Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:15 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Linux "On June 15, Bill Gates announced that he would be retiring from Microsoft in July 2008, and everything changed. It may be two years away, but when a giant the size of Gates moves, the world moves with him. And, in that movement, in this period of change, Linux may have its best chance ever to seize the marketplace momentum from Microsoft."
Order by: Score:
Is Gates' Retirement Linux's Chance?
by Duffman on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:22 UTC
Duffman
Member since:
2005-11-23

Steve Ballmer is the CEO of Microsoft since many years. I don't see what, in the Gates' Retirement, will be a chance for linux.

Edited 2006-06-16 14:22

Reply Score: 5

chlordane Member since:
2006-05-11

I have to agree...

Microsoft has a strangle hold on the OS market...
I would LOVE to see open source software take some real market share, but I would be kidding myself if I say that Linux has a chance against the 400lb Gorilla that we all know as Microsoft...

There would need to be something very competitive in the works, like a TRUE option for a desktop OS for home users, and I am talking about people who come from a Windows background, not a programmer/hacker background....(people such as my mother).

(I didnt forget about Ubuntu)

I hope something good comes from Bill stepping down....

Reply Score: 1

Come again?
by rockwell on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:25 UTC
rockwell
Member since:
2005-09-13

this may be suprising to the author ... but MS employs more than one person. Gates leaving isn't going to change the face of desktop computing all that much.

Reply Score: 5

v This site is not called 'linux News'
by Harald on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:29 UTC
Ronald Vos Member since:
2005-07-06

Hey Professor, there's a BSD article on the front page directly underneath this article. If BSD had as many distros as Linux, I'm sure there'd be more mention of them. Your complaints are unjustified.

I believe the GP was referring to the article seeing Gates' retirement as a chance for Linux, as opposed to a chance for BSD/Syllable/SkyOS/Haiku/VisOpSys/Plan 9 or even OS X.

Reply Score: 2

No, not really
by moleskine on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:33 UTC
moleskine
Member since:
2005-11-05

No, not really. Like the recent article about Novell versus Microsoft, this is another one that wants a dramatic battle royal which isn't going to happen. According to the otherwise excellent SVN, with Gates leaving MS "Linux may have its best chance ever to seize the marketplace momentum from Microsoft." But it is not about seizing anything, imho. It is about quietly and methodically building a better product that will increase its share of the market because people feel it is worth it. Linux's market share doesn't have to grow that big before it becomes too large to be ignored and the MS monopoly grip is broken.

Besides, Gates isn't entirely going. He still gets to stay as chairman which also happens to mean string-puller in chief. More likely once Vista is out, imho, is the end of Ballmer.

Reply Score: 4

Sad soul, making this up
by duckie on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:41 UTC
duckie
Member since:
2006-04-10

That is one lame question. How many times has this been asked? First of all, linux will allways have a chance.

Linux, BSD, whatever opensource will get "the chance", when it fits the needs, and when people are ready for it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Sad soul, making this up
by chlordane on Sun 18th Jun 2006 02:07 UTC in reply to "Sad soul, making this up"
chlordane Member since:
2006-05-11

I dont know man, people have become consumers...
Microsoft knows how to sell an OS that has weak security, and low-stability....

How can anyone take market share from Microsoft?
How do you suppose Linux takes on Microsoft?

I would Love to see Linux gain in the Desktop OS world...

Dont misunderstand me, I am FreeBSD user, and I love Mac OS X, but Microsoft pretty much owns the Desktop OS market...

I would think Microsoft would merge with Apple before Linux gains any real market share...

What people need is choice and education....
maybe that would do it....
^_^

Reply Score: 1

It must be a slow day...
by sean batten on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:44 UTC
sean batten
Member since:
2005-07-06

...if things like this are being posted. I guess there's no Informit articles available today :-)

Reply Score: 3

de_wizze Member since:
2005-10-31

It's not like linux is defined by the progress of Windows ... there are other alternatives that are out there ... are was recently posted on this very site. As a matter of fact could it not be OSX's change? What is the definition of phishing?

Reply Score: 2

Quite the contrary
by diegocg on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:50 UTC
diegocg
Member since:
2005-07-08

Actually, Gates has been the direct responsible of many of the microsoft failures since he started being the chief software architect. The IE vs Firefox debacle, the Vista delay, .NET (mis)adoption (admitted by him), missing the services trend vs google....


Now Microsoft will be able to find a *better* replacement. Gates is a great directive (he's the richest man on the world) but he's not so great when it comes to technology and software development, he got that "chief software architect" job because he wanted it, not because he deserved it, and I bet the rest of directives don't even tried to convince him that he should left the job he wanted to have.

Microsoft will get stronger, not weaker. What the hell makes people think that Gates is the "heart" of that 70.000 employees company and that they can't live without him?

Edited 2006-06-16 14:52

Reply Score: 3

RE: Quite the contrary
by Synced on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:59 UTC in reply to "Quite the contrary"
Synced Member since:
2006-06-16

diegocg, I think you are sadly mistaken about .NET

If you think .NET lied in passport you are sadly mistaken. How many sites run .aspx? Ever notice how many of MS's own software is now written in .NET? If people think the BS articles linux people like to write about .NET and how MS is abandoning it then their getting the wrong picture.

.NET is now the preferred platform for mobile devices.
.NET is now the preferred platform for extending MS desktop apps (office etc)
.NET is now integrated directly in IIS 7.
.NET is used for Microsofts new AJAX framework (Atlas)
.NET is what Media Center was developed on.

And the list goes on. So its quite obvious to any windows developer nowadays where the future lies.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Quite the contrary
by diegocg on Fri 16th Jun 2006 16:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Quite the contrary"
diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

diegocg, I think you are sadly mistaken about .NET

I think it's you who is mistaken with .NET. Where did I mention passport? .NET is being used, sure. But it's being used as much as Microsoft expected? Gates has admitted that .NET will take four or six years more than they imagined and that it has not been the huge success they expected several years ago (.NET has been around for a while and several versions have been released, still many people doesn't care). Sure, lot of Microsoft products are using or planning to use it. Let me say I'm not surprised. What about everybody else? How many VB users are really betting for VB.NET instead of migrating?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Quite the contrary
by Synced on Fri 16th Jun 2006 16:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Quite the contrary"
Synced Member since:
2006-06-16

True but many people do attribute .NET's "non success" from MS passport. Although that is MS's fault I suppose for putting passport under the .NET branding.

