IBM switching to Linux destops in Germany according to a Linux Forum 2006 presentation by their head of open source and Linux sales in Germany.
Interesting news from LinuxForum 2006
During a presentation on IBM's involvement with Open Source, Andreas Pleschek from IBM in Stuttgart, Germany, who heads open source and Linux technical sales across North East Europe for IBM made a very interesting statement...
"Andreas Pleschek also told that IBM has cancelled their contract with Microsoft as of October this year. That means that IBM will not use Windows Vista for their desktops. Beginning from July, IBM employees will begin using IBM Workplace on their new, Red Hat-based platform. Not all at once - some will keep using their present Windows versions for a while. But none will upgrade to Vista."
The question is, does this only apply to IBM in Germany, or IBM world wide?
If ALL of IBM switches to Linux desktops and OpenOffice... that would be a very significant loss to Microsoft; not only in direct licensing revenues, but also in speeding adoption of Linux by other companies. After all, if IBM can run on Linux desktops...
forums
RSS Feeds
Windows is a reality of the corporate environment. You can't run a business easily and cost-effectively on Linux when the rest of your collaborative world uses Windows.
You're right there Tomchu, but what if Windows ceases to be a reality? Back in the 80's *NIX was *the* reality in any corporate environment. Who would've thought that everyone would have a computer at home then? As I see it, this is just a small step towards a new revolution in software use. Once the enterprise/corporate world takes notice that you can use a Linux desktop system and not die trying, more and more will dare to take the step, and live happily ever after.
Thats what MS want us to believe - but you're so wrong Buddy. IBM has just been waiting to get Workplace fully deployed to finish getting rid of Windows. IBM already has over 15,000 Linux desktops deployed. That just shows that a large corporation can work effectively with a mix of desktop OS's in place. But now on to 100% Linux. Bye bye .doc and on to .odt,. IBM will never use XAML. This is the beginning of the end of MS as we know it. The arrogant illegal monopolist will just have to become an ordinary company amongst many others.
Our company has been doing it for the last two years. Collaboration implies open standards.
Just for your information: at typical German University, around 90% of Windows computers are without the licence.
Just for your information: at typical German University, around 90% of Windows computers are without the licence.
That isn't the case. Wild guess as to why? What if Susie Secretary wants to plug her Pocket PC in and sync it up with her desktop machine?
It has to Just Work, and it doesn't.
Besides, IBM has been talking about moving over to Linux for years now, as have other companies. I don't see much being done about it.
My wife had a pocket PC which she kept her checkbook in Money on and interfaced with Money on her PC... until Money ate her records on bothe the PC and the PDA. It don't "just work" on Windows either.
I mean, what a specious arguent; Microsoft keeps on moving the target so as to be incompatible with everybody else and tha't a goo thing. Please!
I wonder when tomchu last looked at Linux?
Welcome to last year.
Tomchu, you're right, IBM doesn't appear to have much of a desktop business. But I think that's because that's the point. They sold off Thinkpad division to Lenovo, and they don't make much for PC software, that which they do make (e.g. Lotus Notes) is practically speaking for businesses only.
I think IBM is trying to make good on their Open Source commitment, but as mentioned earlier, it takes a long time for a company that big to shift direction.
What I see being done is IBM cancelling their contract to Microsoft
WINE faster than Windows ... Linux "just working" with other proprietary devices ... ahh, when will the humour end? I take a look at the latest distros whenever the hype starts building up.
I was thoroughly unimpressed with the latest Ubuntu, for instance. Windows XP runs perfectly fine on my spare Duron 1.2/256 MB system. Ubuntu? Laggy as sh*t.
So much for better performance. Real people simply want to use computers, not spend half the day setting them up. My Macs are 100% plug-in-and-use, with no troubles. Windows XP is about 80% that way. I have yet to see any major Linux distro even come close to the same problem-free nature present in Windows/OS X.
Those who go around proclaiming that Linux is already much better than Windows/OS X are psychotic, and should drop the Linux religion. It's just an OS, people.
Odd, on my parent's 966 MHz Celeron with 192 Mb RAM it is all but laggy.
<i>Real people simply want to use computers, not spend half the day setting them up.</i>
That's why they should have to use a ready-to-go Linux distro instead of bothering with antivirus, antispywares, commercial pseudo-firewalls, video codecs, installing (often cracked) proprietary sw...
The time I spend needing setting up my computer has dropped next to zero since I switched to Linux.
