After 10 years of supporting Linux, IBM continues to challenge Microsoft on multiple fronts and aims to push Linux even further into the enterprise. While IBM has competed and partnered with Microsoft over the last two decades, the Microsoft-free PC effort is perhaps its most direct assault yet. "The idea of Microsoft-free personal computing has been in the air for a while," Inna Kuznetsova, director of Linux at IBM, told InternetNews.com. "We're just partnering with Linux distribution vendors and hardware vendors to make it happen."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2008-04-18
Member since:2008-07-15
So what you're saying is that in order for Linux to succeed on the home pc, Microsoft has to produce something worse than Vista? I'd much rather see software succeed, or not, upon its own design and concepts, not because some other company screwed up, and it's the lesser of two evils. I'm not saying Vista was great by any means, but seriously, how many more Linux adoptions did we see? Most of those who either hated Vista or had serious problems with it either stayed with XP or went over to the Mac.
Member since:2006-06-13
Member since:2007-09-06
It doesn't even need another marketing fiasco by MS. Take MS out of the picture entirely if you like even.
All it takes is for companies to continue developing and refining there distributions. The average home user gets Windows or osX preinstalled when they buy a new machine; I see no reason why a preinstalled and preconfigured OS based on the Linux kernel should be different.
The cases where a function is only supported by Windows are becoming very limited. These days it's industrial software (CAD), specialty needs (Gaming) or interaction with existing Windows (Windows only network protocols). The last is probably the most valid need but is not likely to effect many home users unless they run an MS ADS.
Continue to refine the "issues" that people have with a preinstalled Ubuntu, Mandriva, PCLinuxOS, Suse and you'll quickly see that home users don't care about branding provided what's in the box does all the bullet points listed outside the box.
The biggest challenge is really a political one in getting people to see a reason to try alternatives or think outside the marketing hype they are already saturated with.
Member since:2005-09-28
I've successfully moved a non-expert relative over to Linux as their OS without too many problems. The install needed needed a bit of expertise, but the day-to-day use has been closer problem free than Windows+OE+malware.
I know that other people have had similar successes.
Member since:2005-12-15
Why is it that having Windows means to some people malware is a certainy? I cannot remember a single time I've been "infected" with malware, spyware or virii, with the exception to the Stoned virus which was back on my 286 and it came from a floppy disk.
I practice common sense when on-line. Never a problem.
People who piss on Microsoft for this sort of thing really should take equal slashes at the guys who write this stuff as well as the end user. For any end user to say, "I'm not technical, I'm not technical" is really ignoring the fact that they were the one that 99% of the time click on the bad egg, visit some porno, warez or dodge ringtone site.
Use Firefox also. Security of other browsers aside, it's exceptionally superior to any of its competition.
Sure there has been instances in the past where just being on-line without doing anything can result in your PC being attacked and serious shame on Microsoft for missing such a stupid and enourmous problem, but the majority of the time it's ignorant end users.
And yes, the OS shouldn't have bugs in it in the first place, no arguements on that in any way, but lets face it, there are a lot of factors driving software quality than the idealogical, "don't release until it's bugfree" mantra. If Microsoft took 10 years to check every single line of code against every single possible bug then the OS would be redundant half way through the testing phase, not to mention the flack the media would serve up.
This is not a "Windows" problem, it's a software engineering problem. One only has to look at the monthly Solaris patch announcements and all the bugs, exploit and remote code patches released to see that, not to mention all the bugs that are fixed in OSX and any random Linux distro.
Member since:2007-09-06
As the son of an IT manager, my challenge is getting Pops to give it a go. I keep leaving liveCD with him when I'm back visiting but familiarity and lack of motivation to change his primary machine keep him bound to win2k. Needing to know the popular and current Windows systems for his contract work made him purchase a Vista license with his new laptop.
Really, the only thing holding him back is not taking ten minutes to boot from the liveCD and poke around a bit. I think part of it is the concern of not having familiar programs to work with media and documents but then I've not put a great deal of preaching just get a point for converting someone. His setup supports his needs so we'll look at it more seriously when that old hardware starts to fail.