Really live.com and windows live services is passport resprung all over again.

.NET's success also is not simply VB. It is any managed code in general. Not to knock VB developers, but many I know don't want to transition to VB.NET simply because its more difficult. They now need to learn proper OO and do not wish to.

C# I think has flurished much more than VB.NET.

I know many businesses that are moving to .NET on the web presence and software services/desktop apps.

I guess your opinions are relative to what world of the IT you exist. If your in a shop that mostly does open source, you don't see anyone jumping up and down for C# or VB.NET.

Visual Studio has always been one of microsofts best products every version. It's a very minor money maker for them but costly to make. On the flip side it brings them lots of 3rd party support. Worship the developers and apps will be made. If apps are made, users come.

XBOX is a perfect example of this. Make something people are already familiar with developing on (DirectX) and continue to improve their development tools. One quote said porting a PC game to a 360 would take months but porting a PC/360 game to PS3 would take 2-3 years.

Love the developers, get the users ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Quite the contrary
by halfmanhalfamazing on Fri 16th Jun 2006 16:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Quite the contrary"
halfmanhalfamazing Member since:
2005-07-23

---------And the list goes on.-----------

Agreed. .NET is so influential that even linux-native apps are being built with it.

Ever hear of Banshee?

Novell's iFolder too.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Quite the contrary
by Synced on Fri 16th Jun 2006 17:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Quite the contrary"
Synced Member since:
2006-06-16

Bingo. You got it my man. Productivity at its best.

----------------------------------------------------
Agreed. .NET is so influential that even linux-native apps are being built with it.

Ever hear of Banshee?

Novell's iFolder too.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Quite the contrary
by mario on Fri 16th Jun 2006 20:25 UTC in reply to "RE: Quite the contrary"
mario Member since:
2005-07-06

I won't argue with any of your other points, as I am simply not qualified, but this one:
.NET is now the preferred platform for mobile devices.
is incorrect. Java is the preferred "platform" for mobile devices.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Quite the contrary
by duckie on Fri 16th Jun 2006 20:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Quite the contrary"
duckie Member since:
2006-04-10

In my POV: It might be the most _spread_ platform, but really not the "preferred". Developing java on cellphones can be tricky (http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/johnc/Recent%20Updates).

In a couple of years Windows Mobile will be the most used platform for mobile stuff (and therefore also pocket .net). It is too expensive for mobile companies to develop new platforms all the time, and too confusing for the users.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Quite the contrary
by archiesteel on Fri 16th Jun 2006 21:09 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Quite the contrary"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

In a couple of years Windows Mobile will be the most used platform for mobile stuff (and therefore also pocket .net).

Really? That's not what the latest buzz is about...

Leading Mobile Phone Players Converge on Linux
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS2710208789.html

It makes sense, mind you. This will give phone makers greater control, and will free them from paying the Microsoft tax...

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Quite the contrary
by mipeligro on Fri 16th Jun 2006 22:28 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Quite the contrary"
mipeligro Member since:
2006-06-03

Buzz and market share are different things. If anything, the latest (fourth) attempt at a linux mobile standard is bad news for the linux community because of the fragmentation it is helping promulgate.

When discussing telephony, one needs to discuss five rather different markets: China/Asia, Japan, Europe, the United States, and the rest of the world.

DoCoMo rules the Japanese market. Not sure what this means to them, though, or if they're just paying lip service.

Linux is doing OK in China, less so in Asia, poorly in Europe, and very badly in the US. Windows has a different situation: it is doing better in the US, adequately in europe, poorly in China/Asia and poorly in Japan, although the DoCoMo acceptance of Windows DRM as a standard may change that soon.

You also need to look at the phone space in three layers, dumb, 'feature', and 'smart', but that's a topic for an entirely different post.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Quite the contrary
by Synced on Sat 17th Jun 2006 18:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Quite the contrary"
Synced Member since:
2006-06-16

Sorry I mean windows based mobile devices. PDA's basically.

They've mostly migrated from advocating embedded c++ but now all their toolkits are based on the .NET Compact Framework.

Reply Score: 1

What's up with the MIcrosoft obsession?
by stew on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:52 UTC
stew
Member since:
2005-07-06

Why can't such people just be happy with Linux and try to make it the best OS it can be? Why do they always seek comparsion with Windows? All you need to win over the masses is a good product, regardless of what Microsoft does or doesn't do.

Reply Score: 5

rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

All you need to win over the masses is a good product, regardless of what Microsoft does or doesn't do.

In what fantasy world do you live?

Reply Score: 2

um, no
by pjjmartin on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:53 UTC
pjjmartin
Member since:
2005-07-08

It seems that any time a major figure in the closed software world so much as farts, it's hailed as "a great opportunity for Linux."

If Gates were starting his own Linux distro, that would be a great opportunity. He's not. He's just cuttting back on his time there. Also he hasn't been "at the helm"; Steve Ballmer has been CEO for a few years now.

Linux has its own strengths that made it a good piece of software. But all this desktop talk is too distracting from those strengths.

Edited 2006-06-16 14:53

Reply Score: 1

What does gates do?
by PlatformAgnostic on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:54 UTC
PlatformAgnostic
Member since:
2006-01-02

I don't really see what Gates does at MSFT in terms of developing products and choosing the actual "Architecture" of offerings. If anything, it seems like what he does is write memos and choose extremely broad things for teams to focus on across the many MS products. (Like unified storage, Trustworthy Computing, etc). I'm sure Ray Ozzie will do just as well if not better in this role as Gates himself. The only thing MSFT loses is a celebrity voice to give keynote addresses.