Setting up my office network printer on Linux was a matter of three clicks and putting the IP address. My collegues took a day. I never had to install a single driver: they just were ready to go. What's the operating system where hardware Just Works?
<i>Those who go around proclaiming that Linux is already much better than Windows/OS X are psychotic</i>
Maybe. Freedom is inebriating
:-)
Go now, freedom frighter, your Crusade awaits you.
But Vista isn't Windows. It's Vista.
If you are going to be jerked to a new, largely incompatible environment, why not pick where you want to go, rather than having MS pull you along by the nose.
I was running ubuntu on Duron 1Ghz/640MB. Felt more responsive that my XP 3000+/1GB running windows 2000.
Even stripped down of useless processes and it's registry cleaned the win 2k box feels often laggy. Accesses harddrive when browsing the start menu etc. and gets less responsive over time. It starts swapping more and more the longer it's on.
My 1GHz duron is now running debian/fluxbox, current uptime is one month and it's still fast as hell. Im using it as my primary puter now.
>Those who go around proclaiming that Linux >is already much better than Windows/OS X are >psychotic, and should drop the Linux >religion. It's just an OS, people.
I guess im psychotic then.
I recently switched completely to linux because:
1. I find it easier and more logical to use and troubleshoot than windows.
2. It performs much better on my hardware.
3. It's a better network OS. I can use my puter from anywhere remotely. With a simple CLI.
So obiviously our experiences and opinions differ. We might try to respect it, ok?
I hope IBM dumps Microsoft. IBM has been pushing linux for a while and its about time it starts practicing what its been preaching.
Some additional reasoning on perhaps why IBM would be looking to dump MS is because of the trial going on with SCO right now. IBM has recently subpoenaed microsoft in that trial.
IBM wants to know any deals Microsoft had cut with SCO. In the summer of 2003, Microsoft started buying what would amount to approximately $16.6 million worth of SCO's Unix licenses . Many people saw this as proof that Microsoft was bankrolling SCO's lawsuit in an attempt to stall Linux's growth.
There\'s probably a German word for that...
Thats what MS want us to believe - but you're so wrong Buddy. IBM has just been waiting to get Workplace fully deployed to finish getting rid of Windows. IBM already has over 15,000 Linux desktops deployed. That just shows that a large corporation can work effectively with a mix of desktop OS's in place. But now on to 100% Linux. Bye bye .doc and on to .odt,. IBM will never use XAML. This is the beginning of the end of MS as we know it. The arrogant illegal monopolist will just have to become an ordinary company amongst many others.'
Unlike the Linux geeks who command <insert higher payscale here> to maintain Linux systems? It all boils down to which distro of Linux they plan on using, However, anyone trying to fool others into believing Linux is as user friendly as windows, is only really fooling themselves. Those of us who actually use both OS's know who is really fooling themselves...
Bill, is that you?
Debian is my personal preffered distro, works great for server applications, and so does Windows server class releases, if the user gets off his butt, and makes some security adjustments (assuming said person could AFFORD it to begin with)
Ease of use being the keyword here guys/gals, meaning easy setup, easy driver updates, and not to not having to worry about if your new hardware is supported by the OS or not.
Linux is great, if you do not mind learning more about the OS, and then tweaking it AS A SERVER OS. I have a few friends who also cannot afford, or dont want to afford MS products, so they also use it as a desktop OS. This being said, saying Linux is as good as windows in the desktop arena is pure BS.
Linux just isnt as polished compared to Windows, plain and simple.
I now love linux!
Ubuntu is a really good GNU/Linux distribution based on Debian, that can have severall very nice GUIs, in my case and choice, the GNOME. I like XFCE (fast) as well. Fluxbox flies....
Of course if Microsoft wanted Windows to be banned from market, the world would not stop and other OS would take its place, preferably severall. No drama. MS Windows would be quickly forgotten.
In this moment, if i set up a GNU/Linux box with KDE and show it to 90% of MS Windows users and say it's Visssta, the new MS OS, they will believe and adapt to it.
Let's not underestimate the human capacity to adptation.
--
pedro.mg
I never installed Linux on my own machines because I didnt want to deal with it, I liked the idea of FLOSS but not in practice.
Now, I run a dual boot Win/Linux on both our home desktops and even on my trusty Thinkpad I have dabble with various Linux flavors. My Mac laptop gets very little use.