Member since:2006-01-01
The problem with Linux Desktop is that there is no commercial innovation. Every company relies purely on Open Source Software such as X.Org, KDE and GNOME. Not one company has dared to say, "Ok we have had enough. It just doesn't work (as in succeed)! We need something new! Something similar to what Apple did with Darwin". Even IBM hasn't done anything about it! The least they can try is try to port the OS/2 libs and GUI! They just keep relying on existing *broken* technologies. The X desktop is a home desktop made of different parts stitched together, the base, the board, left side of the board attached with the right side (from another desk) with a bit of polish to make it "look" solid but once you try to use it, not quite the same now is it? It just doesn't feel right. It's all shakey. Well this is the current state of the Linux Desktop where X is the "home desktop" in this case. Simply there isn't coherence in the system, everything is incompatible! FLTK, GTK, QT to name a few. Why? Because they all come from a different source - parent, there isn't a standard where regardless what type toolkit you use to develop your app, the Open Dialog, the Save Dialog, the app behavior would be the same! This is how Windows is! Windows has standards and the base is the Win32 API! Then you have things such as KDE for Windows or GTK for Windows where they break these stanatds. This is the problem with the Linux Desktop. Everything is stitched together and broken. As long as it remains this way, Linux Desktop will never be (except for geeks) and quite honestly? I think X is to blame for this because as far as I know, they haven't written functions such as "OpenDialog()" "MessageBox()" or "SaveDialog()" and Menu Bar objects -- you know, just like good old Windows so people are forced to write their own.
I can feel the steam and hate coming out from some angry Linux fan dudes now...grrrr -200 quick. Regardless what you rate me, it is the truth.
Edited 2008-08-06 23:26 UTC
Member since:2007-09-06
There should be only one brand of car made from one brand of parts. This every car using the same type of bolts and round wheels just doesn't work.
Start looking at different distributions, as they actually are, as different OS and things become more clear. Debian is an OS with it's own strengths. Ubuntu a very similar but different OS. Mythbuntu an OS with a different purpose yet again.
(it's the choice and flexability of systems built from modular comodity parts that makes OS based on the Linux or BSD kernels so applicable to many different problems.)
I only mod up where applicable though so no /. inspired modding down by me.
Member since:2007-07-01
Member since:2006-10-11
By your expectation of what a home pc system can or can't do, MS Windows XP (I don't know Vista) and Mac OS X 10.5 are unsuitable for home pcs. Both require a good amount of tweaking and added software to become useful.
That being said, I am completly in agreement with your further assessment. GNU/Linux strong suit is not the home desktop pc. Good thing that IBM, Red Hat, Novell and Ubuntu are, according to the article, pushing for the enterprise desktop
Member since:2005-07-06
I don't disagree... it's just that I don't really see Windows as a joe-six-pack OS either.
Give your friendly neighbour a -clean- PC with an Windows XP CD and and Office 2003 CD... and lets see how it goes. (Hint. Major disaster)
The amount of know-how required to successfully install Windows, then service packs, -drivers-, anti-virus, install and configure a fire-wall, etc is simply staggering.
- Gilboa
Member since:
2008-07-15
unfortunately, I don't see a Microsoft-free home PC coming out of Linux for quite a while yet. When I say "home pc," I mean a pc that average joe can use without having to tweak and hack it. Currently, Linux just doesn't fit this bill and, barring some major redesign and collaboration on various parts of the system, I doubt it ever will. And, before all you Linux zealots go modding me down for daring to speak such blasphemy, I do believe Linux succeeds very well at a lot of tasks. It makes a very good server os and, with the right configuration, a nice enterprise desktop and development workstation. Not to mention it can be a very lean embedded system. It just doesn't fit the home desktop pc world yet, and I don't see it going that way any time soon no matter how hard various distros like SuSE and Ubuntu try to push it.