Reply Score: 1

Crap article
by mkools on Fri 16th Jun 2006 14:56 UTC
mkools
Member since:
2005-10-11

Before I start I want to tell you that I'm very pro-linux.
I have it running om most of my system, but let's be honest, Linux isn't ready for the desktop yet, not for corporate users or average users.
Windows is far better to manager and far more user friendly.

So this article is crap, Linux has to make it's own succes and it will do that eventually but not because bill gates stops working for MS.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Crap article
by markjensen on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:20 UTC in reply to "Crap article"
markjensen Member since:
2005-07-26

I am also very pro-Linux.

However, I don't think it is accurate to make the sweeping statement that "Linux isn't ready for the desktop". It is certainly very capable on the desktop, providing you don't rely on apps that only run on Windows. That is an application dependency/requirement. Not an Operating System requirement.

As for the article, Bill Gates is/was a savvy businessman. He's made some business blunders, but overall he has had much success (understatement, perhaps). Will his departure from an official post at Microsoft mean a huge break for Linux/OSX/BeOS? Not any more than they had before then...

Reply Score: 4

Linux had chances in the past
by TaterSalad on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:04 UTC
TaterSalad
Member since:
2005-07-06

We had a similiar article stating the same thing when it was announced that Vista was going to be delayed. The exact same question was asked. The theory was that since Vista was being delayed by 2 years, companies couldn't wait that long to upgrade and would migrate to linux. While linux is gaining ground, it wasn't taking over Windows as predicted. Why should this be any different?

Can it still be that company without him at the helm?

I don't see it. I don't see it at all.


Of course not if you take a pessimist view of it. Linux has always taken the negative view of Microsoft. Lets try the positive view. Microsoft now has a chance to reform itself. This could be the start of good things, wanting to work with linux and OSS. They even had their open source lab opened for the public, unfortunately that got snuffed in their faces by the linux community. I think you will see Microsoft trying to reach out to more partners now.

Reply Score: 2

edmondcheung
Member since:
2006-02-26

they just want to say 2008 is the year for linux desktop again.....

Reply Score: 3

No.
by mickrussom on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:08 UTC
mickrussom
Member since:
2006-05-13

A company with 61,000 employees is not going crumple up and die because Gates is scaling back. Yeah, I'm sure Gates tracks what 61,000 people do everyday. C'mon.

The guy built one of the largest, richest most successful businesses in the world, and I do not worship them or loathe them, they exist, they sell lots of product, and that product has flaws.

If "Linux" (whatever that is) needs the leader to roll over and die because its fuhrer dies to win, then it is hopeless.

One of the things Linux needs to do is to make all the distros more coherent. It was Gentoo 2 years ago, now its ubuntu, and before gentoo is was redhat, and before redhat it was slackware. Everything I mentioned has a different take on what "Linux" is.

I've adminned them all and like them ok, but Win32 has been making software companies a lot of money. Programs written in Win32s still run today.

Gates' scaling back of his day to day will have no effect. The management efficacy of MSFT is fairly excellent.

Reply Score: 2

This is a ridiculous premise.
by JonInAtlanta on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:15 UTC
JonInAtlanta
Member since:
2006-02-17

Is Gates' Retirement Linux's Chance?

This is a ridiculous premise.
Bill Gates isn't holding Linux back, Linux is holding Linux back.

Reply Score: 5

RE: This is a ridiculous premise.
by Synced on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:33 UTC in reply to "This is a ridiculous premise."
Synced Member since:
2006-06-16

Linus is holding Linux back. For the love of god, give the hardware companies what they ask for.

Without hardware and software support a OS is never going to blossom. Competing with an OS that works hard with hardware vendors and partnerships is very difficult if your going to do all the work (the community).

Asking the open source people to implement every driver and make those drivers as good as the vendors win32 drivers is a tough task.

You need the support from the hardware vendors. Period.

Ontop of that, linux needs to stabalize its API for very important tasks. The world does not need 3 sound daemons.

I know the idealists say options are always better, but not in all cases. Can I use Open Office or MS Office? that is a good option. Can I use sendmail or postfix? that is a good option.

Can the hardware vendor support 3 sound daemons? That is a bad option.

Instead of saying everything in windows sucks, learn from windows. Take its strengths and learn from them, and take its weakneses and learn from them. So far I see linux capitolizing on windows weaknesses, but not so much learning what its strengths are.

Worship the hardware vendors and developers by giving them stable API and great developer tools, and the results will come.

Reply Score: 5

2fargone Member since:
2006-02-20

The stable API mantra...

Computers have been around for awhile, but the technology is still way too new. That's the reason Linux doesn't have a stable API. The kernel developers don't want to get bogged down with having to be backward compatible as Linux improves. And I whole-heartedly agree.

Opposed to closed source philosophy, as the base of OSS software improves, they'll go back and make repairs to the old software to make it run on the new technology.

This philosophy sucks for end-users and companies that want to hide their code, but in the end, it's a better road to travel.

I don't know how long it will take, but sooner or later, Linux's API will become stable. Not because the developers will make it that way, but because the technology will mature to a point where changing the API isn't necessary anymore.

Reply Score: 3

Synced Member since:
2006-06-16

Stable API is important. People ignore it because its not fun. Most of linux's contributions are non-business based which means they work on what they enjoy, and that is usually future features.

Without hardware vendors support and actual business like focus and direction from the leadership of the larger projects, linux will continue its slow gradual progression but until it gets hardware vendors on their side, that is all it will achieve (desktop wise).

Server wise linux does well. It tackles these problems properly. Low major version numbers in large projects (apache etc) and more work on stability. Although less fun, but it is what servers are about.

Desktop wise though, linux needs more focus on what is important and not what is fun.

Reply Score: 1

diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

Stable API is important. People ignore it because its not fun.

What useful is a stable API for a API that is not good enought? Unstable APIs are important for Linux. Linux is not perfect, hence it needs to improve. The faster it improves, the better it gets. Unstable APIs make evolving easier.

Stable APIs are good when you've a good product - Linux desktop isn't a really good dektop product compared with others. It needs to evolve - that means libraries will break APIs sometimes.

