Submitted by Red Hat is planning a packaged Linux desktop solution that it hopes will push its Linux desktop offering to a far broader audience than exists for its current client solution. The move is designed in part to compete with Novell’s SUSE Linux Enterprise 10 platform, which includes SUSE Linux Enterprise Server and SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, which were released in July 2006.
I thought at one point they already had a desktop offering ‘for the masses’, but they scrapped it and started the Fedora project.
I suspect they realised that many corporations want an end-to-end supplier (servers, middleware, desktop). Whether that be Novell/Suse, Sun, Microsoft, or whoever.
Also, the success of distros such as Ubuntu recently has probably led them to reevaluate the benefit of having some say in how the desktop develops. Better to be in the driving seat than in the trailer!
Just a guess of course, but it seems to be what the article is suggesting too. In fact I’m surprised they took quite so long about it,truth be told.
Edit: added the word “many”
Edited 2007-03-19 20:14
I agree: this is very significant and it has more to do with Ubuntu than with Suse.
Red Hat realized that losing the desktop mindshare is bad because the young geeks of today will be the system administrators and purchasing managers of tomorrow, who will buy what they know and like.
But perhaps the news that came out a few days ago about Suse seeing large desktop deals is indeed the cause of this move.
I agree: this is very significant and it has more to do with Ubuntu than with Suse.
Red Hat realized that losing the desktop mindshare is bad because the young geeks of today will be the system administrators and purchasing managers of tomorrow, who will buy what they know and like.
No, I don’t think it has anything to do with Ubuntu. Keep in mind this will be a commercial offering, not a free community project in line with Fedora.
Red Hat does have a desktop, but it’s priced around $250/seat and is targeted at specialized enterprise clients (it’s sold 10 to a pack, last I saw); this would seem to be an offering targeted for more versatile deployments with probably lighter requirements. They’ve got no vision of marketing it at the consumer level, but they specifically mentioned the ability to download and purchase a subscription online, the same way Novell offers SLED (in addition to their conventional reseller channels).
No doubt they’d like professionals and power-users to opt-in as well, but as with SLED vs. openSuse many of those standalone non-corporate users would likely not see the value in subscribing for a service they are completely capable of maintaining themselves with the community project.
The IT-oriented trade and business mags have been full of stories and releases for Novell’s commercial-oriented desktop linux starting with NLD, but really ramping up prior to and post-SLED. Even if some of it has been fluff, to put it mildly, there’s no such thing as bad publicity. With SP1 due soon for SLED incorporating new updates from SL 10.2, that marketing machine is likely going to start ramping up again in the near future. Red Hat has been non-existent from a business desktop perspective, I’ve probably come across more press on Xandros as a desktop alternative than Red Hat. I think Red Hat is finally reacting, after years of continually maintaining that desktop linux had no viable commercial market outside of specialized workstation or managed environment applications.
I suspect Red Hat would be loathe to admit it, but I see this as a direct response to the traction, if not actual license sales, Novell has gained. Even if the ISV’s are non-committal about bundling linux for business desktops, SLED is the distro they most often refer to. Even if companies are non-commital about moving to desktop linux, SLED is often the distro that’s referred to. Even if nobody’s actually buying it in massive numbers yet, people are still talking about SLED. Red Hat can’t afford to lose mindshare, their brand value is too important to have Novell trumpeting client wins in the press, I’m just surprised it took them this long to respond.
Just my 2c…
Fedora was never meant to be a ‘desktop for the masses’ – Fedora is a community based distribution as a ‘incubator’ for bleeding edge features which will eventually make their way into the commercial distribution which Red Hat sells.
As for the ‘desktop distribution for the masses’; they actually released one called Red Hat Desktop Linux – but it never took off, but then again, when it was made available, it was way back before Fedora – there weren’t the applications, heck, I don’t even think there was OpenOffice.org yet.
Even today, I don’t think Linux is ready for the masses – masses being the walmart shopping moron who thinks that Microsoft Office is the operating system, and the hard disk is the computer case itself; maybe in 18 months once HAL has become more mature, device support improves, Notes 8.0 will be out and mature, OpenOffice.org 2.3-2.4 will show big strides in usability.