Fast forward to today and over the past 8 months I have installed Ubuntu on 10 desktops belonging to my parents and their retired friends with half the machines being P3's and you know what? No problem with the old folks including the 3 who never saw a mouse before.
They can surf, write letters, email, IM, listen to and burn cd's, watch dvd's,..you know, 90% of what people do on their computers (apart from gamers or pr0n addicts but theyre both degenerates!!).
My dad even asked me why I didnt switch him earlier! I've done minimal maintenance on a few machines but honestly its been out of sight out of mind apart from the old folks who IM me to say hi every time im online.
On the other hand, when my Windows using friends call for free help (all geeks are burdened by this) because their computer is crawling at a snails pace, I tell them to reformat their HD, dump IE and Outlook, get Firefox, AdAware, Zonealarm, AVG antivirus and a few other freebies and THEN I might look but most of those machines are so loaded with trojans, virii and other goodies that its a total waste time.
So please let me laugh in your face if you think that Linux is too hard on the desktop.
A browser is a browser, a word processor is the same and if a dozen retired people (as well as the two dozen people who work at the compassion club and the community center mentioned below) can get it with no problem, then it says a lot more about you.
As well, I got together with some friends at work last summer and we donated our time to wire up and install computers at a local compassion club (8 terminals) and a community centre (15 terminals) which had no new computers as they were donated and we had to cannibalize many of them to make others run. Both places run Linux. Actually, the community center asked us for Linux because they heard it was free and they were on the software watchdog shitelist because they were running illegal software.
And you know what? No problem.
Does this mean it would work at the graphic firm I am currently working at? No but I wouldnt buy a Mac if I was a gamer either.
You have to know your use.
I would have never dared try this with the ol Red Hat 6.2 but it seems to me that's where a lot of Linux 'experts' last saw a Linux desktop which reminds me that before OS X, I thought Mac software sucked.
Things change, preconceptions dont.
they already are
Lemme see, a free OS, a free Office System, free browsers, firewalls, anti-viruses, music players and so on. I don't see the problem.
Add to that MS costs of calling in the geek squad or people like me to fix your Windows boxes, I don't see any way MS is cheaper or better than Linux. Even my parents are using Linux comfortably now.
I watch a little Chinese guy using an abacus - now for the life of me I couldnt figure out _how_ he was using it, but he kept getting the correct answer.
Now perhaps from some perspectives people see Linux like this. Mainly because all they have ever used is Windows in some form or another. This doesnt necessarily make Windows easier to use, it merely means that Microsofts monopoly means people are pre-indoctrinated and prejudiced towards Windows because everything seems more difficult than perhaps it is, because it isnt what they know.
However, there are at least two things working against Windows, firstly people are curious more than a few will try something else and stick with it, secondly the competition is free.
The ultimate thing Linux has on it side is time, it doesnt have to win today or tomorrow, it cannot lose what is there to lose? It is really nothing more than an idea. There will always be alternative because people value choice everywhere else there is choice, and eventually there will be in OSes as well. Conversely Microsoft cant win or continue to be a winner, because naturally a monopoly can get a bigger market share than 100%, but every time someone switches from Windows they generally lose at least two perhaps three customers. An OS customer, an Office customer, and perhaps another voice in the market place saying hey you know there are alternatives to Microsoft.
I'm preparing a migration of a realty management corp with 4 sites entirely to Kubuntu. I'll soon have firsthand knowledge of just how 'not ready' linux is for desktops.
(Note: Stay away from Xandros Linux, its bloatware all the way, even with their hack for active directory domain login into the kdm login page. Although xDMS would be nice to hack for ubu system imaging)
The 80s were really fun when UNIX took over from the old Big Blue and desktops were blindingly fast 32bit 8 autonomous processor GUI workstations with 10MB Ethernet and 19 inch portrait screens.
I liked the applications that populated the desktop with their own icons letting functions be dragged and dropped onto the app work space, I liked the way the menus were right clicked minimising mouse movement and increasing productivity and I liked the 3 button optical mouse and pad that could rotate objects in 3 dimensions as well as cut and paste.
We seem to have gone backwards from there till now, Still mainly only 32bit, one main processor controlling the peripheral ones, drop down menus, 2 button mouse, single tasking, small landscape screens for years, a desktop computer for every user. Not half as good as the 80s where one workstation could effectively support up to 8 users.