Reply Score: 2

Cloudy Member since:
2006-02-15

computers have been around for awhile, but the technology is still way too new. That's the reason Linux doesn't have a stable API.

Um, no. Unix has had stable APIs in areas where Linux hasn't for thirty years. novelty isn't the reason why Linux doesn't have stable internal APIs.

The kernel developers don't want to get bogged down with having to be backward compatible as Linux improves.

If Linux, internally, was somehow superior to the systems it is intending to mimic, or if there was any sign of API innovation, that might be a valid argument.

But it's not and there isn't.

There are places where API experimentation makes sense: multimedia, power management, et cetera; but there's no reason why a 14 year old OS can't have stable APIs for driver interfaces, other than a lack of skill and discipline on the part of its developers.

Reply Score: 1

2fargone Member since:
2006-02-20

This, btw, was not my opinion. I read this in a Linus Torvalds interview a few years ago.

Reply Score: 1

Cloudy Member since:
2006-02-15

Yes. It is one of three things Linus and I have disagreed over on LKML that he will end up changing.

He's famously wrong about kernel debuggers, thread models for operating systems, and kernel APIs. (He's wrong about other things, of course, but these are ones he and I have debated. ;)

Reply Score: 1

I love Linux. I really do.
by polaris20 on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:23 UTC
polaris20
Member since:
2005-07-06

Especially Ubuntu and Fedora Core. But let me know when I can run Tracktion, Reason, Acid, Office, Photoshop, Summation, etc. on it. I know, I mentioned apps of which some are completely unrelated. That's because there's apps in a lot of fields that Linux just doesn't have.

No, something similiar is not good enough.

When I can buy these apps for Linux, then Linux will make its way onto the desktop.

Reply Score: 1

MS has nothing to do with Linux success
by 2fargone on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:30 UTC
2fargone
Member since:
2006-02-20

Linux is not a product, it is a project. Linux will not die or succeed by anything Gates does or doesn't do. It will die if it's abandoned and that's not going to happen anytime soon. And it's success isn't dependant on market share. Its success is dependant on if there is anyone who is willing to continue to improve it.

Also, Linux is the kernel only. It's not the distribution as we can see there are BSD and Solaris distros that use the exact some software as Linux minus the kernel.

The thrust of the article should have been will MS lose ground to alternative operating systems if Bill leaves, not can Linux succeed when Bill leaves.

Reply Score: 2

Hardly a one man show
by shadow_x99 on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:33 UTC
shadow_x99
Member since:
2006-05-12

Microsoft is only a one-man show... You can't credit or blame all pieces of strategy/software/hardware/initiatives that came out of Microsoft to a single man (Bill Gates).

What will change with Gates gones for OOS? Nobody can know for sure

Reply Score: 1

Wait
by sappyvcv on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:34 UTC
sappyvcv
Member since:
2005-07-06

I didn't know that going from full-time to part-time and stepping down from being CSA to only chairman is "retiring".

Can't Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols get anything right?

Reply Score: 4

v YES
by Nelson on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:38 UTC
Gates' retirement
by negativity on Fri 16th Jun 2006 15:49 UTC
negativity
Member since:
2006-02-23

Can be used to layoff some thousands of Microsoft employees to try to make Microsoft more efficient and lower the costs. I see it as basically a "mission accomplished" kind of thing, because Vista and their webby projects have plenty of time to get better until 2008. After that, Gates will retire in a grand way, and Microsoft will start selling and trimming down the costs.

Reply Score: 1

It's never white or black
by Headrush on Fri 16th Jun 2006 16:09 UTC
Headrush
Member since:
2006-01-03

Will his retirement have an effect - sure it will.
Whether Gates is intimately involved in a project or not, there is no doubt that MS drive/direction is greatly influenced my this man. Reading any biography on him and its apparent.

Now, whether this affects Linux in any way, good or bad, is a toss. We don't know and this could very well help MS, rather than hinder it.

The bottom line is most users are still blind and dumb sheep. They don't use product A over product B because it is better or worse, they do so because they have been told to or marketing has done their job. (Being pre-installed on most computers helps too.)

Both Linux and Windows have issues, but once either are setup and fine tuned, the difference to an average end user is minor. Hence, its other factors that cause users to pick Windows. (Its those things that caused the DOJ to get involved.)

Reply Score: 1

v Pointless article
by ssa2204 on Fri 16th Jun 2006 16:43 UTC
RE: Pointless article
by aent on Fri 16th Jun 2006 20:11 UTC in reply to "Pointless article"
aent Member since:
2006-01-25

The example you gave is really funny, since stuff like Xgl/aiglx actually literally improves the stabilitiy of the GUI. It removes the chances of tearing affects and makes all of the GUI feel smoother. aiglx is now included in Xorg and just needs drivers to enable it to be used by everyone (intel/older radeons already have the releases, nvidia said the next release will support it, the modern ati proprietary drivers are the only ones with the status unknown). Once all that comes out, the days of people complaining about moving windows feeling slow (especially with Firefox) is over.

Reply Score: 1

Windows has 2000 programmers
by negativity on Fri 16th Jun 2006 16:51 UTC
negativity
Member since:
2006-02-23

At least that is what I got from a recent article on Windows development.

Each one of those developers has produced an average of 1000 lines of code per year for Vista, while the US average is 5000 or 6000.

Open source developers outnumber the 2000 programmers that work on Vista, and they work much more efficiently as well, working on independent modules which are constantly tested.

The law of the inertia seems to help Linux much more than Windows.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Crap article
by archiesteel on Fri 16th Jun 2006 17:00 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

While I agree that Gates leaving will have little effect on Linux adoption, I disagree with you that it's not ready for the desktop. It is in fact ready for many desktops (including the one I'm writing this on).

Now, the question is: why do you feel the need to begin your post by saying that you're "very pro-Linux"? Do you think this gives you more credibility? Because it really doesn't...This reminds me of people sayind "I'm not a racist, but..." and then making a clear racist comment.

