Linux Not Just For Geeks Anymore (Forbes.com)

Posted Jul 17, 2002 15:00 UTC (Wed) by DeletedUser2025 ((unknown), #2025) [Link]

<SARCASM>
And of course, business profitability is the only way that you can judge the value of something.
</SARCASM>

Actually, I was surprised that the article was as balanced as it was. It mentioned the "market" penetration of Linux, the big companies that are supporting and marketing Linux, and even said that Linux is "low-cost software that's functional, flexible, based on standards and has lots of technical support." That's a far cry from what the movers and shakers were saying about Linux a few years ago.

Posted Jul 17, 2002 15:55 UTC (Wed) by garym (guest, #251) [Link]

I don't accept the "poor pitiful me" scenarios that blame all dot-bombs on cosmic forces. Let's face facts: Linux distros tanked by no one's fault but their own. After all, as software companies, they get the lion's share of their dev costs handed to them for free! Let's take some responsibility.

So, if Linux popularity is soaring, why are distros in the red? A serendipidous sidebar on this LWN post contained a Mandrake advert that boasts "Professional and easy-to-use Linux products for enterprises and individuals." A nice sentiment, but is it true? I find it at best misleading because of odd twists to their definitions:

"Professional"

they probably mean "we sell it" rather than any measure of the suitability of their software for use by professionals (ie lawyers, doctors and other white-collar non-technical staff). How many doctors do you know who have customized their Windows desktop or spent hours installing customized voicemail/fax applications? Approximately none.

Real people want ready-to-run software so they can use their computers, they don't tinker with them. They will stare at an HP-logo background image for years without bothering to set it, and how often do you see the default flying-windows screensaver? If we look at the contents of the 3CD Mandrake set, the vast majority of wares are tinker-ware, infinitely configurable to your slightest skin-whim, cool toys aimed at geeks ... surprise surprise, geeks don't buy software, they roll their own. Professional people buy predictability and convenience, not flexibility. Look at the Mac. QED.

Even on the server side, Linux excells at a Unix installation which was wonderful for 1995. Web apps mix and match PostgreSQL and MySQL, Perl, Python and whatever, only some of them able to leverage professional legacy systems. If "professional" means "professionally trained and experienced MIS people on staff or on contract" then there is no problem, but if the same company buys NT, they are miles ahead; they can just go to the local Business Depot and buy a CD of cheap commodity expertise.

Professional people also expect professional-quality software; with almost all Linux distros, many (like the gnome time tracker and address book, or Medusa or shopping carts or ...) are preview releases which barely function. Even when software is installed by default and advertised on the box, it's no indication that it is "best of breed" ... or even functional.

"Easy-to-use"

yes, it installs pretty fine, if you don't mind a dozen "cool" scripting languages or LaTeX viewers --- who uses Haskell? in the office? what does "Gnome version of Ghostview" mean to a legal secretary? --- and if you don't mind a default start-button that includes triplicates of some applications. It installs easy, if you understand the questions, but how many times do you install your O/S? About once? And yes, KDE and Sawfish with OpenOffice/Mozilla are a pretty seamless jump for a Win2k user on MsOffice and MSIE, but it gets pretty fuzzy after that as some apps drag and drop, others don't, some cut and paste with the mouse, others use CUA conventions, some use /usr/lib, some use /usr/share ... Diversity and choice are Good Things(tm) but they detract from usability. Much better to restrict choices to a few things, and then do them well.

"Enterprises"

this term usually means big businesses like accounting firms or factories. Ok, StarOffice is included, but where is the wizard that hooks it to your Oracle database? Where is the Outlook/Exchange client? Will a GM exec really use PostgreSQL Access? If the enterprise is a software-vendor enterprise, no problem, each desktop will have the skills and teresterone to make the software do the job, but in a sheet-metal shop? They will likely ask for their MsAccess/Excel back, go buy a copy of Powerhouse and just put up with the bluescreens.