Thank Linus et al for Linux. We are now getting back on the forward development track. 64bit on the desktop now and leading rapidly to 128bit. (For those that say what use is 128bit, just remember that the Intel MMX extensions run in 128 bit internal registers). Multitasking Linux forcing MS to play the forward development game. Larger screens forcing software developers to embrace the right click menu. Robust Linux forcing MS and all the Unices to emulate its garbage treatment capabilities. (IBM and the rest knew about this way back in '95 when Monterey got the drop, so the writing has been on the wall since then.) Modular Linux where crackers have to get through so many doors to do anything nasty, it's easier to go for the one door of an MS system. And lastly Universal Linux that runs robustly, cost effectively, and productively on hardware from Mars Rovers to Desktops to Mainframes.
Since '95, IBM realised Linux was the best OS, so they and their chip making partners have been concentrating on designing and building hardware that can take us into a future long denied by MS, where desktops will once again be large displays (this time controlled mainly by voice), hand writing readers and 3D recognisers, and the bums on seats brigade of the Microsft Anomoly will be out of a job.
Think about it. Do you really want to be associated with something as old fashioned and out of date as a Microsoft desktop?
Or a 20 second search on Google
If you're referring to Gubuntu it was just a myth for a short while, Google completely denied it. I'm not saying it's not true, but from what I read it was a myth, unless you're referring to something I haven't heard about, I apoligize.
Linux is progressing, it's not as user friendly as Windows because most people are used to Windows. I introduced Ubuntu to someone who knew NOTHING about computers, she just does word processing,surfing, and occasional burning of pictures. She was very happy with it, I got it onto her Windows home network and showed her how to use it and she couldn't tell the difference. If you untrain this Windows superiority out of people they'll slowly migrate and adapt to Linux. Yes, many of the GUIs of Linux are memory hogs, but there are plenty that aren't, and XP isn't that much better, let alone when Vista comes out the ridiculous hardware requirements for that.
He even set up a messageboard once in order to get some friends of his to bash a MAC-editor for saying MAC was a better and safer computer to surf the net with, since there are hardly any viruses that attacks MAC.
tomchu also used to put up different versions of Windows for people to download from his homecomputer, all up until his ISP threatened to cut his internet.
And no, I'm not trolling, this is all true...
Second: I've used Linux in various distros since late 98. SuSE (back then it was S.u.S.E.) always was my favourite, beacuse of the simplicity of setting it up and the option of tweaking it after your will.
I use a 486/66-16Mb as a name and dhcp-server. It's running SuSE 7.0 and is faster than ANY windows-computer I have running.
Linux even corrects the faulty BIOS who's not being able to tell if it's 1996 or 2006.
And no, it was no hassle to install SuSE on it.
Anybody who claims Linux is difficult to use is technologically impaired.
Most often this type of people wants their computers pre-installed with windows, since they find it impossible to go into the BIOS and make it boot from the CD-ROM...
Then a year later, i installed Debian on my desktop and after using it for a few days, i really appreciated it. I've used debian exclusively at home since 2000 and love it.
The same thing happened when i first saw a mac way back in the 90s... i thought they sucked and thought mac users were weenies. Then i actually used OSX for a few days and a week later i purchased an iBook and use it constantly.
We've seen this all before. They'll make a deal with Microsoft sooner or later after the linux desktop experiment fails.
I have this question too, (@tomchu >< Bill, is that you?)
All of our discussion is for nothing I think. The reality of Linux, and unreality of M$ is not a thing to discuss about here, even for you Mr. Bill (tomchu) Dont forget, youre just a simple user. (Or maybe youre something more, if youre Bill
MS/Windows, simply hides the procedure and *you* / like a N00B just look at monitor and see everything is wor-king! Oh, what a great OS, > Always want to pay / play / stay noob. Itd be suitable of course.
The reality is that Linux hardware support, despite being less complete than Windows', is far more clear cut. Either the driver exists, or it doesn't. This saves a lot of time, as opposed to the Windows scenario of having drivers only for Win98, or only NT, or you're not sure which, if any. Then there's the amount of times a driver simply hasn't worked.
On Windows, people like tomchu see this as normal. On Linux, they see it as the "reason Linux isn't ready for the corporate desktop". I've got news for you - all the business machines I've had to touch (quite a few) have been *ware infested pieces of shit. This wouldn't happen in Linux, for the simple reason that software can come from a single trusted source.
Oh, now I get it. Benham is probably a socialist european
I installed SuSE 9.2 about a year ago and it works just as well now as it did then - no "WinRot".