In this user's opinion, Linux IS ready for the desktop, and has been for a couple of years.

Reply Score: 4

v RE[2]: Crap article
by ssa2204 on Fri 16th Jun 2006 18:22 UTC in reply to "RE: Crap article"
RE[3]: Crap article
by vitae on Fri 16th Jun 2006 18:59 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Crap article"
vitae Member since:
2006-02-20

Number one complaint was the GUIs were not stable, problematic, and just plain pain in the @ss to work with. As much as the zealots would love to cry out about Windows BSOD, hardly any of these people have experienced any serious issues with Win XP. In fact, in the past 5 years I can not think of one instance where we were called in to resolve an issue related to Windows instability or security. 99% of our issues are due to configuration problems, hardware failures, or various network issues related to firewalls, switches, VLANs, wifi, etc. Makes you think doesn't it.

Yes, there are most certainly hassles involved in dealing with Linux. Nobody would deny that. But wouldn't you say people just take Windows' problems for granted? Doesn't pretty much everybody know about the security problems and almost expect malware problems these days? To some degree people have simply gotten used to Windows so even if there are problems, it's less "alien" than Linux. Might not that be a big part of it?

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Crap article
by archiesteel on Fri 16th Jun 2006 19:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Crap article"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Fact is the average computer user CAN NOT use linux, it is that simple.

That's not a fact, that's an opinion - one, might I add, that is disproven by my own personal experience AND by empirical studies. I've had newbie users get up to speed very quickly with both KDE and Gnome.

Far from being a fiasco, the Linux desktop is a successful experiment that keeps on improving, and the reason market share increases slowly have nothign to do with its quality, but rather with inertia, lack of marketing, FUD and computer pre-installation.

As far as the workplace example you give out, I'm sorry, but I call BS.

Reply Score: 3

RE: I love Linux. I really do.
by archiesteel on Fri 16th Jun 2006 17:10 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

But let me know when I can run Tracktion, Reason, Acid, Office, Photoshop, Summation, etc. on it.

You can run Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop on Linux.

Tracktion, Reason and Acid are professionnal music software. Summation is legal software. All of these are very specific to a small segment of the population.

Arguing that Linux' success on the destkop is related to these is exactly the same as saying that Windows isn't ready for the desktop because Piranha or Final Cut Pro aren't available for it, or that Mac OSX isn't ready for the desktop because 3DSMax isn't available for it. It's a fallacious argument.

The truth is that Linux is ready for a lot of desktops, though obviously not all. Enough with the FUD, please.

(See above for my comments on why saying that you "love Linux" is irrelevant.)

Reply Score: 5

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

But there are examples in every industry in which Linux can't be used because the appropriate software is unavailable. Add these specific small segments together, and you get a large portion of the Windows userbase.

There are examples in every industry in which Linux can be used, either by using Windows software under Linux, or running a native alternative. Add these specific small segments together, and you get a good bunch of people using Linux.

Reply Score: 2

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

There are examples in every industry in which Linux can be used, either by using Windows software under Linux, or running a native alternative. Add these specific small segments together, and you get a good bunch of people using Linux.

I think this guy was just listing his own 'killer apps' .. I've got several myself. If you take thousands of people and they start listing their Windows-only apps, the few that you see here would probably turn into hundreds. Are there Linux equivalents for most of those? Probably. But the Linux community doesn't seem to want to do much to educate us on how good the apps are, so I figure they must not be very good.
Don't just give me a list of 5-6 Linux apps that are equivalents to whatever I'm using under Windows and say "Here, try these ..", explain to me exactly why they are better than what I'm currently using. And if they're not better, then don't waste my time. And no, I don't consider an app to be 'better' just because it comes with the source code.

BTW: If you're going to try and convince us that an app is 'better' just because it comes with the source code, you're going to be in serious trouble if that's the best you can do. Sure, I know this matters to some people and for them, the choice is obvious. But what about the other 98% of society?

Reply Score: 0

vitae Member since:
2006-02-20

And no, I don't consider an app to be 'better' just because it comes with the source code.

No, but for common users, an app MIGHT be better because it's free.Is there not enough pirated copies of Windows and Windows software out there to warrant police agencies from all across the world to bust warez sites? Now imagine there was no warez. Is the average user going shell out the money for Microsoft office or Adobe Photoshop? Hell, no. The average user doesn't have that kind of money to throw around. But they always know somebody a little more knowledgeable than them who will hook them up with some free software. As long as the BSA doesn't find out, there good to go.

You always look at it from your viewpoint, the viewpoint of somebody for whom money is clearly no objective when buying software. Let's be honest, you make a lot of money in your field, don't you? So you dropping several hundred dollars for the latest app is probably no big deal, is it?

Reply Score: 2

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

You always look at it from your viewpoint, the viewpoint of somebody for whom money is clearly no objective when buying software. Let's be honest, you make a lot of money in your field, don't you? So you dropping several hundred dollars for the latest app is probably no big deal, is it?

Ultimately, for Linux to gain widespread acceptance on the desktop, it would have to run these same apps, so then you're stuck in the same senario. Open source (desktop) apps are good, but most of them are not that good. If they were, we'd all be running Linux by now ;)

As for myself, about a year and a half ago, I made the decision to stop pirating apps and go legit. At the time, I examined many of the Linux alternatives to the Windows apps I was using to see if I could make the switch and save some money, but I ended up spending about $3,000 I didn't have to get the apps I wanted. Why? Because most of the Linux equivalents generally ranged inbetween medicore and horrible (at least compared with what I was using in Windows). Sure, there's a few good ones. And there are some Linux apps that are better than their Windows counterparts. It just so happens though that I don't really use any of these kinds of apps, or else there was a Windows version of the app anyway.

Reply Score: 1

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Ultimately, for Linux to gain widespread acceptance on the desktop, it would have to run these same apps, so then you're stuck in the same senario. Open source (desktop) apps are good, but most of them are not that good. If they were, we'd all be running Linux by now ;)

If it was like that, then why don't people switch to f.ex. Macs? There are great apps for Macs for which there isn't a good/better alternative in Windows world. You see, it really doesn't go like that..

