“I predict that Linux will eventually be at the foundation of nearly every enterprise system and that the whole issue of which server operating system to choose will then disappear into ambient background noise. It’s not often that I make predictions about predictions, but because the above prophecy is so bold, I’ll make an exception: I predict that this will turn out to be one of the easiest predictions I’ve ever made.” Nicholas Petreley predicts the future of Linux for ComputerWorld.
ComputerWorld on the Future of Linux
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
– Corporate users want to maintain their own OS? No, they not only want a
vendor to do that, they want the biggest vendor, because the Suns and IBMs
have more engineering resources. An in-house OS would be an even worse
backwater than a little vendor.
– Linux is the only OS that comes with source? Does this guy know anything
more than what he reads in IT rags?
– Microsoft is going to fold and leave you with no upgrade option? Oh, sure.
When Microsoft folds, it will be because the herd has stampeded off to the
next big thing. You’re going to see it coming a long ways off, and any
corporate user is going to have the same reaction – follow the herd. Only
the severely lame will be there weeping as the dirt hits the coffin lid.
Linux probably will do OK in the corporate world, but it will be IBM’s Linux,
not “Linux source code.”
IBM will sell the machines and sell the support for RedHat’s version of Linux, but it will be Redhat supporting it, not IBM……IBM does not want to be in the OS business any longer than it has to, with Linux, they just need to pick a vendor, and make the kernel work on their machines. Redhat is the obviouse vendor, and IBM will be providing patches and modules that will be included with their preinstalled system so the system works with the OS. 5 people per Product line can do that and it willbe a lot cheaper for IBM.
If big blue is pouring so much development time and $ into the kernel, and Sun is making so many improvements to Gnome, won’t all these improvements make it into distros everywhere? Linux users everywhere benefit from IBM’s and Sun’s work, no? (Donn, I’m trying to get at what you mean by “IBM’s Linux”?)
If so, it sounds like Linux is on the verge of becoming much more bug-free and easy to use.. (?)
Loonyx, easy-to-use? I’ll believe that when I see it.
Right, same with me. But isn’t that what Sun’s efforts are working toward?
Well of course GNU/Linux is getting easier to use. Has anyone used Mandrake at all? It’s alot easier than when i was trying to use Corel or Debian. So yes things are getting better. Course i see alot of remarks like opinionboy that say that GNU/Linux is a hard operating to learn, use, manage, install, ect. Though most of these people are probably the type that just download one distro and judge the whole community on that, Or they use GNU/Linux and don’t get the feel of it and rate it on a bias demostration that no body could use this cause it’s not what their used to. Course i said probably and that’s probably not the truth for some of those. but theirs one thing i got to say and that’s _some_ people don’t get the concept that operating systems are hard to use. It took me just as long to learn windows as it did when i learned the GNU/Linux operating system.
Is AIX (IBM’s UNIX) bug free and easy to use? By IBM’s Linux, I mean IBM’s going to
come to your meeting room and sell you Linux. Right now it looks like they’re working
with 4 existing distributions, and it could stay that way, or it might be in IBM’s
interest some day to buy one up and settle on that one. My point is that the
relationship between IBM and its customer is the same, AIX or Linux. Source code
is irrelevant. (So is ease of use, this stuff goes in the basement.)
It would be interesting to see what they would do, if FreeBSD started getting more
press. I think Linux probably suits their objectives better.
Linux has the power to become ubiquitous. AIX does not. also, IBM has to put very little resources into development(basic patches to make it work well on IBM hardware) FreeBSD is a good ssytem, but unfortunatly, the BSD licence is not to good for Ubiquity since people can keep changes Proprietary and not make them usful to the rest of the community. this limits FBSD’s chances to become what Linux has pretty much done (in theory). IBM likes that they have the full potential of the Linux development community at there disposal. BSD does not since people do not have to give the code back to the project. so you see, IBM has more to gain by using Linux than it does by using either AIX(in the future) of BSD. less cost(AIX)and it is a certainty that improvments to Linux will benefit them(BSD)
“trakal” said:
“_some_ people don’t get the concept that operating systems are hard to use. It took me just as long to learn windows as it did when i learned the GNU/Linux operating system. ”
That is true for those operating systems.
However, with my BeOS 5.x Pro, It took 15 minutes to install ( install consisting of, “where do you want to put it” ) and less than that to figure out how to use the OS once it was installed.
Why use anyting else, except for the obvious reasons?
well, OS X.1 took me all of 2 minutes to finish interacting with the installer. probably took only a few more minutes to copy files but I went to the store. once it was installed it worked flawlessly. now when I go t my Win ME machine, I get anoyed by the crapy Memmory managment. when an IM pops up the whole computer lags……I could be doing 50 things with OS X and not one single lag occures.
It seems that “ease of use” wouldnt matter on the server end of corporatations. It doesnt have to be “easy to use”. Thats why you pay an IT department to do this for you. Maybe Im wrong, I have been before. The one major concept on the issue that everyone forgets to mention. If you are going to replace any OS as a server or workstation. The IT/persons in charge must know a good amount of what they are replacing. I got my MCSE just because of it. Im sure some of you think that I am lame. I probably am, but thats my view point
You all sound very young and unknowing to me. Give another ten years and you might catch up to what business needs!
MCSE, Pff. I have to follow in your wake fixing your f*** ups.
You dont know who I am, nor what I do. You sir are the very reason that people get sit of message boards. I gave my 2 cents and that was it. I didnt say that it was a definate guide to corporate computing. So Im young, whats your point. Its a young industry.
PS Please tell me what you mean by fixing my ** ups
Imaginereno:
>>>However, with my BeOS 5.x Pro, It took 15 minutes to install ( install consisting of, “where do you want to put it” ) and less than that to figure out how to use the OS once it was installed.
Why use anyting else, except for the obvious reasons?<<<
well one. how many other operating systems have you used. i mean for me to go from a DOS operating system to a UNIX-clone was what was differnt. and if you understand how to use the terminal on a unix like operating system then you pretty much can say that you can use other unix like operating systems within a few minutes of leaning the differnt variations.
I’ve used BeOS 5.0 personal. yes it was 15 minutes to install (which in mandrake which was about the same, mostly picking out all of my pacakages). thought i didn’t really like it. i couldn’t figure out how to get online with it, and it didn’t really give me some software i could work with as i just installed it.
i should rephrase what i said about having to learn how to use it to that and having to also deal with it.
I feel BeOS was going forward, not backwards like Loonyx, all for the sake of free software and ‘compatibility’ with what some company did x years ago. Loonyx feels clunky, grossly unresponsive and so backwards to me in so many areas, it’s not funny. Won’t be sitting on my desktop in this lifetime, that’s for sure. But then again, the topic says nothing about the desktop, but the enterprise, so I should shut up.
Of course, take my opinions with a grain of salt; I’m no self-proclaimed ‘expert’, but I do know what I like. What I really like has been Amiga and BeOS. It seemed the sky was the limit, especially with the Amiga. The things it did were amazing (still are). Loonyx depresses me. Severely. Not my image of cutting-edge, or what computers should be about…AT ALL.
Call me ignorant for caring about intelligent design.
BeOS and AmigaOS are desktop Os’es – Linux is a server OS. Period.