The core system works extremely well as do most of the apps. I get the occasional app crash on me but that situation is improving with each new release. In the three years I have used Linux I can count the number serious crashes (needing me to press reset) on one hand. I have NEVER had any situation so dire that I had to wipe my HDD and re-install - beat that MS !!
Hardware support is still patchy on Linux but thats the fault of the device manufacturers not writing drivers for it, despite that most Linux distros can detect all the important things like video, sound, network, USB etc "straight out of the box".
Some of you will never use Linux. Thats OK, thats your choice but at least you have a choice now. It has also forced MS to improve its own software so you benefit if you use Open Source or not.
PJ Blue
CTO RareList
I need CAD and other only windows software.
It's not a matter who I am and I'm a user just like you; Try not to be angry about realities. Sorry for my English. (Its not a matter as well and itd not change the reality)
---
PS. I'm not European buddy
Good post, lots of very interesting comments.
1) Installing a current distro (I'm using Suse 10) is fast (15 minutes from scratch incl. all necessary apps) and very easy (boot and go) but yet very flexible if desired (compare alone the partitioning and bootloader placesment with Windows installation).
2) For standard PC users (office + browser) there's no difference between Linux and Windows in usability.
3) If you want/have to use non-standard software, a different driver than the standard one under Linux, you quickly need expert know-how. You need to be able to compile code, often fix compile errors, resolve package and library dependencies manually. Short: non geeks are lost because there's not setup.exe
4) As with Windows it's possible to overcome the problems under point 3 with centrally managed clients in a corporate environment.
5) OpenOffice is capable to open/save MS Office files. But even with the latest version some templates, .doc and .pps files I open still don't look exactly the same as in MS Office. In my point of view this is the biggest hinderance in a business environment. Not being sure if the customer sees the same document as I do. To ease the transition from .doc to .odt I suggest to provide both versions of a document e.g. as a mail attachment.
6) I'm working at HP. Besides the standard Win installation we also have a complete process to deploy several linux distros to our internal hw (see open source solution LinuxCOE) and some geeks already use it. Technically we'd be able to switch our entire environment within a few days from windows to Linux. I guess it's the same at IBM. What takes time is bulding up support, migrating collaboration environments (exchange, calendaring, etc.)
I switched my Laptop to Linux one year ago as an experiment to find out if it's possible to use Linux on a desktop/Laptop in a business environment. My conclusion: Linux/KDE/Gnome has become mature enough to do so. Although I lost many many hours in fine tuning, trying and guessing to integrate it with our corporate exchange server - with a professional internal IT service and support it would be as easy to use as windows.
Once "Evolution" has become mature enough, it would even be possible to keep the excahnge infrastructure...
So it's not the OS/GUI per se that hinders us to switch but just the installed base and the exchanging of documents with the world outside. This will change once 80% of Windows installations have a ODT Viewer installed. That's where the Linux "industry" should put their focus to in order to overcome the final blockade.
Mike
Technical Consultant
What's for sure is that a giant group like IBM selling out its main groups means that they are doomed to fail and go bankrupt sooner than expected. I wonder if their CPU division will be bought by Sony or Toshiba since Sony needs it to not lose its money on the Cell project if IBM goes bankrupt..
WinXP is after all made in 2001, the next ubuntu is released in April, I think that when Vista is released it will take another 4-5 years before the next windows. It's a new Ubuntu version every 6 months!
That said, Ubuntu sounds pretty nice and I will check it out. The last time I looked at Linux it was interesting but very much a GUI cobbled on top of an old CLI OS. Maybe Ubuntu is better - at least I will go into it with an open mind instead of a religious devotion to an idea.
Oh, and darren, I like my games and my pr0n! I fear for your sanity when you find out just how surrounded by degenerates you are...
The advantage that IBM has, compare to many middle and even large size businesses, is a powerful internal world, which has its own Educational System of many different kinds and in many different flavors. This will be the key to expand a knowledge base of its employees.
IBM developers will have no problems at all, whereas IBM global services and support people may need additional education.
Besides educating people there is also a software problem that can be 80% solved by adopting the IBM Workplace within IBM.
As to the Bryan's post about running Win'2003 and XP without downtime - it all depends what exactly the load those systems have. Because besides Mainframes, that have ~5-10% of downtime, all other systems running all kinds of Unixes, Linuxes and especially Windows will have a much greater downtime.
Windows have a huge problem with its MM (Memory Manager) which can be solved [hypothetically] with Vista by going to 64-bit, therefore no matter how good it looks and easy to use, you will have to restart it at least once every couple weeks as a must. Which can be acceptable for Desktops, of course.
