Three or four years ago, open-source providers enjoyed plenty of attention. But now some of the disruptive energy seems to have dropped away, as attention turns increasingly to the collaborative potential of the Web. Google and the buzzword du jour, Web 2.0, are capturing the attention once enjoyed by the struggle between Linux, Windows and Unix. ZDNet UK sat down with Red Hat chief executive Matthew Szulik at the company’s user summit in Nashville for a brief discussion on how he intends to keep his company on the cutting edge and battle the biggest threats to its future success.
But RedHat seems content to focus on the server side, while keeping developers employed to work on Gnome if the day ever arrives where desktop Linux adoption ever gains traction. Their bottom line seems healthy, so why not.
if the day ever arrives where desktop Linux adoption ever gains traction.
for desktop linux to actually get started
first needs to surpass the Mac os x in features,etc. then they can start thinking about making a dent to windows 90% desktop market share. once linux gains about 20%-40% desktop market share away from windows then they can start calling it desktop linux. and don’t forget the scale goes form 0%-100%, desktop windows owning 90% of that.
Edited 2006-06-02 01:38
for desktop linux to actually get started
first needs to surpass the Mac os x in features,etc. then they can start thinking about making a dent to windows
The Mac has its own set of problems as can be seen from the article about this one. Basically, people aren’t willing to pay the hardware tax. But all indications are that desktop Linux has actually surpassed Macs in the desktop market. That doesn’t mean much though. It’s like Jimmy from South Park surpassing a turtle in the 100 yard dash.
90% desktop market share. once linux gains about 20%-40% desktop market share away from windows then they can start calling it desktop linux. and don’t forget the scale goes form 0%-100%, desktop windows owning 90% of that.
Don’t even think about 20-40%. That’s decades away. Gnome had a little motto for one of their conferences of 10 in ’10 – which meant 10% in 2010. That in itself is highly optimistic and pretty unrealistic.
People like you always quote percentages. No data to back up these percentages, but you quote them anyway.
You, are perpetuating the sheep mentality. You want to be like everyone else.
You will not accept desktop Linux until everyone else does, but one thing you forget….
It does not matter what everyone else uses, it is what is on our own desktop that matters.
I have Linux on my personal PC. It is my sole desktop, there is no Windows on this machine, there never will be. So, as far as I can see, “Desktop Linux” has arrived, it is here, and it is better than everything else by leaps and bounds.
I do not care what you, or everyone else runs on their computer. I am not a sheep.
I do not care what you, or everyone else runs on their computer. I am not a sheep.
You claim you don’t care what anyone else runs on their desktop and yet you take the time to post about it, and then end it all off by labeling someone else.
LOL whatever dude.
> It does not matter what everyone else uses, it is what
> is on our own desktop that matters.
>
> I have Linux on my personal PC. It is my sole desktop,
> there is no Windows on this machine, there never will
> be. So, as far as I can see, “Desktop Linux” has
> arrived, it is here, and it is better than everything
> else by leaps and bounds.
Do you actually know that Linux has reached its current state exactly *because* you are *not* the only one running it? I recommend that you look at the changelog about who contributed what. Then say again that it was irrelevant that these people used Linux (and thus invested a lot of time in it), because to you it only matters what *you* use.
Clearly you missed my point;
I do not care what anyone else uses on their computers, I use Linux… Therefore, as far as I am conserned, Desktop Linux is HERE.
But RedHat seems content to focus on the server side, while keeping developers employed to work on Gnome if the day ever arrives where desktop Linux adoption ever gains traction. Their bottom line seems healthy, so why not.
To me it seems that they keep developers working on GNOME, because they want to offer RHEL Workstation as a development platform for their server offerings. Most of their newer additions seem to support that:
– Heavy investment getting gcj production-ready, and building a gcj-compiled Java toolchain.
– Providing the Red Hat Developer Suite to RHEL subscribers, which contains Eclipse + plugins.
– Providing the Red Hat Application Server to RHEL subscribers. This contains prepackaged Java class libraries, Tomcat, Jonas, etc.
– Building and integrating Systemtap and Frysk. Two tools for diagnosing the system and applications at various levels.
As far as I can see this seems to be a good bet. We are slowly moving towards “the browser is the operating system” for various (but not all) applications. And Red Hat provides everything that is required in the chain: desktop software (Red Hat Desktop), workstation software for development (RHEL Workstation), and server software (RHEL ES/AS).
Wow you mean they’re still agressive even after the incoming young Bush administration let them off with such a savage slap on the wrist, how hard to believe is that?
Modding it down doesn’t make it any less true.
Open source businesses will thrive in the era of the commodity OS. Traditional platform vendors are running for higher ground in the web services and IT services businesses because they cannot hold off the flood of cheap, high-quality, and flexible open source software at the OS, middlewear, server, and application levels. Open source is a natural fit beyond the desktop application and into web services, as we have seen Linux-based Google services dominate the search market before Microsoft could waddle its fat ass up the supply chain.
