Sponsors announced for Desktop Linux Summit 2004 [LWN.net]

red hat on the desktop

Posted Feb 4, 2004 4:30 UTC (Wed) by mattdm (subscriber, #18) [Link]

Despite what you may have read on Slashdot, Red Hat never said anything like that. Here's the article that started all the silliness: http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5101690.html. And here's the relevant bit, emphasis mine:

Matthew Szulik, chief executive of Linux vendor Red Hat, said on Monday that although Linux is capable of exceeding expectations for corporate users, home users should stick with Windows: "I would say that for the consumer market place, Windows probably continues to be the right product line," he said. "I would argue that from the device-driver standpoint and perhaps some of the other traditional functionality, for that classic consumer purchaser, it is my view that (Linux) technology needs to mature a little bit more."

That's a very realistic and should-be noncontroversial statement, which fits in pretty well with what people like, say, Linus Torvalds, have been saying.

In fact, Red Hat very much wants to emphasize Linux on the desktop. That's why they sell this.

red hat on the desktop

Posted Feb 7, 2004 11:49 UTC (Sat) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link]

Red Hat may have never said the specific words "Linux isn't ready for the
desktop", no, but "Windows probably continues to be the right product" comes
close enough for me. How ANYONE that considers themselves a Linux
booster, as certainly RH should, given they are selling the product, could say
THAT, I don't know. Recommending the product I've come to call
"MSWormOS" is simply irresponsible, in my view.

OK, so perhaps Linux is NOT ready for the desktop in their view. What
then, other than recommending "MSWormOS"?

Well, it's NOT like there aren't other alternatives. Recommending OSX, tho
I'm certainly no Mac user, would be more reasonable and responsible, IMO.

OTOH, for the non-gamer at least home user, who has fairly simple needs,
one of the low-end $200 Thiz Linux computers, or something similar, might
be worthwhile. Or, for those that want/need the hand-holding and don't mind
paying a bit more for it, Lindows, even if all they are doing for the most part
as far as software goes is selling a customized but stripped down Linux with a
bunch of open source available but Lindows pre-packaged add-on solutions
available at an extra per-package or subscription type fee. Part of that extra
fee goes to pay for what folks are REALLY buying in such a situation, the
hand-holding, and the familiar comfort of prepackaged software, for those a
bit hesitant to jump straight into the open source free-for-all.

Compare that to recommending that a user continue paying the MSWormOS
tax, continue to be part of the problem, rather than the solution, both in what
they support with their $$ and with the worms and etc they continue to spread
from their designed-to-be-insecure (aka ease of use over security) on the
network we all share, continue to accept that "XPrivacy" and "Anti-Privacy"
as a policy is actually tolerable...

I just don't see how someone actually aware of the issues can out and SAY
stick with MSWormOS. I might grudgingly accept that folks may prefer to do
so, just as I know that folks will continue to click on malware even tho
they've read a hundred times that they shouldn't, but simply don't CARE
enough to actually become informed enough about the situation to know and
do the right thing themselves, that's reality. However, that's FAR different
from recommending that people actually go out and DO it, which is what RH
is quoted as doing in the above link, and what Linus specifically did NOT do,
in the above link quoting him. (He accepted the reality that it'd be a few
years before folks started switching their home desktops, but did NOT say it's
better for them to stick with MSWormOS until then, as did RH.)

Duncan