Following up on their tests to work out which Linux distribution works best for business, ZDNet has taken a look at the wider issue of whether or not Linux is actually ready to replace Windows on the majority of Windows desktops.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:I believe that Linux can provide certain functions that make it just as viable as Windows in certain business enviornments.
Albeit, Linux cannot do EVERYTHING windows can for businesses can, but it can certainly do more than Word Documents and Emails. And it is moving ever so fast towards that goal of doing everything.
I think the development enviornment under linux is top notch. The tools available off the bat trump what windows offers and companies are providing great IDE's and other software engineering tools.
It is the end user application development which is being stifled. Part of the reason may be (as you said) that the developers just dont view the Linux enviornment as advanced. That in itself is not linux's fault imo because I think it is a fine enviornment with lots of capabilities. And of course there is always the low market share issue. Developers dont want to make applications that dont want to be used.
Linux will get there imo, but it may take a while. At this point in time, it provides really well for some businesses.
Member since:2005-07-06
Let me say that I said that not as pro-this or pro-that. As a developer, I appreciate Windows environment and integration it can deliver.
I'd be interested in releasing solutions for Linux and that's why I welcomed MONO. However, *nix is still failing to provide an unified ecosystem of integrated services and frameworks (and APIs) as complex as Windows provides. Hence, developing for Windows still is much simpler.
Take a look at Apple which understood this and it's starting to provide basic low-level system-wide services (isn't new CoreData just like Windows data services, available for years? Isn't new system-wide graphics services just like DirectX?). The development model surrounding Linux and xBSD is dispersive. The GPL is harming integration because everyone can go on his/her own and it doesn't encourage developers to stay together and to unify. The GPL model applied to big business is forcing Linux to stay basic and raw because then, on top of bare system, everyone is building their solutions and inteoperability among them is not a goal because could harm selling of solutions from different companies as a whole. This effectively prevents the basic system to evolve and doesn't attracts developers.
On the other side, you have a company which is happy to fill the gaps. When Microsoft thinks a certain service / extension is needed for their system, they will develop it (sometimes harming or crunching partners... sadly, but that's life...) because they're interested into platform as a whole (they can do because they control their technology... something IBM cannot do... nor Novell and so on... while that's something Apple can do).
As an example, check brilliant new Worflow Framework (WWF). That's a basic, low-level evolution to which Linux should reply but, as of now, it's not able to. You can bet a few euros that I will use WWF a lot in my future solutions and that would keep me hooked to Windows again. But Windows will benefit from my solutions as well.
A suggestion: stop thinking Microsoft achieved dominance by unlawful or marketing means. This only partly true. You cannot achieve dominance by marketing but that can help. I suggest that developers for those platforms to carefully watch what Microsoft is doing. At worst, copy. At best, improve.
Member since:
2005-07-06
100% agree.
Plus, development on such platforms is not only limited by spare presence (a very low market share), but also by an overall environment which is not as advanced (under developers' point of view) as in Windows.
Failing to acknowledge this means hearing "Next year will be our year!" forever...