Is Linux ready for the desktop? [LWN.net]

From:		"Jay R. Ashworth" <jra@baylink.com>
To:		letters@lwn.net
Subject:		Is Linux ready for the desktop?
Date:		Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:30:18 -0400

That's the question asked (and supposedly answered) in an article linked from this week's LWN.

But as far as I can see, that's not the real issue.

Check out this piece from the Inquirer, which points out that "Windows 2004" (aka Longhorn) will be *completely backwards incompatible* with everything, ever.

If this turns out to be, in fact, accurate, then that's going to serve as a tipping point for Linux. If you have to throw out everything you own *anyway*, then what do you want to replace it all with? Programs that already exist and run on a rugged, reliable, secur(able) operating system with 30 years background?

Or the Next Big Thing from the people who brought you Windows 2.03?

And the time to be evangelising ISV's, folks, is *right now*. If you want to see Quicken2004 for Linux, and Turbo Tax, and all that kind of stuff, open your mouth! Write letters! Tell Intuit that you're not *going* to Win2004, and you'll have to switch to some other product if they don't support Linux. Tell 'em LSB makes it more practical than ever before.

Remind them that multiple distros aren't *that* scary -- they already have to support Win3 (in some cases) and 4 95's and 2 98's and ME and 4 NT's and 2 XP's and...

Make some noise. It's another opportunity to change the world.

But hell... what do I know? Maybe it's just me.

So many things are just me...

Cheers,

-- jra

-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra@baylink.com
Member of the Technical Staff     Baylink                             RFC 2100
The Suncoast Freenet         The Things I Think
Tampa Bay, Florida        http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

   "If you don't have a dream; how're you gonna have a dream come true?"
     -- Captain Sensible, The Damned (from South Pacific's "Happy Talk")

(Log in to post comments)

Is Linux ready for the desktop?

Posted Apr 17, 2003 15:31 UTC (Thu) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]

Fine, sure; dropping DOS and maybe even Win3 compatibility.

But Win9x? 2k? X-fercrissake-*P*?

That's what I'm hearing so far; if someone's lying to me, I'll be happy to hear about it...

Nope; making you replace all your hardware every 2 years isn't enough for Redmond anymore; they wanna make you toss *ALL* your software too.

Unh unh... not in my body.

Is Linux ready for the desktop?

Posted Apr 17, 2003 17:04 UTC (Thu) by ericbr (guest, #5904) [Link]

As I read the article, I get the feeling that Longhorn won't run on current PCs - you'll need a hardware upgrade to run Longhorn.

But I can't believe that anybody at Microsoft is stupid enough to toss compatibility with Win32 (9x/2k/xp). Nobody's going to buy an OS that requires entirely new software.

Besides, Microsoft hasn't shipped new SDKs for this supposed new API, and Microsoft knows that they can't make a successful OS without third-party support.

So, my conclusion is that this supposed software incompatibility isn't going to happen.

Is Linux ready for the desktop?

Posted Apr 17, 2003 22:04 UTC (Thu) by mbcook (subscriber, #5517) [Link]

Well, dropping everything is just what Intel would want, I'd bet. Their biggest problem with a desktop version of the Itanic would be the terrible 32bit performance. If the OS forced you to use all new software and you couldn't run a single older program, this wouldn't be a problem because you'd be running all 64bit code.

Longhorn will arrive at about the same time as the desktop Itanic (assuming Hammer doesn't cause Intel into a spiral and clawing for market with a hurried release of the Yamhill (that was their supposed x86-64 right?)). I base the Longhorn release date on how long MS tends to delay things and the fact that it would be convient for this theory. I know, not scientific.

Just a little conspiracy theory. ;)

Is Linux ready for the desktop?

Posted Apr 17, 2003 22:05 UTC (Thu) by mbcook (subscriber, #5517) [Link]

That's a good point about dropping EVERYTHING. I meant it more as "dropping everything BEFORE WIN32." Which would still include all native Win9x/2k/XP programs.

Is Linux ready for the desktop?

Posted Apr 19, 2003 15:13 UTC (Sat) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]

yes, but if the piece is to be believed, *they* do *not* mean that: they mean *everything*.