Fedora an incubator? Don’t say that to the developers; every interview I’ve read so far has them pitching Fedora as a viable desktop offering, and that Fedora is not a beta testing environment!
Maybe the same developers feel gutted now that Red Hat has actually owned them by wanting a “viable desktop offering”?
Fedora an incubator? Don’t say that to the developers; every interview I’ve read so far has them pitching Fedora as a viable desktop offering, and that Fedora is not a beta testing environment!
Maybe the same developers feel gutted now that Red Hat has actually owned them by wanting a “viable desktop offering”?
I wish that were the case, but from my experience, they don’t spend much time fixing the bugs in their releases; HAL bugs that exist in Fedora 6 in regards to handling multi-partition music cds is up the crapper as one example.
if Fedora want to be taken seriously as a distribution, not only must it be up to date, they must also be willing to hold back a release because there is an unacceptably high number of bugs in it.
Not only do these bugs shed a bad light onto Fedora, but turn people off from running Linux operating system, and as thus, the loss of a potential convert.
Actually some of bugs turned out be duplicated, upstream issues and others are solved but no closed meaning the number of unresolved bugs are deceiving. For these issues, BugZappers[1] is created for people to help sorted out these bugs to ease developers task. This shows these kind of problems are not really unique to Fedora project.
[1]http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
Edited 2007-03-20 18:14
Good luck. I went with Novell SLED because there was no suitable Red Hat offering, and I am satisfied with my decision. I’ll look into the desktop market again in 3 years when the times have changed.
I guess RH can’t rest on their laurels any more.
The “masses” are so named for a good reason — they’re the majority. You ignore their abilities, needs, and desires at your peril.
Microsoft is helping Linux so much. Trying to force people to use a low quality OS, the people are fleeing to Linux.
Windows is neither a low quality OS nor are people flocking to Linux. But I do see the tides changing…
Windows is [not] a low quality OS
Funny quote of the week!
Edited 2007-03-19 21:41
“Windows is neither a low quality OS nor are people flocking to Linux. But I do see the tides changing…”
Vista is not low quality? I guess you like your OS highly priced, infected with DRM/activation/WGA, and having absurd system requirements. You are right, the tides are changing, obviously not in Microsoft’s favor.
“Vista is not low quality? I guess you like your OS highly priced, infected with DRM/activation/WGA, and having absurd system requirements. You are right, the tides are changing, obviously not in Microsoft’s favor.”
He said Windows, not Vista. 80% of the world clearly doesn’t think the quality is low enough to stop using it.
“He said Windows, not Vista”
Vista is Windows.
“80% of the world clearly doesn’t think the quality is low enough to stop using it.”
There will be a steady decline in Windows market share, because of people switching to Linux. The decline will be similar to the IE market share decline, because of people switching to Firefox.
“Vista is Windows.”
Windows is a branding of a line of operating systems. Vista is the newest of that particular line of products. However, Vista does not equal Windows per se. For example, many people still associate Windows with XP. Many wont know Vista even exists until it’s time to purchase a new computer. I use Windows, but I use Windows XP (as well as Linux), but I will avoid using Vista until forced to by an employer.
Sorry to nit pick 🙂
“There will be a steady decline in Windows market share, because of people switching to Linux. The decline will be similar to the IE market share decline, because of people switching to Firefox.”
While I agree there may be a steady decline, I believe it will be much smaller than the decline of IE market share, at least for a while. There are large differences between an operating system and a web browser, including difficulty of adoption. While Linux as a desktop has been experiencing wonderful growth, it still has a lot of non-technical hurdles to jump before it sees adoption on the scale of Firefox.
However, I believe Firefox and other FOSS such as OpenOffice.org, Scribus, Gimp, Inkscape, etc. offer an easier transition to an open source operating system since familiarity with the cross platform applications aren’t lost.
I dunno… switching operating systems is a bigger jump then switching browsers… I could switch browsers in a week. But I could -at best- switch operating systems in months…
“Vista is Windows.”
Vista is Windows but Windows is not just Vista, it’s XP, 2000, ME, etc.
“There will be a steady decline in Windows market share, because of people switching to Linux. The decline will be similar to the IE market share decline, because of people switching to Firefox.”
