[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Has Desktop Linux Missed its Opportunity? here

[sevenhuman]

I've been listening to this Linux Desktop nonsense for a decade now. It's not a good idea, it never was. I hope that no one succeeds in homogenizing Linux so that uneducated users can feel comfortable. It's a consumer minded idea that goes against the open source paradigm.
Linux is NOT a user OS. If the goal is to web surf, make spread sheets, play video games and watch movies, there's already an OS for that.

[Maarek]

Open Source is frankly... open. The IT staff is currently trained for Windows and not linux so a cost in training users is another consideration.

Another reason, people are "afraid" of change. If they know how to do something for a long time, than why change it on them? You can make linux look and act like Windows, but there are still things that are different and a commandline use is necessary for some circumstances.

In the business environment, you'll find more linux PCs than a MAC. A MAC is a personal computer, not a business computer. It limits customization which is what PCs allow users to do.

Tough luck Apple, Linux will grow faster than MACs in the business world. Look at IBM and their AIX os, that's a UNIX os with a Linux feel running the most stable OS that can run for years without a reboot. Windows can barely run for weeks.

[wirehead]

I recently looked at both Fedora 10 (Red Hat)and THE Ubuntu 9.04 beta. Both are superior to XP Pro and the unreliable Vista. They come bundled with all of the applications you need to do just about anything you can do on a Windows PC. I get OS and application updates every day, I have a free Linux newsreader and AV software. Microsoft Office has few advantages over OpenOffice. Printing was a problem in the past, but not any longer. The Ximian Evolution email client is superior to Outlook Express and equivalent to Outlook. The only downside to Linux is games. Microsoft has a clear advantage there.
Most businesses could use the desktop version in their businesses and save thousands of dollars. The Linux servers are more complex and require a lot of command line work and compiling of applications.

[Envergure]

Desktop Linux has come a long way in the last 10-15 years, and all that way it was used by a meagre fraction of 1% of the market. Personally, I think it's a success despite its relative unpopularity. It's the easiest OS to program on (as opposed to "complex" rather than "free from effort") IMO and is infinitely more customizable than Windows or OS X.
I have used Ubuntu since 5.10, and I'm going to miss it in September when I'm forced to use Windows by my university.

[JimH443]

I've said this about the change from XP to Vista, but the same holds true for any OS. The response to the following question is a clear indicator as to whether or not a change is justified: What compelling advantage is there to changing to the new OS?
It would seem that the article answers this question by saying "Under the best circumstances it can be as good as Windows, and it's free."
Well - my current OS >IS< as good as Windows, and from a practical perspective it's also free (since it's already paid for).
Give me something I want that I don't already have.
And this "cloud" talk is nonsense, for 5 years at the very least. Maybe some day, but I don't see it becoming mainstream before 2020.

[chestnut1969]

For me, one thing stops me using Linux on my desktop - Applications.
I have very specific application requirements for work, that I cannot run under Linux.
For the time being, Linux sits happily as my HTPC OS of choice..

[spaceboy909]

I disagree with those that say Linux is ready for the desktop. Of course, when I say desktop, I'm not referring to niche workstations with on site tech support. I'm thinking 'personal desktop'.
There are still far too many issues with end user desktops.
But I also disagree that Linux will 'never make it'. I don't really see any reason why it won't eventually 'get there', but I do think it will be at least another 10 years, and it may never achieve more than moderate success.
Work on the desktop continues to move forward, albeit at a snails pace compared to proprietary software. Every new driver that is written, every bug that is fixed, every new GUI introduced and every UI enhancement opens the door to another handful of users, and attract more developers as the potential becomes more obvious.

[spaceboy909]

....this form just trashed my post, so I'll keep this one brief.
I still think Linux has a shot, but for end user desktops, I'd say at least another 10 years, to play catch up with the drivers, fix the resource issues (is anyone even looking at these?), and, for the love of God, get the apps spruced up so that they look and function somewhere near the proprietary level!
Linux is loaded down with too many ugly, clunky, bare bones apps.