Linux is a good OS, so as XP or 2003, but the "good" part here highly depends on who you are and what your strategy is - IBM is not a person and it definitely has a combinations of such strategies. So far, for 90 something years, it exists and feeds its employees - if it is time for Linux now, then why should IBM wait?
I'll believe that MS is reliable when MS tech support stops telling people to reboot your computers. We have unix servers that haven't been rebooted in years. And interesting, when I did IT work for a major manufacturer of medicaal monitoring devices, there wasn't an MS box to be seen. Why? Can the most ardent MS shill honestly say they want their heart pump run by MS windows?
MS has aa lock on hearts and minds, and as several previous posters noted, people like what they are familiar with. I am often amazed at what MS windows users will tolerate and can only believe that they just don't know aany better.
Linux is still rough, but it will continue to improve - 6 months in the computer world is an eternity. And once people figured out that by changing, they can free themselves from the upgrade lock that MS has built, they'll never go back. All software has a lifespan. MS windows is reaching its EOL. When was the last time their software offered a really compelling upgrade? The main reason business upgrade at all is because MS drops support on older products.
I see a dark future for MS, even though it may be many years off.
I can't understand how Windows at over £100 for the OEM version, and Office at more than that on top, can continue to be attractive when for £6 I get a DVD with all this functionality and more on it - and it works a lot better than my Windows XP desktop at work. It made good default choices too for things like the firwall which I trust a lot more than Windows, and offered to go off and fetch the NVidia commercial video drivers for my graphics card and set them up for me.
I recommend this system to anyone that asks that doesn't have special Windows needs (noone I can think of), and am happy to show friends around it. What's more - I can perfectly legally lend them the DVD!
Windows must be living on inertia and fear of change. So much is invested in Windows in terms of processes and infrastructure that people are afraid of losing that investment. It is this, not software quality, that is keeping Windows going.
Windows is suffering though through complexity. As Microsoft add more common UNIX ideas such as least privelage computing to their server line, as they break compatibility between Dot-Net-1 and Dot-Net-2, and Eclipse trounces Visual Studio for free, and as they change their file formats in Office to new incompatible ones - things may become more difficult for Windows.
Choose freedom! Choose Democracy! http://www.getdemocracy.com/download/
You, and your children, will thank me.
Unfortunately the kids may just accept this as the way things are - and thing you odd for thinking that copyright was actually once a trade-off between the owner and the public, that fair use rights existed, and that it was possible for a non-big-commercial entity to own copyright.
I like my Debian Sarge Cluster + Workstations.
There not talking about *selling* desktoips. They don't do that anymore, Lenovo does. They are switching their employees to Linux. And contrary to your "head in the clouds" beliefs people do run their businesses on Linux. And Unix. And Macs. And, yes, Windows.
Linux is open-source which is both it's greatest strength and it's greatest weakness. One of the side effects of this is that there are a ton of distros to choose from when compared to OS X and Windows.
From a consumer's point of view, there are just so many distros to choose from without a clear definition of the differences between them. You go and ask any Linux expert in a computer store what's the difference between Red-Hat and Susie and why I should choose one or the other, and, 90% of the time, you'll get an answer along the lines of... "Oh, it's hard to explain. I personally like (insert salesman's favorite distro) just due to personal preference.
Now, for real computer-savvy people like us, we dont need sales people to help make our decision and download the distro for free off the internet. However, many consumers are just turned off by Linux because of this very reason. There might be distros that are easy to set up and configure, but, from the consumers point of view, they are just one drop in a sea of distros and the resulting chaos is confusing to them.
Thats why Linux is difficult to consumers. Not because of technical difficulty, but because they just dont have a clear understanding of where to find the good Linux distros and why one distro is better than the other. Apple and Microsoft both have people dedicated to making their product stand out and making consumers understand why they should use their product over someone elses. Linux doesnt have that.
Bottom Line: Linux is confusing and difficult to consumers because there are too many distros without a clear product identity that is easy for consumers to grasp.
I believe that Linux will continue to improve and continue to grow steadily and I will continue to enjoy monitoring its progress. However, Linux needs to consolidate its distros into a handful of clear, distinct, products before consumers will begin to rapidly embrace it.
Consumers know what OS X is because there is only one primary desktop distro.
Consumers know what Windows is since all the windows desktop distros are well documented and the differences made clear. ie: XP Home, XP Pro, Media Center, etc...)
