The age of the Linux desktop [LWN.net]

Not that long ago the Giga Group - not one of the more friendly analysts-for-hire out there - warned businesses to stay away from desktop Linux until 2005. More to the point, desktop Linux has long been regarded as a distant dream, even by many strong Linux supporters. It is commonly assumed that Linux is still far from where it needs to be to move out of the server and onto the desks of "ordinary people."

The Giga Group may be right that it will take another year or two before Linux is a common and safe choice for desktop deployments. For everybody who does not seek permission from analysts, however, desktop Linux is becoming a viable option rather sooner.

Consider, for example, the deployment of 80,000 desktop Linux systems in Extremadura, Spain. Linux and the GNOME desktop were considered to be more than good enough for students across the region; Linux systems were also used to set up 33 centers for general use.

Or consider CorelRescue, a shareholder effort to block the acquisition of Corel by Vector CC Holdings. This group, which claims to have over four million shares committed to voting against the acquisition, believes that Corel would be better off to continue as an independent company and reinvigorate its Linux desktop efforts - especially WordPerfect. Tux was even drafted as the group's logo.

For the clincher, consider this Business Week article about Apple, which happens to mention the following:

Long maligned as a desktop nonstarter, Linux should pass Apple in market share for desktop operating systems on computers sold in the coming year. That means from 7% to 10% of all PCs shipped won't bear the Windows icon.

Apple's MacOS is generally considered to be the most advanced desktop operating system out there. That perception may not change, but the fact is that users are voting with their keyboards. Linux will displace MacOS as the second most popular desktop operating system within the year.

Once, not all that long ago, Linux was considered to be a toy system suitable only for hobbyists. Over time, Linux has proved its worth in many contexts, from personal video recorders to supercomputers - a Linux cluster is now the third fastest computer on the planet. Success on the desktop has taken longer, but it is now within reach. Nobody can say that a system which has surpassed Apple in the marketplace is not suitable for the desktop.

(Log in to post comments)

The age of the Linux desktop

Posted Jun 26, 2003 19:07 UTC (Thu) by asburke (guest, #5091) [Link]

what you envision is precisely what cannot
happen because MS is a monopoly and will
not permit it. Unfortunately, in the short
run, but fortunately in the long run, folks
must choose Mac or Linux or MS, not all.
It some point of critical mass, folks will
abandon MS in large numbers and then
your vision will come about.

The age of the Linux desktop

Posted Jun 29, 2003 22:43 UTC (Sun) by barryn (subscriber, #5996) [Link]

For Dell, this is already the case in at least some markets. For instance, look at this:

http://www.dell.com/us/en/hied/topics/sbtopic_360_precn_kat.htm

The age of the Linux desktop

Posted Jul 3, 2003 16:16 UTC (Thu) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

Have no illusions:

In 2005 there aint gonna be choice for commom users between Windows or Linux or other OS for the same machine!... as you ca see in the URLs down, plans are going to

http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit029.html#palladium
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107-992425.html

MAKE A WINDOWS ONLY MACHINE, THAT WOULDNT BOOT OTHER OSes !...

This Giga report is obnoxious in the sense that it hides the truth, playing with an plausible carefull opinion... of course the "FRITZ" chip by itself wont stop anyone from installing Linux... BUT FORGET ABOUT MEDIA PALYERS, .NET TRUSTED (.NOT) M$ ENABLED SITES, VMWARE OR WINE TO RUN M$ TRUSTED APPLICATIONS( including OFFICE)... have no illusions..

Also Dell, HP,etc... are not leaders in the "PERSONAL" COMPUTER business, they are followers:

Infortunately i dont have a URl to show, but i almost can make a bet that i saw an article somewhere (reliable) that stated that 60% off all PC in the world were from "WHITE" lines...so...

PRE-INSTALLED LINUX FROM BIG BRANDS IS NOT THAT IMPORTANT FOR A LONG TIME !...WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT IS HARDWARE DRIVER SUPPORT !...

And that is the real trick!... how the driver model in Linux is going to evolve to permit the industry support near to that of Windows without collapsing the Linux kernel under is own weight !!...

HARDWARE DRIVERS IN THE FORM OF KERNEL ONLY LOADABLE MODULES ARE DEAD !...

..or is that hard to imagine a kernel that offers similar hardware support than Windows but witch sources are near 1 Gig, and took 4, 5 or 6 years to get to the stable series ??.

The age of the Linux desktop

Posted Jun 26, 2003 2:56 UTC (Thu) by cpeterso (guest, #305) [Link]

I think the difference between Apple and Linux desktops is the users. I don't think many businesses have Apple desktops. Businesses that have Windows desktops are looking for a way to ditch Microsoft. Linux desktops will be easy for admins to configure and LOCK DOWN, something that is very difficult with Windows or Mac OS.

So Linux desktops will surpass Apple because a small piece of a HUGE pool (small and big business users) is still bigger than Apple's small piece of a small pool (home and education users).

This is good news for Linux, but probably bad news for usability. Those corporate desktop users will have to grin and bear it until GNOME and KDE catch up to Mac OS X. :)

The age of the Linux desktop

Posted Jun 26, 2003 14:43 UTC (Thu) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

Those corporate desktop users will have to grin and bear it until GNOME and KDE catch up to Mac OS X. :)

In what areas do you think Gnome and KDE come up short compared to OS X?

I went to CompuUSA a while back just so I could spend a few minutes playing with OS X to see what it was like. It's appearance is very polished, but I found it very primitive in areas such as manipulating windows on the desktop. It's not the sort of environment that would make working with a half-dozen xterms very much fun. It gives up a lot in usabilty for the sake of providing a friendly environment for novice users.

The age of the Linux desktop

Posted Jun 27, 2003 1:03 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link]

I think the difference between Apple and Linux desktops is the users. I don't think many businesses have Apple desktops

I don't know either, but from what I see in movies and on TV, it looks like lots of busineses have iMacs. Who can blame them? Think of the money spent on training and technical support?

Of course, not much of anyone has Apple desktops, but business seems to have as much a share as of Windows.