[spaceboy909]

This is my 3rd attempt at a post. First two were trashed.
Should I blame Pcworld, or Firefox?

[JimH443]

I'm using Firefox and I see them just fine.

I think I may know what you experienced while trying to post, though. Eariler today when I submitted my post to this article, I thought PCWorld trashed it. However, when I closed out that tab and used the link in email that brought me to this article, my post was right there where it was supposed to be.

[spaceboy909]

Ok, thanks. I see them now!

[drrexx]

Somehow I feel like I have read this article 50 times during the last 10 years. Yet, Linux does not seem to go away... Ironically, this article is posted on the same day as another article entitled "Microsoft, R.I.P." Overall, this reflects a very US-centric view. While the Linux desktop may be struggling to achieve critical mass in the US, it is extremely more popular in other markets, both at the enterprise level and at the end-user level.

[apexwebmaster]

Yes it is true that Linux requires some up front learning. But, didn't we all have to learn Windows the first time? Many do not see the many benefits of open source, as this article clearly states. Many hardware vendors such as Dell and HP are (and have been) selling servers and desktops with Linux. But this isn't enough. Companies need to know about the high value of Linux, especially when compared to Windows. Yes it's easier to stay with Microsoft products, but in the long run you will end up eating up way more time, money, and resources.

This post has been edited by smax013: 04 October 2009 - 12:15 PM
Reason for edit:: Removed self-promotional/external link

[JimH443]

apexwebmaster said:

Many do not see the many benefits of open source, as this article clearly states.

Yes, but what is rarely mentioned are the disadvantages. Anyone with (1) access to the source code, (2) knowledge of programming/compiling and (3) access to the computer can make malicious changes to the software that would be difficult, if not darn near impossible, to detect.

For the home user this is usually not an issue. But for a company (such as a financial institution) this potentially opens a Pandora's box. Here is the situation I envision. I admit I've never worked in a corporate IT position, so I don't know how realistic this is, but the thought scares me:

If one of their "less than honest" IT employees is knowledgeable about programming adds code to the OS and loads it onto the system... only that employee will know what it does.

[bbneo2]

Don't miss your chance to try Linux...

I won't try to argue that using Linux is "pain free", but it is probably no more painful in the end than Windows systems, and you are investing some time into learning some interesting things about operating systems.

Last year, I had a 3-4 month period of time where I had a 1 hour commute to work each way, and I started getting familiar with Linux (becausing Vista problems were driving me nuts!). I listened to Chess Griffins's "LinuxReality" Podcast, and he took me from burning ISO's through partitioning hard drives, etc.

I already had had quit a bit of "user" experience with unix command lines, so the occasional administrative matters of installation don't scare me... for example, with each new kernel update of fedora, it resets the grub bootloader file default to restart into Linux. I always change that boot file back so that my systems boot into Windows, so as not to panic the wife and kids.

(In a terminal window: su
passwd: xxxx cd /boot/grub, vi menu.lst, ... I know vi...)

Debian was the most flexible in installation, but I decided to standardize on fedora and now have all of my machines on fedora 10 dual booting.

There are some amazing softwares out there for free for Linux... OpenOffice is great, Firefox is fine, just installed a Doom implementation the other day, and a really neat kids physics demo called "Numpty Physics" which applies physics gravity/collision models to 2 dimensional drawings you can make...

It took 2 years for my Vista machine to stabilize to the point where I can actually depend on it a little. Oy!

