Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Mar 2009 18:53 UTC, submitted by snydeq
Linux Red Hat CEO Jim Whitehurst questioned the relevance of Linux on the desktop, citing several financial and interoperability hurdles to business adoption at a panel on end-users and Linux last night at the OSBC.
Permalink for comment 355247
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
UncleWarthog
Member since:
2009-03-26

It seems to me that there's more to this than what he's saying. Maybe it's matter of "we don't feel we can make money from it so we'll gainsay the market so publicly that nobody else can either". If I were of a more conspiracy-theorist bent, I might think that bad-mouthing Linux on the desktop might be part of their new agreement with Microsoft, but they were doing so well before that so I don't think that's it.

As far as I can see, they want to keep out of the desktop market to avoid cannibalizing their server market and all the bad-mouthing is just a way to avoid saying so. The reasoning is fairly obvious: just about any good desktop Linux distribution can make a pretty good light- to medium-duty server as well. Red Hat's older distributions before they started concentrating on servers only were well known for it. Now, Red Hat offers nothing in that category: all of their current offerings are not general-purpose enough to make a good desktop, light duty server, or enterprise server from the same distribution. The current "desktop" offering, Fedora, is changed far too often and is far too bleeding-edge (read: unstable) for good use as a server. I think Red Hat like it that way.

Reply Score: 1