Reply Score: 2

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

If it was like that, then why don't people switch to f.ex. Macs? There are great apps for Macs for which there isn't a good/better alternative in Windows world.

Speaking as a Windows user, I'm not about to pay the Apple Tax just to get compatable hardware to run the OS, especially since I've seen no evidence that the apps are any better over there. Some people swear up and down that iLife is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I consider iTunes to be only slightly better than its 'jack of all trades, master of none' audio/ripping/burning ilk (which really isn't saying much), so I don't hold a lot of hope for the rest.

Reply Score: 1

vitae Member since:
2006-02-20

At the time, I examined many of the Linux alternatives to the Windows apps I was using to see if I could make the switch and save some money, but I ended up spending about $3,000 I didn't have to get the apps I wanted.

See, that's what I mean. You're pretty casual about throwing down that kind of money unless you absolutely need it for your business in which case it pays for itself. But again, I was talking about the average user. I'd be willing to bet most "average" users would take the free software and make due rather than spend the down payment on a new car or a cruise in the caribbean on software. Open source apps are not that bad and many are rather good despite not having the advantage of having a corporation behind them, but if you're going to compare them to most expensive closed source software out there, they will come up short. Bear in mind there's plenty of lousy closed source apps out there too gracing the rack at Walmart.

Reply Score: 1

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

But again, I was talking about the average user. I'd be willing to bet most "average" users would take the free software and make due rather than spend the down payment on a new car or a cruise in the caribbean on software.

With average users, you're going to run into an entirely different problem. For example, my dad runs Win2k and I am basically his tech support. If something goes wrong, I fix it. Same with my close friends and family. Now, if my dad downloads Ubuntu (or whatever) and installs it, who's going to provide support for him? Certainly not me, because I don't know Linux well enough to do that. If he has problems getting his DSL to work with it, is he going to be able to call SBC and get support for making DSL work using his Linux box? Hell, most places barely provide adequate support for Windows, much less Linux.
Another senario .. I have a flash mp3 player that is a UMS device, so it works pretty much everywhere without drivers. However, I had a need to upgrade the firmware recently. But, guess what .. the software to update the firmware only works on Windows. There are just too many situations that come up like that.

Reply Score: 1

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

If you take thousands of people and they start listing their Windows-only apps, the few that you see here would probably turn into hundreds. Are there Linux equivalents for most of those?

It really depends. For a regular home use there are usually even dozens of alternatives to use, while in a lab environment there may be no native Linux app at all. You know why? Because companies have the money to hire people to develop apps for specific scenarios, and to hire f.ex. scientists to tell the devs what scientists need in their lab. I assume there aren't many Linux geeks working in such an environment, or they lack the time/money/programming knowledge to create an equivalent Linux version of their Windows software. All in all, you can't just state an all-around "fact" that Linux sucks. There are scenarios where it simply doesn't cut it, and scenarios where it actually is a lot better OS to use than Windows. Just think of Apple and Mac OS: it doesn't have to beat Windows everywhere. It is used where people deem it better or they like it better.

But the Linux community doesn't seem to want to do much to educate us on how good the apps are, so I figure they must not be very good.

That completely faulty logic. Just think of it: a bunch of people programming something in their free time, versus a company with money to throw into documentation and advertising...And still, throwing thousands of dollars into creating documentation, sweet flash animations and great ads doesn't guarantee the software is any better. You should really try it out yourself and see if it fits your scenario, or stop whining.

And if they're not better, then don't waste my time. And no, I don't consider an app to be 'better' just because it comes with the source code.

Well, neither do I consider an app to be better just because it is open source. But hey, as I said, there are many factors why in some case some app is better than another. I can't decide for you which one is the best. But how about f.ex. cost? I take myself as an example; I need sometimes an office suite, but since I barely have any money, I don't want to pay hundreds of euros for MS Office when I can get OpenOffice.org for free. Sure, they are different and OpenOffice.org doesn't have all the features of Office, but since I wouldn't use them anyway I don't really care. And remember, this was just a single example. Just try to think hard and you may come up with some even yourself.

BTW: If you're going to try and convince us that an app is 'better' just because it comes with the source code, you're going to be in serious trouble if that's the best you can do. Sure, I know this matters to some people and for them, the choice is obvious. But what about the other 98% of society?

As I said, software being open-source doesn't mean it is any better. A regular home user would probably not care at all. But, in a corporate world it actually might be quite a noteworthy thing. Why? Because they can alter an already-existing and working software to better suit their needs, without needing to hire another company to develop some completely new software. Also, they can adjust the security of the software and fix bugs themselves as soon as they wish without needing to wait for others to do it for them.

Reply Score: 2

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

But the Linux community doesn't seem to want to do much to educate us on how good the apps are, so I figure they must not be very good.

That completely faulty logic. Just think of it: a bunch of people programming something in their free time, versus a company with money to throw into documentation and advertising...And still, throwing thousands of dollars into creating documentation, sweet flash animations and great ads doesn't guarantee the software is any better. You should really try it out yourself and see if it fits your scenario, or stop whining.


I think you missed my point here. Take a look at the below 'walkthrough tour' of Directory Opus (probably the best file manager on Windows, or anywhere else for that matter):

http://www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html

Some people say that Konquerer is better than Dopus, but why? Would be interesting to see a similar write-up for the best file manager that Linux has to offer, and they can go head-to-head with Dopus.

Anyway, it appears that the above write-up was NOT written by the programmers. So I'm not talking about programmers writing up advertisements for their programs, I'm talking about the community (people who have an interest in Linux advocacy) doing so. With as much energy as some people spend flaming Microsoft on various forums, they probably have loads of spare time to do this.