Compare the rate of desktop Linux growth over the last 20 years with the rate of Firefox growth over the last 2-3 years then try that one again.
“Compare the rate of desktop Linux growth over the last 20 years with the rate of Firefox growth over the last 2-3 years then try that one again.”
Linux is better than ever, while Windows is worse than ever. Don’t underestimate people’s disgust for Vista. Linux will take market share from Windows, it might not happen as fast as Firefox’s market share increase, but it will happen.
Edited 2007-03-20 21:56
He said Windows, not Vista. 80% of the world clearly doesn’t think the quality is low enough to stop using it.
I think that most of the world doesn’t think at all when it comes to OS selection. They just accept what is handed to them, and too many people isn’t even aware that there is something to think about.
This will continue as long as the dominant vendor keeps preloading their OS on almost every PC sold.
Windows is not a low quality OS.
Window excels at many things other OSs fail at:
* standard developer APIs across all versions
* backward compatibility
* centralised configuration through active directory
* being really easy to pick up how to configure things(as long as the wizards work)
* file and printer sharing
But it’s not flexible enough and not Free software, so I refuse to use it.
Backward compatibility has become a problem with Vista. Many of my apps don’t work or work poorly.
You’re right. People aren’t flocking to Linux :o)
Windows SUCKS. It is the time for Linux to conquer the world. Thank you, Microsoft.
the new Red Hat desktop would be preinstalling it on a Dell, HP, or Lenovo laptop.
Unless it’s free AND factory installed, it will not be adopted by masses. Linux geeks are generally happy with the 100% free distros. And as far as the rest of the people know, Windows is also free because it comes pre-installed on their PC, and they just accept as normal all the problems that Windows has. I hope this effort brings some good results for RH and the Linux community in general. Maybe RH could distribute the OS for free but offer payed support.
“Unless it’s free AND factory installed, it will not be adopted by masses.”
“Windows” is not free and has been adopted by the masses, too. Furthermore, PCs sold with Linux preinstalled will soon have their hard disks wiped and Linux replaced by a pirated copy of some “Windows”.
“And as far as the rest of the people know, Windows is also free because it comes pre-installed on their PC, and they just accept as normal all the problems that Windows has.”
People pay for presinstalled “Windows”; this is usually refered to as the “Windows tax” which is included in the whole price of the PC itself. “Windows” is not free, people are just made think it was.
“I hope this effort brings some good results for RH and the Linux community in general. Maybe RH could distribute the OS for free but offer payed support.”
I would see this a good solution. But furthermore, advertising is needed to make people aware that they have a good alternative to “Windows”, so they do not think anymore that nothing else exists. Linux should be available at local shops, too, in a pretty box with installation media and maybe a handbook with nice pictures in it.
Sun offers a similar solution, as you might know. Solaris is free, while you can buy support from Sun. Especially corporate customers use this offer.
It does not have to be *free* (beer), it just has to have a transparent cost. As evidenced by Microsoft Windows.
However if you had read the article you would know that they are not targeting the mass market of consumers.
“Asked if part of the strategy is the mass consumer market, Cornier responded that Red Had has “no plans to go and sell this offering at Best Buy, if that’s what you mean by the mass consumer market.”
So they are scrapping rpm for apt? :p
So they are scrapping rpm for apt? :p
Maybe not much news atm, but there exists apt for rpm: http://freshrpms.net/apt/
By the way rpm (or deb) and apt (or yum, urpmi, smart, etc) are at different levels in package management.
Edited 2007-03-19 21:19
Seems like this case gets made every time a “Ubuntu vs. SomethingElse” article gets posted. The first response made note of it, but:
comparing RPM to “apt” is comparing apples to oranges.
‘rpm’ is analogous to ‘dpkg’
‘apt’ is analogous to any number of rpm-management systems such as ‘urmpi’ (Mandriva), ‘yum’ (RHEL, Yellow-Dog, and others), etc.
Sorry, can’t help but make the necessary post.
Rhel5 is an excellent desktop choice I myself use Fedora but there is the need for a Desktop selection from Red Hat for sure. The market is large enough for several distro’s for users to pick from the better the competition and the quality of the software will keep evolving.