In order for consumers, as a whole, to begin to adapt Linux in mass, there needs to be a lot of consolidation between all the distros. Now, this will probably never happen since it's the nature of open-source to have multiple distros of the same software since, theoretically, everyone could make their own.
Dudu
See http://www.strategicboard.com/weblog/pivot/entry.php?id=434
emerge sync && emerge -uDN world
in Fedora/Red Hat:
yum -y update
in Ubuntu/Debian/Kubuntu:
apt-get --update
In windows:
???????
When I first discovered this, I spent 2 hours googling for posts in obscure forums to find out how to shut down X. Anyway, when I ran init 3, my computer stopped responding, until finally I hit CTRL+ALT+F1 and I got a prompt again somehow.
Another thing about viruses. Linux is an inherently harder environment to make viruses for because of the administration layer. In order to install ANYTHING, you need to have root access, so a Linux virus would HAVE to ask the user's permission to be installed. The only way to circumvent this would be to figure out the root password for every machine it comes into contact with. In windows, the main user is also the administrator and has unrestricted access to all areas of the system, without a password. 99% of the time a windows machine has one user, so a virus could easily sneak into a Windows machine without alerting Grandma May that it's there, unless Grandma has 3rd party software to detect it.
Linux doesn't work perfectly on every computer. People that just happen to have the right hardware are exstatic that "it just works," whereas people with proprietary machines (like my 2001 Presario) don't have such a good experience.
Riiiiiiiight. And in the 1800s, buggy-whips were a "reality" too. Don't see many of them around now, do you? Change happens. Face it: Windows is starting its long, slow decline.
Mike
http://www.QuickTrivia.com
At home, I have been doing lots of video editing on MacOS X, and ended up making that computer my primary machine, and my Windows PC hasn't been turned on since late December.
I think Linux on the desktop has arrived.
IBM Workplace is a horrible, Eclipse-based app on which you can run a Notes plugin (and Office-like plugins). The Notes plugin itself simply doesn't work, and the IBM Workplace itself is a huge memory hog, and will eventually crash if left running long enough.
I used to run IBM's Linux desktop, back when the Notes for Linux ran on the Wine emulator. I still needed a backup Windows box to use some Notes databases that wouldn't work properly on Wine. Now that we've begun migrating to Notes 7 (for which there is no Wine client), I've had to abandon the IBM Linux desktop altogether.
Aside from the Workplace, the IBM Desktop Linux (basically rebranded RHEL4, I believe) is pretty sweet. Basically, Lotus Notes crushes everything. If we could just use OpenOffice and a browser-based email client (and abandon the thousands of special-purpose Notes databases)...
As usual, articles like this attract the people with strong opinions. If strong opinions come from real passion for your work or computer hobby, then great. I ask each reader to look for the good in people sharing their experiences. We can learn from each other. But I, like most people, could do without senseless people bashing. Reading through the above foray of opinions forced me to take a few minutes out of my busy day to post my humble and honest opinion.
I've been programming professionally since 1986 on AIX, Solaris, Macintosh, Win3.x, Win NT codebased, OS/2, and Linux. With the alluring blast of free downloadable ISO distros, I got hooked into installing about 20 different distros over the last four years, and have had a lot of fun trying them.
Bottom line: I am glad to hear IBM converting all of their internal workstations to Linux and OpenOffice. Why? Nothing to do with Microsoft, its because they have had success with their DB2 RDBMS, AIX, and other software offerings, and I wish them well using Linux. Perhaps they will deliver future innovative software offerings to the world. Ive been using OpenOffice for a few years with honestly no problem at all. Maybe my documents are too simple, being typical design and proposal documents and spreadsheets, because all of the MS to OpenOffice conversions have worked 100% perfectly every time. As far as Linux goes, both KDE and Gnome have done a good job making file managers as easy to use as Windows Explorer, and building upon that comparison, all other O/S utilities and applications are getting better and better and more user friendly. So my opinion of this article is this: what took IBM so long? Their internal work could have relied on Linux 5 years ago. Maybe since they took their time, there is something bigger happening that we dont know about. Yet.
By the way, at work I use WinXP because everyone else does and it was put in-front of me the day I started. If it had been any Linux distro, I would have been just as productive. Maybe other people need a bit of training, but why should they be afraid of that and just toot the Windows horn? Learning is a good thing. Expand our horizons.