Reply Score: 1

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I think you missed my point here. Take a look at the below 'walkthrough tour' of Directory Opus (probably the best file manager on Windows, or anywhere else for that matter):

And you know, Directory Opus is not part of the Windows Desktop Environment. It is a completely separate program which doesn't come with Windows. That's the reason why it has a separate guided tour. Konqueror on the other hand is a part of KDE, and thus, you should seek a tour on KDE to find more about a specific part of it. And such tours on KDE can be found all over the web if you just try some Googling =)

PS. I don't like Konqueror at all. And neither did I look Directory Opus, based on the information given on that link you posted. I _still_ prefer Nautilus =)

Reply Score: 1

archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

I am not a "blind zealot", and using insults will only get you modded down.

I specifically said that Linux is not ready for ALL desktop, such as the desktop of a professional musician (who'd be better to use OSX or maybe Windows). Likewise, Windows is not ready for the desktop of a professional film editor while OSX or Linux might.

What I said is that Linux is ready for a lot of desktop (the majority of them, IMO). It certainly is ready for mine.

One should also consider the great strides achieved by Linux in emergent economic powers such as China and India, as well as increased use of it in government sectors here and in Europe.

Then again, I wonder why I waste time arguing with someone who believes insulting those who disagree with you is a valid form of debate.

Enough with the FUD.

Reply Score: 2

Gates retiring
by WereCatf on Fri 16th Jun 2006 17:14 UTC
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

Gates retiring doesn't make any more available market place for Linux, and in 2008 I think Microsoft will have finally released Vista. Then they will focus on something new and advertise it. Linux is a good OS all in all, but first of all, who is going to advertise Linux as Microsoft advertises Windows? No one, not even when Gates is gone. From what I know about Vista, it sucks, but it is still more familiar to people than Linux, and people just tend to choose something they are familiar with, even if it is just the name. Microsoft will still call their OS Windows something, even when Gates is gone. This article is just stupid..

Reply Score: 1

Soundcards
by archlyn on Fri 16th Jun 2006 17:28 UTC
archlyn
Member since:
2006-01-11

Someone here mentioned that there are too many sound daemons for the sound hardware companies to support.

Aren't the drivers for these cards located in ALSA or OSS? If so, why do these companies even need to care about the daemon being used?

Reply Score: 2

lol!
by scuro_falcao on Fri 16th Jun 2006 17:36 UTC
scuro_falcao
Member since:
2006-03-18

this article is pointless! These people will say anything to get the linux name in the press. anything to get linux in the marketplace..

Reply Score: 1

All this hubbub`
by Shadowmane on Fri 16th Jun 2006 18:04 UTC
Shadowmane
Member since:
2006-06-16

As a Linux user, I don't care what happens at Microsoft. If Gates is going into semi-retirement, more power to him. He's not been the driving force behind Microsoft for a few years. He's just been a figurehead. I switched to Linux because its a better product for ME. For some people, constantly tinkering with their operating system just don't float their boat, and I admit, I sometimes get frustrated myself, but I switched because I was tired of constantly being hacked and I was tired of having to reboot every day. As far as Microsoft is concerned, they're not going away, and no amount of dreaming from the Linux community will change that. I believe Linux will someday gain enough market share to be a competitor to Microsoft, and I believe the same will happen to Mac. Instead of a two way race, I think parity will eventually be reached. Bill Gates will go down in history as a mover and shaker in the business and the computer world. There's no denying that. Now, in two years, his company will go on without his direct imput (as many other companies in history have... Dell comes to mind).

Reply Score: 3

Wrong OS Stupid
by Sphinx on Fri 16th Jun 2006 18:16 UTC
Sphinx
Member since:
2005-07-09

Is this Window's best chance is the question.

Reply Score: 1

What about the chair-man
by CharAznable on Fri 16th Jun 2006 19:49 UTC
CharAznable
Member since:
2005-07-06

If anything, Steve Ballmer's non-retirement is an opportunity for Linux.

Reply Score: 1

a look at the timelime
by SK8T on Fri 16th Jun 2006 21:04 UTC
SK8T
Member since:
2006-06-01

in bill gates time, up to the year 2000, there was a new windows edition nearly every two years. No place for upcoming Linux Desktops.

And in steve balmers time, 2000 to today; there was online one (!) Windows version in 6 years (!) - enough space for Mac and Linux.

I think it will be the same in the future, too....

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Quite the contrary
by archiesteel on Fri 16th Jun 2006 22:54 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

If anything, the latest (fourth) attempt at a linux mobile standard is bad news for the linux community because of the fragmentation it is helping promulgate.

Fragmentation? Hardly. These are four leading phone manufacturers (and two service providers) coming together to set up a standard. Since when has producing a standart promulgated fragmentation?

I agree with you that Linux phones are doing better in China/Asia than in North America/Europe, however the Chinese market alone is a huge one. Don't underestimate it (nor should you overestimate the strenghts of MS in that sector)...

Reply Score: 1

tomahawk
Member since:
2006-06-17

“When the mighty falls, jackals come to call”

Its a shame to think Bill Gate's departure is chance for Linux. You must fight when somebody at his prime. You don't fight with kids, women and the old.

Tomahawk Computers
Makers of Tomahawk Desktop

Reply Score: 1

Oh come on
by mOrPhie on Sat 17th Jun 2006 07:30 UTC
mOrPhie
Member since:
2006-01-02

As if gates is the only man in that company.

Reply Score: 1

should look at this the other way round.
by xushi on Sat 17th Jun 2006 16:48 UTC
xushi
Member since:
2005-08-29

To be honest, this isn't the way Linux should think. They shouldn't rely on the/a competitor's manager/ceo/person_with_power to retire in order for it to have a chance, but it should rely on it's own powers in the market and public, its own advantages over the other product, and have a good self esteem and confidence.

Linux should have a chance because it's GOOD, not because the competitor is getting flaky; and that's why it's still here today!

Reply Score: 1

RE[9]: I love Linux. I really do.
by archiesteel on Sat 17th Jun 2006 17:29 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

With average users, you're going to run into an entirely different problem. For example, my dad runs Win2k and I am basically his tech support. If something goes wrong, I fix it. Same with my close friends and family. Now, if my dad downloads Ubuntu (or whatever) and installs it, who's going to provide support for him?