We use Rhel3 at work and have a few development Rhel4 nodes in use. I am glad to see Red Hat is taking notice and hopefully will fill this gap in the market place. It is really exciting to here they will be pre-loading machines entry level would be awesome!
“Rhel5 is an excellent desktop choice”
I don’t agree with you about this; I have it installed on my HDD and I wanted to see how it would be to install a software like f-spot from source (as there is no precompiled rpms for this great application); It took me about 12 dependancies to solve with alot of code troubleshooting. I ubuntu the story is different, because dependancies will be handled with the installer, and you are done..much like what a home desktop user will want.
But the word Desktop is really HETEROGENOUS; because it could mean
1.Corporate Desktop
2.Home Desktop
3.Gaming Dektop
4.other arenas Desktop
So if a corporation would consider RHEL5 then its a good choice, mainly because administrators will care about the technical problems and solve then for the corporation; while a Home desktop user will be left alone in the dark to find his way away from the darkness of the jungle in bash consoles; and if Gaming Desktop is meant then no single distro right now, no matter how advanced it is (with emulators) will reval Microsoft windows. And if we talk about scientific desktop then all linuxes will beat the hell out of windows with its stability and flexibility.
Really Desktop version is not anymore correct and the more appropriate term would be “Desktop Versions”
And finally I wish that linux will not follow Microsoft pattern of Desktop versions because they are not based on really 100% real life senarios. Home N, Home basic, Home Premium (first one for Homeless, second version for Poor Home owners, and 3rd versions for People with really nice Homes on the beach)!!
Red Hat lost a lot of the desktop margin when they stopped support for the version < 9.0 series. When they went to the Rhel environment they focused on the Server or Enterprise environment only. If they are focuses on the desktop the end user would be a continued customer if they stick around long enough to reap the rewards. I have a feeling that the Fedora Community is in the decline and they probably think the same thing.
I would love to see Red Hat get serious about the desktop being the fact vendors are looking into pre-loading the OS they had better get in gear or be left behind…
I have a feeling that the Fedora Community is in the decline and they probably think the same thing.
In decline?
http://distrocenter.linux.com/article.pl?sid=07/01/08/1937206&tid=1…
Yeah, it’s sure devastating.
❓
Red Hat lost a lot of the desktop margin when they stopped support for the version < 9.0 series. When they went to the Rhel environment they focused on the Server or Enterprise environment only.
Yet they let community working on a general purpose distribution called Fedora which is the base of RHEL so they can pick up the most stable packages to be included.
If they are focuses on the desktop the end user would be a continued customer if they stick around long enough to reap the rewards.
At that time, home desktop market was not profitable even with its advanced features superior to say Windows XP (ask both SUSE and Mandriva that were forced to reorganize themselves). Are you aware some of desktop features are developed by Red Hat? Beside, Red Hat is also working on embedding systems.
I have a feeling that the Fedora Community is in the decline and they probably think the same thing.
In decline because there is already 2 millions installation of Fedora Core 6 (which may be higher) not including previous and test release?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics
In decline because the development list is so busy enough to fill the email?
Thank you for speaking the Orwellian way.
Still I believe the (K)Ubuntu installs are greater than Fedora I am not sure where stats are kept on this?
So what? The point was about debunking the argument about the decline of Fedora development on which you are proven wrong.
I’m using the CentOS version (free clone), and it’s very nice and stable as a desktop OS. What else do they want to add?
HP announced massive corporate sales of of Desktops preloaded with Linux.
Peugeot Citroen moves from Windows to Novell SLED Linux desktops.
The French Parliament dumps Windows and adopts Ubuntu Linux for its’ desktops.
and more…
Yes it crept up on us when we weren’t looking – the Year of the Linux Desktop! – Fanfare.
RH has decided it has to compete in this market or risk losing out.
If you visit Novell’s website they have all kinds of Information about SLED and videos showing functionality to software applications like Evolution for instance. On Red Hat’s site they have a small section without much information more on memory to price. They really need to let their operating system shine and promote it what can they lose well everything as far as the desktop goes if they are not careful…
Edited 2007-03-19 23:36
Peugeot Citroen moves from Windows to Novell SLED Linux desktops.
And the good thing about that, unlike any so-called GM deals that might get promoted, atleast Peugeot Citroen isn’t going down the gurgler like Ford and GM are currently.