Among the various explanations for why Linux penetration has been slow in the desktop space, relative to growth in servers, is that open source development models don’t work that great for application software such as office suites. The free software desktop had to wait for major contributions from Netscape and Sun before it could pick up steam. If the playing field is moving up to the web services level, it can only reduce the amount of focus that has gone into reinventing the desktop and competing against Microsoft’s strength.
Essentially, while the barriers to making money licensing application software are quite high, all it takes is a great idea and some open source software to start making money off the web. One person’s work can touch millions of people–isn’t that part of the spirit of open source software?
Businesses that provide services for integrating open source components into a convenient stack will be successful. Ubuntu now has a fully integrated LAMP stack that comes fully configured and certified right out of the box, and Canonical will provide phone or internet support for $700 USD per year per server.
The fact that the hype is beginning to die down and money is starting to be made is a great thing. It’s the culmination of the PC era, and Microsoft is beginning to settle into a slow, decades-long decline. Harware is cheap, OS and application software is cheap, and web services run on ad revenue. Welcome to the post-PC era, where supply-side of society heavily subsidizes digital communications technology as a cost of reaching their market, in essence, demonitizing these links from the prospective of the consumer.
And open source will power the post-PC era.
Among the various explanations for why Linux penetration has been slow in the desktop space, relative to growth in servers, is that open source development models don’t work that great for application software such as office suites.
It’s actually a lot more than that. A bigger barrier is that Linux is so fragmented. And since everything is open source you have tons of distros, that are basically equivalent in what you can run on it, but different enough that ISVs have a hard time targetting it.
If the playing field is moving up to the web services level, it can only reduce the amount of focus that has gone into reinventing the desktop and competing against Microsoft’s strength.
Agreed. If the investments to be made are made on software that talks to a browser then there’s not much incentive to really go outside of the box and so something different in the desktop space.
RedHat realized a long time ago that desktop Linux wasn’t going to be something to make money off of. They’ll keep their hands in it just so it doesn’t go stale and Novell doesn’t get to own it, but they’ve moved on from that pipe dream.
It’s the culmination of the PC era, and Microsoft is beginning to settle into a slow, decades-long decline
That might be yours and many others fantasy, but it’s hardly reality.
“It’s actually a lot more than that. A bigger barrier is that Linux is so fragmented.”
That’s another very compelling argument, but I think that the plethora of distros is just a natural OSS adaption to try many different ways of packaging the same kinds of pieces and see which way works best. At the top of the mountain of distros are the ones that certify their configurations and provide support. These are the ones that ISVs target, and they continue to improve based on taking what works from the smaller distros. Not all distros need to be ISV targets. Not too many people run Oracle on Slackware.
“That might be yours and many others fantasy, but it’s hardly reality.”
I don’t think it’s fantasy at all. You tell me how Microsoft can grow their platforms business given their market dominance and the commodification of the desktop space. How does Microsoft deal with the fact that “emerging markets” are way more receptive to open source than the US/Europe will ever be? The keys to dominating the application layer for Microsoft have been “embrace and extend” and nurturing a culture of software piracy. Hasn’t open source figured out a more socially and politically palatable way of doing both of these? I’m not predicting a nosedive, just a levelling-off followed by a slow decline. I’m sure plenty of “real” analysts agree.
1) Open source is beyond an Operating System.
2) Microsoft isn’t going anywhere. You are just expressing Wishfull thinking.
If Linux hasn’t dominated against Windows by now, it sure won’t happen when Vista comes out.
Good luck with your dreams and FUD.
That is, Microsoft commands a powerful marketing machine, but the content of the platform is old and stable.
Now, with Windows Vista, at least they will provide a more secure platform. Kudos to them. If I could I would install Windows Vista on computers of users that can’t run Linux; It’s a pity that Windows Vista will cost lots of money and will have a kind of heavy hardware requirement, though.
Well, at least things seem to be improving everywhere…
“It’s the culmination of the PC era, and Microsoft is beginning to settle into a slow, decades-long decline.”
There are a lot of arm-chair market prophets on OS-Noodle.
I make daily observations. More Linux being deployed and the MS-techs wrestling with AD conversions. It’s fun to watch the motions.
The interview wasn’t particularly detailed, but it certainly didn’t focus on how MS acts towards OSS. This issue was mentioned only in one question. Why the sensationalist title? Wouldn’t a better title be “Matthew Szulik discusses RHEL and OSS” or something like that?
One thing is for sure on osnews.com, place Microsoft’s name in any title and it will attract mass attention. Notice the general disparity in the number of comments between MS and non-MS related articles.