lists where I can talk to the creators and developers of the software, where feature requests and bug reports are paid attention to, freedom to copy all the software to friends, freedom to share with friends, open file formats, .... Oh wait, I mentioned some development tools, I must not be running a "desktop." Hahahahahaha.

Linux left the Windows "typical" configuration long ago.

dbreakey: "the follow-up commentsmost of them seem to be little more than uninformed rubbish"

Hahahaha. LOL. Like your comment?

You are confusing Desktop with configuration and compatibility. In Windows, these may be "integrated" (Hahahaha), but in Linux, they are separated. I'm personally against the idea that we should design our work environment around the tools needed to configure that work environment. Who wants to endlessly configure shit?

As for the rest of your whining - configuration is not automatic. There are many reasons supporting this, try to research "determinant systems," and "security". Many Linux people actually see autoconfiguration as a hindrance. Compatibility is weak - do you know who is responsible for this? (Hint, they sold you the useless device. You bought the useless device from them.) Don't like to rant at those who are really responsible, do you? Because unlike me, they don't listen. Do they?

And Windows? How many time have I reinstalled the same device, reinstalled drivers, removed the drivers, rebooted, reinstalled the OS from scratch..... If I only had a nickel!

The functinoality of an operating system does not lie in it's ability to autoconfigure itself.

Hahahahah.

Torsten

if ("AutoConfigureAbility" == "Functionality" then {UR_CLUELESS()}

Posted Mar 13, 2003 17:15 UTC (Thu) by dbreakey (guest, #1381) [Link]

Perhaps I am simply viewing it strictly from the point of view of the "average user" (not that I've ever actually found one).

Many users, especially those used to the Windows paradigm, do not look significantly beyond the glitz and gloss of the initial desktop environment; in that regard alone, Linux has finally become functionally equivalent to a typical Windows configuration (sorry, I probably should have stated that more explicitly).

I happen to like auto-configuration tools for the simple fact that I just don't feel like wasting my time managing trivial details (such as how to properly configure my USB scanner whenever I plug it in). If you do, you must spend a great deal of time doing so; if you enjoy that, then great. Personally, I'd rather get on with something more useful.

The fact is, that Linux is finally reaching the same degree, and type of flexibility that made me love the Amiga computer; this was a machine that was infinitely configurable by those who had the knowledge and desire to do so, but at the same time was smart enough to be able to be used by people who had no interest in that level of detail.

Linux has long enjoyed the flexibility—its Unix roots, after all, have proferred flexibility pretty much since day one. What Linux has lacked, until recently, is the ability to auto-configure itself—which I for one consider extremely useful (just because I can edit config files and hand-tweak it to the smallest degree doesn't mean I want to). This has been one of the major items holding Linux back from wide-spread adoption, and it is no longer.

Auto-configuration is not a hinderance, and I have personally found very few who believe it is, whether in person or in newsgroups. What is a hinderance is the removal of the ability to manually reconfigure—in other words, complete reliance on auto-configuration is the hinderance, and that is where Windows ultimately falls apart.