Don’t count Solaris out either; its a long road, there is a massive market of available Windows clients that can be converted; things are moving to the server, the client is becoming less and less important, with this move off the desktop, Microsoft is going to be forced into the corner, to compete on merit rather than intimidation of customers, vendors and so-called ‘partners’.
I got burned one with the sudden ending of RH9 after a year. Then, Red Hat’s CEOs mumbled something about telling people to use windows as a client OS. Now, much of the same. They will not be pushing for real preloads at retail locations.
Red Hat is fine as a server, but I will not take them seriously as a client OS, not because they are not technically capable of producing great software, but because Red Hat’s corporate culture does not believe in the desktop or in its ability to deliver in this area.
Nothing worse than letting fear immobilize you. I am sticking to Suse and K/ubuntu for desktops.
I could never find a replacement suitable to replace Red Hat 9 or that would work with my hardware. I also suspect this lead to Ubuntu’s popularity rise and SuSE to. But this was Red Hat’s move on the desktop now it is more than ready any distro…
SuSE SLED is a nice desktop OS and Red Hat must be getting a little jealous.
> but because Red Hat’s corporate culture does not believe in the desktop
“Get the facts” 🙂
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RedHatContributions
* gnome.org infrastructure, hosting and bandwidth
* pango: originally written and maintained
* glib, gtk+: most primary maintainers and developer work
* metacity: written and maintained
* nautilus: co-maintained
* gnome-panel: co-maintained
* gnome-session: maintained
* vte: written and maintained
* cairo: written (employee) and maintained
* gconf: written and maintained
* dbus: written (employee) and maintained
* hal: written (employee) and maintained
* gnome-keyring: written and maintained
* gnome control-center: co-maintained
* evince: written and maintained
* NetworkManager: written and maintained
* vino: written and maintained
* gnome-menus: written and maintained
* sabayon: written and maintained
* dogtail – UI automation and testing framework
* Xorg: major contributions and maintenance.
* AIGLX: Compositing desktop framework.
What does part of the glory of Ubuntu ?
– hal
– NetworkManager
– AIGLX
– etc
Edited 2007-03-20 12:03
Writing good code is not the same as providing a coherent desktop offering to the market. Does Red Hat invest in lots of sound technologies?
Yes, but a mixture of conservatism and its non-desktop corporate culture have kept it from delivering a product as strong on the desktop as its server offerings are.
> but because Red Hat’s corporate culture does not believe in the desktop
btw : Who is the major contributor of OLPC OS ?
Red Hat.
Red Hat believe in desktop. But they do not believe that Linux is/was already fine for all propose.
Check the relative success of Xandros, Linspire, Mandr[ake|iva], etc…
Fedora is all well and good, but it is a community distro. If I am some PHB who wants a commercial distro, why am I going to trust Red Hat to provide one? They already yanked out the rug once before.
I think it will be good for RH to offer a desktop distro again, but IMHO they’ll have a little work to make people forget how they quit doing so once before.
they already do provide one, it’s called Red Hat Enterprise Desktop. What they DON’T offer is something for outside of the enterprise.
I don’t really see why Fedora cannot be great desktop operating system besides it being testbed for upcoming RedHat enterprise shrinkwrapped boxes.
With couple smart tweaks like those from Stanton Finley’s WEB site ( http://www.stanton-finley.net )
my Fedora5 is flying on poor Duron 85o MHz and EVERYTHING I do on my Linux box and I need is there; no need for expensive commercial applications.
That’s why I think RedHat’s move is a good trend even a bit late ( Canonical-Ubuntu, Novell-SUSE and Xandros have their share in overall Desktop Linux upcoming tide).
It seems Red Hat people learned their lesson: server market is OK but there is Desktop Linux market growing too.
Man, I like the trend. It is so encouraging.
Edited 2007-03-20 03:53
Raven Zachary, senior analyst and open-source practice head at the 451 Group, agreed, telling eWEEK that most organizations have highly heterogeneous data center deployments and that he does not see a single operating system vendor having much success in persuading enterprise customers to standardize on a single operating system platform any time soon.