[ronww]

I have the MS-only extreme and the MS-what's-that middle of the road in my family. My sister is the If-it's-not-MS-I-have-no-use-for-it type. This despite the fact both I and her son have rescued her MS Office documents using Open Office. Her son, on the other hand, is oblivious to the OS, prefers FireFox and thinks Open Office is great. Otherwise, all he looks at is the brand of the PC. Even after after his hard disk died and I replaced it (and had to put Linux on it, because the recovery "disk" was really a recovery partion), his PC is still an "HP". He literally does not notice the difference (even the the menus are a little different). It's got Open Office, FireFox, GIMP and a photo album manager, so he's happy. At his work, they already used open source apps that were available on both, so nobody there notices that the new PCs my cousen sold them run Linux. They're just happy to be paying a lower price.
(Even the loyal Mac users in my family have no trouble using Linux. They just strongly prefer their Macs.)
Ironically, it is me who is stuck with MS at work - because of one specialized technical application that only runs on MS. But I do have a 2nd PC, there, running Linux. No one there has noticed I am using Open Office. And they thanked me for introducing them to Dia, which exports to Visio XML format, so customers are none the wiser. (Note: I have noticed that PDFs are increasingly preferred by our customers, so format issues occur less often.)
From my observations, the everyday office user will have little trouble switching to Linux.

[WinTard]

I disagree that Desktop Linux Missed its Opportunity.

What opportunity?

Opportunity to capture market share? Linux users don't care about market share.

Opportunity to make money? Linux isn't about making money.

All the benefits of Linux come from the freedom and empowerment it gives to end-users.

A bit like taking a guided tour, versus going out on your own, exploring nature. Personally, I'd much rather fly into a country, rent a vehicle, and go off on my own, instead of following a pre-packaged tour bus.

For me Linux is about discovery and knowledge. My Linksys routers use Linux. My HP Media Vault runs on Linux. Many set-top units run on Linux. I'm not sure about this one, that I stumbled onto this morning, but also suspect it runs on Linux.

Quote

Google: Results 1 - 10 of about 8,680 for WD TV HD MEDIA PLAYER (WDAVN00BN). (0.32 seconds)


http://www.wdc.com/e...sp?driveid=572]

>
> File Formats Supported
> Music - MP3, WMA, OGG, WAV/PCM/LPCM, AAC, FLAC, Dolby Digital, AIF/AIFF, MKA
>
> Photo - JPEG, GIF, TIF/TIFF, BMP, PNG
> Video -MPEG1/2/4, WMV9, AVI (MPEG4, Xvid, AVC), H.264, MKV, MOV (MPEG4, H.264),
> MTS, TP, TS
> Playlist - PLS, M3U, WPL
> Subtitle -SRT (UTF-8), SMI, SUB, ASS, SSA
> Note:
> * MPEG2/4, H.264, and WMV9 supports up to 1920x1080p 24fps, 1920x1080i 30fps, 1280x720p 60fps resolution
> * An audio receiver is required for surround sound output. AAC/Dolby Digital decodes in 2 channel output only
> * JPEG does not support CMYK or loss less.
> * BMP supports uncompressed format only.
> * TIF/TIFF supports single layer only.
About $100 at Costco or $120 at Best Buy. Now if that unit had a Gigabit-Ethernet RJ-45 port, I'd go buy it right now!^1

Well, I'm looking for a FLAC player.

Or I could turn my old Xbox into an [Xbox Media Center, also supporting FLAC without sacrificing a PC for that.

Quote

Linux isn't about replacing the desktop. Linux is about fun first and foremost (FFF), flexibility and surprise! :D

Linux is the glue that binds all PC's together! (Mac included) ;)

And Linux is doing extremely well, and has a bright and prosperous future looking ahead!!!

As for the working life, I'll leave that to Windows. But I don't live to work, I work to live and have FUN!

