Desktop Linux's Future

[David]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 12:11:43AM -0500, John Lambrechts wrote:
> The following is a quote from timdorr on Neowin.net, 
> "

snip

> maintain only an open-source set of software on Linux machines. Also, I
> still think desktop Linux sucks (the quality, non-beta software selection
> is less than even my Mac), so it's like eating filet mignot covered in
> dung. You may have one of the best meats to eat, but it's still wrapped in
> crap.
> "
> I would like to hear everyones point of view on this statement and what
> the future of desktop linux holds. The only thing I have yet to understand
> is what do companies and small businesses have to benefit from getting
> into the open source world? I just watched the video of Mark Shuttleworth
> talking at Debconf and he has a very interesting outlook but I still
> personally haven't seen the light in the desktop linux market.

I first got involved with Linux in 1996, when Win NT4 (just 
released) failed miserably to do what I wanted. Somebody set me up with 
Slackware, and it "just worked".

Back then, gnu/linux was a street in front of NT4 for a small business 
internet server. Pretty amazing for something that was invented in 1991. 
Since then the critical mass for servers has continued to swing in favour 
of gnu/linux, and now I can't think of any sane reason to use WinXX for 
THAT purpose.

On the desktop, the critical mass falls heavily the other way. The killer 
apps.are all on Windows - games, Office, etc. Macintosh gets them by 
default, because Microsoft couldn't afford for Apple NOT to have Office - 
remember the anti-trust case in which Microsoft was actually convicted but 
never punished. Apple survives because it has a graphics/music niche and 
still gets Office from Microsoft. Gnu/Linux survives because it wins hands 
down on servers. 

Because of the monopoly, manufacturers can't afford NOT to play 
Microsoft's game. They will always release drivers or applications updates 
for the latest Microsoft because it's suicide not to. At the same time the 
moguls are playing hardball on so called "IP" and patents.

OTOH, they don't have to play the Gnu game (release hardware specs for 
instance) and for that matter they don't even have to play the Apple game, 
and often don't.

If Gnu/Linux eventually gets to the critical mass - perhaps 15-20% of real 
user desktops? - things will begin to change. For that to happen, lots of 
nice enthusiastic people have to take the trouble to write and refine lots 
of things like OO and drivers and video codecs. That represents a lot of 
altruism. Personally I think that will happen one day, but in the 
meantime, things creak along slowly. I can now use Ubuntu as a desktop, 
and I have two installed at work for staff and clients to do simple tasks. 
Oddly, I haven't even had any one ask me what the system is! I regard that 
as a good sign.

This has nothing to do with the quality of the product. On servers, 
Gnu/Linux wins hands down and has done for years. Other *nix are fine too, 
but are slowly losing share from what i can see. Mac OSX is still far 
superior to WinXP as a base desktop operating system but is not picking up 
much market share. It's the old VHS/Beta story all over. FUD.

I was a programmer in the late 1960's, when IBM ruled the world. It wasn't 
the best product, but you didn't get sacked for buying it no matter how 
much better other products were. IBM wasn't the invulnerable fortress 
everyone thought, and neither is M$. Evolution is a wonderful thing. Just 
don't expect it to happen at the next sunrise.

PS: none of this has to do with price. I pay for MacOS and lots of other 
software, including shareware and FOSS. It costs far more to maintain than 
it does to buy no matter what you use.