This is a fair comment, and I believe it is one of the reason why Linux adoption on the desktop, while growing, is slow.

However, that is not an argument against Linux, because - as you said it yourself - it is the exact same situation with Windows. It just means that Linux adoption on the desktop will continue to be gradual, because it will continue to rely on Linux-savvy "family tech support," as does any OS.

You seem to believe that Linux somehow needs to take over the market overnight, or not at all, while in fact this is unnecessary (and unlikely).

If he has problems getting his DSL to work with it, is he going to be able to call SBC and get support for making DSL work using his Linux box? Hell, most places barely provide adequate support for Windows, much less Linux.

Which is why cable is such a better solution for broadband, whether you run Windows or Linux! It's so much simpler! (I should know, nearly half of my "family tech support" calls have to do with people having problems with their DSL lines using Windows).

Seriously, DSL is a major hassle. That said, more and more DSL modems come with an integrated firewall/router. In such cases, it really doesn't matter what OS you run, as the administration is all web-based.


Another senario .. I have a flash mp3 player that is a UMS device, so it works pretty much everywhere without drivers. However, I had a need to upgrade the firmware recently. But, guess what .. the software to update the firmware only works on Windows.

So, what you're saying is that you can't find access to a Windows machine around you? I find that hard to believe.

There are many solutions to a situation like this, the most common bein dual-booting (which should be recommended for all newbies and gamers anyway). The other one is to use virtualization software such as VMWare (which is free nowadays). So really, this is not as serious a situation as you would have us believe.

There are just too many situations that come up like that.

And these situations, for the most part, all have easy solutions. As I've said before, Linux is ready for a lot of desktop, but not all.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: I love Linux. I really do.
by archiesteel on Sat 17th Jun 2006 17:37 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

Some people say that Konquerer is better than Dopus, but why?

Kparts and kio_slaves, mostly. Konqueror is more extensible than dopus. Among the kio_slaves, fish:// is very useful (file managing through a simple ssh link).

Also, Konqueror is both a file manager and a web browser, meaning you can have file managing tabs and web tabs on the same app (or have them share the same split tab, something which is useful when grabbing images and stuff from the web).

Soes dopus have an integrated terminal emulator? This is VERY useful when following instructions on a web page, because you don't have to toggle between windows, or try to arrange them in the same screen.

Of course, one should not underestimate the fact that Konq comes standard with the KDE desktop, in which it's very well integrated, and costs nothing.

dopus is a fine app, so is Konqueror, in the end it's probably a matter of personal preferences. However, since one is only available on Windows, and the other only on *nix systems, the point is rather moot.

If you're into those kind of comparisons, however, better to go with Amarok and K3b, which in my opinion represent "best of breed" apps on any OS (especially Amarok, which is a true *nix killer app).

Reply Score: 1

:D ahh funny
by poohgee on Sun 18th Jun 2006 01:25 UTC
poohgee
Member since:
2005-08-13

yeah - one person leaving a multi billion dollar company will suddenly open up some magic gate to Linux Desktop heaven ;)

& maybe actually the opposite is also quite possible .

MS's strategy is not going to change - hey its working - maybe just that little bit more discipline & organisation for things like Vista etc.

The market in "Evil Gates will close" etc ... will perhaps severely increase but .. yeah thats about it .. it certainly seems to me .

Reply Score: 1

Linkbait
by paperfrog on Sun 18th Jun 2006 02:46 UTC
paperfrog
Member since:
2006-01-01

The article is just linkbait, and it worked.

I'm surprised Gates didn't step aside some time ago. Founders aren't always the best people to take a mature company to the next level. His departure, if anything, will allow Microsoft to rethink itself.

It's probably time they did so. Vista's very public launch failure betrays some ossification within Microsoft's mid- and upper-level management. That's exactly the sort of thing a change at the top will precipitate. Ballmer will also leave.

If I were Microsoft's CEO, I'd give serious thought to breaking the company into purpose-driven divisions: one for operating systems; another for Office applications; and a third company for entertainment and media. Maybe even a fourth division for smartphones and portable computing. Anything to make the company less monolithic.

The next generation at Microsoft will know this. I don't see how Gates' departure will create any particular new opportunity for Linux.

Linux' best bet is standardization. This won't please the hobbyists, but companies will feel better about training their people on a single desktop and on feature-stable, boringly standardized applications.If Linux can acheive this and still pitch cost of ownership against Windows, it will find a toehold on the business desktop. And that's the best route to getting Linux on home PCs en masse.

If that's what Linux wishes to do ...

Reply Score: 1

RE: Linkbait
by archiesteel on Sun 18th Jun 2006 06:27 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

Linux' best bet is standardization. This won't please the hobbyists, but companies will feel better about training their people on a single desktop and on feature-stable, boringly standardized applications.

You're confusing things. Linux is a kernel and some basic userland tools. Desktop Environments are separate projects, that can run on a variety of OSes. KDE and Gnome can be used on any *nix system. So you can't "standardize" Linux into using one desktop, because desktops are just apps that run on top of the OS.

In any case, what matters is interoperability and the kind of collaboration that is done at freedesktop.org.

That said, this "standardization" has very little to do with market share. Rather, it is pre-installation that is the largest hurdle to clear.

Reply Score: 1

Not so much ...
by paperfrog on Sun 18th Jun 2006 17:11 UTC
paperfrog
Member since:
2006-01-01

> You're confusing things.

I'm surprised you didn't fault me for not saying "GNU/Linux," while you were at it. And, for the record, I know the difference between the kernel and a desktop environment.

You're right about pre-installation, but desktop standardization is overlooked. And that was my main point: corporations are all about uniformity. You won't see a lot of Fortune 500 companies training large numbers of people on a Linux-based desktop until one is pretty much the same as the other.

This process will probably be dictated by big vendors who also supply support. The current players are Red Hat, Novell/SUSE, and --to a lesser extent -- Canonical/Ubuntu. It may be too late for anyone else to get in the business desktop game.

As it turns out, all three players are invested in Gnome. I think *that* is the Linux business desktop.

Reply Score: 1