h4. FFF LLL

Long Live Linux! Yay! B-)

~~~~~~~~~~
It's fun to be tarded...
~ WinTard

You know you are on the road to success if you would do your job, and not be paid for it.
~ Oprah Winfrey, American Talk Show Host/Actress/Entrepreneur

An intellectual is a person who has discovered something more interesting than sex.
~ Aldous Huxley

It's kind of fun to do the impossible.
~ Walt Disney

I never did a day's work in my life. It was all fun.
~ Thomas Edison

Work and play are words used to describe the same thing under differing conditions.
~ Mark Twain, 1835-1910, American Writer and Humorist

If you never did you should. These things are fun and fun is good.
~ Dr. Seuss

A business has to be involving, it has to be fun, and it has to exercise your creative instincts.
~ Richard Branson

I believe that one of life's greatest risks is never daring to risk.
~ Oprah Winfrey

-----
^1 The original Xbox does support optical out for multi-channel high-definition audio, has component video out 1920x1080, and Ethernet port! Currently runs Linux, but looks like my next fun project with XBMC. And um, it's free, since it has paid for itself many times over, not just playing video games but also discovery, knowledge-based intellectual games. And alas has been superceded by my two Xbox 360, and Sony PS3. Fun is a relative term.

[JimH443]

WinTard said:

I disagree that Desktop Linux Missed its Opportunity.

What opportunity?

Opportunity to capture market share?

Yes.


>Linux users don't care about market share.



Which explains why it missed the opportunity. Imagine where Microsoft would be today if it didn't care about market share.

Quote

Opportunity to make money? Linux isn't about making money.

Which explains why it doesn't care about market share.


Everything else you've said about Linux is true, but until it receives the necessary promotion it will remain an "also-ran" of the Operating System world. This is not to say it's not the best OS available at any price. All I'm saying is that the opportunity to become the most used home operating system was missed. The public seems to be embracing Win7, so it doesn't appear as if this opportunity is going to present itself again any time soon.

[waldojim]

Oh where to start... The author was smoking crack... but to be fair, most of the authors of this kind of garbage have to be...

"Meanwhile, leading Linux vendor Red Hat has "no plans" to deliver a mainstream desktop Linux distribution."

No crap, Red Hat got rid of the desktop line a long time ago. They are trying to bill themselves as a Business/Enterprise level OS. Fedora is whats left of RedHat Desktop. So can any one blame them if they decide not to re-enter a market they got out of?

"And even Novell, which markets a commercial desktop Linux distribution aimed at enterprise customers, says building a market for the OS among consumers will take years."
Again - an Enterprise company, did they not realize that OpenSuSE was a NOVELL supported product? No I do not expect to see Novell Linux Desktop available any time soon. Not that I care, since I CAN get SuSE. Why does the author make a point of asking enterprise OS companies to come up with a common desktop for you and I? I don't see him caring if Sun Solaris is brought to the masses (oh wait - it is free, and that IS enterprise class)

"If major Linux vendors aren't ready to put their full faith behind Linux on the desktop, who will?"
They are, just not under their own name any more. SuSE was bought out for use as an Enterprise System. RedHat split it off to retain a little separation as that seems to have helped them sell a product. Once again, this author is focused on the wrong businesses.

Market share: This would be how many copies of Linux have been purchased. Hmm... This concept seems oddly flawed when it comes to figuring out how many people use Linux. For the past several years I have downloaded every copy of Linux I run. This will not show up in those market reports. Does that mean that I do not run Linux though? We really need to find another way to check these stats, then they may figure out that more people use Linux than they ever thought.

"Just knowing when to switch can be tricky. Jumping ship to desktop Linux often means abandoning proprietary software licenses that have already been paid for."
The nice part about Linux, is you don't have to 'Jump Ship' you can dual boot for example, until your licensee either expires, or is replaced by a comparable alternative.
"Once the switch to open source is complete, the days of paying license fees will be over,"
Not entirely true. Proprietary software is what it is. Linux has some too. And you still have to buy them.

One final point. The article starts off questioning Home Desktop, or at least that is the implication. Because if the author intends to say there are no enterprise desktop distros, he is sadly mistaken
1. Red Hat Enterprise Desktop http://www.redhat.com/rhel/desktop/
2. Novel's SuSE Enterprise Desktop (SLED) http://www.novell.co...oducts/desktop/
3. Turbo Linux http://www.turbolinu...sktop/fuji.html
4. Xandros http://www.xandros.com/

If those aren't Enterprise desktops then what is?
Also - with the exception of Turbo Linux, ALL of those have a HOME desktop variant.

Can someone get an author that knows his topic please?