"Individuals"

there are individuals who like Mandrake Linux. I am one of them, and I've used Mandrake exclusively since 6.0, but I'm aware enough of the real world not to go recommending it to just any individual. For a geek, for someone who wants to control their computer and have a real voice in how their software is built and distributed, MandrakeSoft are great people to deal with. For everyone else I recommend OS/X.

Why OS/X? Because I hate Windows and OS/X is the only viable alternative. Go buy an portable MP3 player, a random webcam or digital video cameral or joystick, and see if you can get it talking to Mandrake inside of a minute, then try just running the vendor CD in windows. If you have the drive and devotion, most things are possible, but most individuals have better things to do.

Then there's the sad fact of conspiracies, even if accidental, where critically important services subvert the unMicrosoft. I recently left the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (www.cfib.ca) because their membership directory only accepts MSIE browsers and I didn't want to go buy a Windows machine just to be a member. CFIB is not alone, and like most of the others, when I report the bug I'm told it will be fixed "someday" ... There are rumours this MSIE-hook is not intentional, but a side-effect of website construction tools, and even Netscape co-founder Jim Clark is now bowing to the pressure of such tools, and excluding those outside the Microsoft fold. Mozilla fans (apologists) will say the MSIE-only site is at fault for non-standard Javascript, just as Fetchmail will say the spammer's broken email headers are at fault, but excluding ourselves over standards cuts our nose to spite our face. We need to be more forgiving and swallow our pride a bit; to rule the individuals, we must learn to serve their needs.

I'm getting pretty depressed about this. OS/X leads people back into the dark ages of overpriced software under lock and key, but it works. Apple has retained everything people loved about the Mac while opening their world to the wonders of Unix. Meanwhile we sit around making 3D monkey icons and bloated Explorer clones to copy every mistaken Microsoft nuance, and each distro swells to more and more CDs of 0.x pre-beta junk; cathedral and bazaar is starting to describe the orderliness of our wares and the barker-ness of our pitch as much as it describes how we work.

I know a lot of you won't like it, but IMHO, Linux distros shoot themselves in the foot trying to be all things to all people. When you hold a bow, you don't hold two arrows, and when you craft a distro, it's either a geek audience or it's everybody else, or you pare it down to the minimal common ground and let them make all those choices post-install (which is the Windows distro method). Trying to please everyone ends up not really pleasing anyone.

What we need is a new mean and lean distro that understands how people use computers. If someone wants more "cool" software and 4 Dialup managers, well that's what the internet is for; write tools to help them find, fetch and install the extras (and charge where you can for the convenience). We need a minimal-capabilities distro that is rock-solid with no configuration conflicts, reliably installable without requiring any post-install tweaking (the old SGI Indy installed with one question, your hostname). Home-user installation should not be asking non-technical people questions they can't understand and menu prompts should not be trying to make the "uninitiated" feel stupid. We (sadly) also need a distro with either Win4Lin or a good Mac emulator so "individuals" can shop for their software at Business Depot just like everybody else, and so they can use vendor install CDs. We also need a distro that takes a stand on Gnome OR kde so it can do one thing and do it well, and we need a distro that fits on one easy to duplicate and easy to install CD to maximize the traditional viral spread of installations.

So if things are so bad, why is interest in Linux soaring while the vendors tank? I think it is because Linux itself serves the need for the traditional old boring backroom services, but the vendors are all still trying to be all things to all people. Thus business downloads their own bits because no vendor gives them what they actually need, and the vendors are barking up the wrong tree wondering why no one is buying.

Who will be the first distro to "get it" about how the mainstream actually uses their computers? They have to choose who they want to serve, whether its the geek fan-base, the professional MIS, or everyone else. The MIS distro is probably already IBM/RedHat or the cross-product of the Uniteds. Who's likely to move us into the mainstream of the office and (or) individual? I don't know, maybe Lindows, I'd like to think MandrakeSoft will wake up, or Walmart, or it could even be RedHat under an IBM edict, or maybe even me, forced to put up or shut up. But until that happens, much as we may not like it, I see only red ink and dusty distro boxes on the Futureshop shelves, and Linux stuck back in the dev shops, embeddeds and in rackmounts.