While this is true of large companies many smaller companies prefer to stick with one vendor if at all possible. Microsoft and Novell offer better solutions for those companies. Even if Redhat disregards smaller companies all together I think this is a needed step. If Redhat wants to compete with Microsoft’s server offerings they are going to have to compete with Microsoft’s desktop offerings also. Otherwise Microsoft is just going to leverage their desktop market against Redhat as they have done to UNIX in years past.
I will find it very hard to forgive Red Hat for the statement attributed to their CEO a few years ago recommending Windows for the desktop. I am rooting for Novell or Canonical to kick their butts.
Microsoft has shown us that when you control the desktop server sales will follow. Apple has shown us that when you believe in your product enough and entrust management to a technical visionary you produce a techical work of art that sets the standard for everyone else.
…Red Hat. What do they really believe? I am not sure I know nor do I really care after the way they treated their fan base a few years ago.
Red Hat does not go in bed with Microsoft.
…yet.
I have not used Red Hat for some time because of two issues:
1: rpm / yum sucks compared to synaptic
2: zero support for audio / video standards like MP3 / MPEG, etc…
An OS in 2007 that requires you to download / compile / install software just to play an mp3 is ridiculous. (bear in mind, I have not use Red Hat for some time, and I do not know if they changed thier policy about installing codecs).
All that will happen by having someting like RedHat pre-installed and having Joe average computer user try to use it and realize that they can not listen to an mp3 or watch an mpeg is just going to give a really bad impression of Linux to average users.
Linux distros NEED TO SUPPORT audio / video out of the box!!!
OpenGL support is getting better with the the new open source Intell drivers and usable (although not the fastest) open source ATI drivers.
1: rpm / yum sucks compared to synaptic
A command line interface vs a graphical interface? Let remind you it took a long time for apt-get to really mature on what it is today. Yum is very functional and keeps improving time by time.
2: zero support for audio / video standards like MP3 / MPEG, etc.
An OS in 2007 that requires you to download / compile / install software just to play an mp3 is ridiculous. (bear in mind, I have not use Red Hat for some time, and I do not know if they changed thier policy about installing codecs).
It does if you use Fluendo MP3 which is the legal gstreamer plugin of that codec
https://shop.fluendo.com/product_info.php?products_id=40 Otherwise, MP3 and other codecs cannot be included by default due to US Patent laws. Microsoft has learned the hard way http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/304871_msftalcatel23.html
If you really want Red Hat to include MP3 and other codecs, ask those patents holders to grant permission to redistribute and modify under either BSD or GPL.
All that will happen by having someting like RedHat pre-installed and having Joe average computer user try to use it and realize that they can not listen to an mp3 or watch an mpeg is just going to give a really bad impression of Linux to average users.
They will get an educational information about these codecs and will be more aware they have choice other than mp3.
Linux distros NEED TO SUPPORT audio / video out of the box!!!
They do with open source codecs like OGG Vorbis, Theora.
Quite a few have for some time. Problem is the Box that it would be coming out of is usually for the “unbelievible retail price of” X-amount of dollars at your local chain electronic store.
To be as blunt as possible, if the biggest task you have for your desktop is playing mp3s, RedHat is not for you. Go get yourself some Ubuntu. RedHat is built, marketed, and sold to professionals, who quite frankly, don’t really give a damn about mp3 support.
Didn’t they try this already leaving behind the desktop users after version 9? Seems to me they are just attempting to take advantage of a situation. I’m not against that, I’m just not expecting anything jaw-droping.
After RH 9 Red Hat provides :
– FC1
– RHEL 3
RH9 does not fill all needs.
> Didn’t they try this already leaving behind the desktop users after version 9?
It’s an old story.
After RH9 :
– RHEL 3 (WS option)
– FC1
– FC2
– FC3
– RHEL 4 (WS and Desktop option)
– FC4
– FC5
– FC6
– RHEL 5 (Desktop begin at 80 $/year).
Red Hat has made some good business moves, but as far as
sticking to anything,don’t count on it
Uh, guys, why are you fighting over 1.5 percent of the pie instead of trying to take a chunk away from the $100 billion gorilla?
but they already HAVE an enterprise desktop: it’s called Red Hat Enterprise Desktop. Hopefully, this desktop for the masses isn’t shooting fedora in the face.