At home, I normally boot into Fedora Core 4, but reboot into WinXP if I have to build a Windows GUI program or run a Windows special program that doesnt work correctly with WineHQ. One example is my camera cell phone Win32 specialized drivers that no one has converted to Linux yet. I would if I had time.
My three children, wife, and extended family and most of my friends use Linux to a point. But in my household and in others Ive seen, everyone still uses a Win98SE or WinXP box for gaming. OK flamers, go ahead and flame me. Im simply telling it like it is. My 8 year old loves getting the free CD game in the cereal box, booting the Win98SE choice, sticking it in, and just playing with it. Yes hes been dual booting with Linux since he was 5 years old, and to him, all he understands is that Windows and Linux are just operating systems. Its the games and applications that make his computer usable. Even after he starts reading opinions like above, I hope he keeps growing up keeping an open mind.
I read their new statement as being more aggressive about the "optional" status of their linux distro... For IBM-Germany, they'll most likely have it on new laptops so when someone has their laptop refreshed, their new one will have linux.
Oh... and to the guy above, I have no problems using linux on my primary workstation at home.. as well as all of my other systems. You can sync calendars and other stuff... you can even sync contacts and calendar on your nokia phone.
Pretty damn impressive considering that M$ spent how much in advertising last year? And Linus himself spends zero? Sounds like Linux is getting market share by simply being better...
The evolution of Linux has been astounding and swift, particularly with respect to the user-interface for the non-technical person. The tools available under linux compared to MS based systems really make my favorite os stand out.
The casual and office user needs an Office substitute which reads and writes those files. Behold OpenOffice2 (except that custom Excel macros have not translated well for me in the past). I interface with the Windows world with precious little difficulty. My frustrtion with the Windows world comes from the clunky formats.
Linux, because of it's Unix heritage has always had a better array of tools available, and its modular nature allows for combinations of those tools limited only by the supply of high-test coffee in the cubical of the noble programmer and hacker.
I sometimes need to revert to a Windows environment on a few of my contracts, and I believe that Windows represents a monument to the indomitable human spirit which can rise above the limits of the software and achieve productivity.
--Chaplain Mike (A Real Chaplain!)
And just two cent. Almost everybody from linux users depends on the distro - taking the package from other disto/version is impossible: either you use unofficial repository or you wait for the next disro release (sometime it's even impossible to update - my colinux installation is just too old to be updated). No one from you can install vanilla kernel - these kernels are simply not usable and have to be polished by distromakers. Almost everybody from you installed the fonts from Microsoft and use non-licensed antialiasing technology to make the fonts at least readable. I'm also interesting how do you do the color managment of your fotos before printing? The linux will never had the normal hardware support because the only chance to have it - release specs: the internal interfaces are broken from release to release, now even in minors x.x.xx.x.
Good luck, IBM, in switching. One competitor on the PC market is less. Though, IBM never had any good software for the PCs
1. If you are a geek, stop complaining and fix the bug.
2. Complaining about lack of source code is not acceptable from a geek.
3. use disassembler.
4. Try Plan 9 OS.
5. Port all good Linux apps to Plan 9.
6. No matter what Linux will succeed
In case anybody thought I forgot - shutup you Mac bigots. Who cares that spyware isn't a problem for you yet? If you run XP as an ordinary user, spyware ain't much of a problem; the 1000+ XP machines in my network have had NO service calls for virii or spyware since we removed admin priveleges from ordinary users . Also, have you ever tried doing a large OS X network (1500+ Mac workstations)and managing it with Apple's Workgroup Manager? Didn't think so. Superiority? Not in this lifetime....
And as far as the comments about users actually caring about what OS they use - I manage ~7500 users, and I've heard an actual preference for an OS from maybe two dozen people. One of 'em even wanted Linux.
The latest Fedora Core 5 will launch around March 20 that brings all those advances together into a single good-looking distro full of "just works" technology.
For those posters complaining about some problems (excludes the Microsoft trolls posting drivel) - two suggestions >>
1. Try the latest Fedora Core 5
2. Install Windows on the same machine and take note of the multitude of tweaks you'll still need to do to get all the correct drivers installed. Installing and configuring Windows with all the proper drivers isn't as simple as many are making out.
For example, the past year or so I've been maintaining my own distribution [http://www.distrowatch.com/ultima if interested], which is based on Slackware. Not only is it faster and more stable than Windows, it's also just as easy to use (maybe even more so).
Well, obviously you don't trust me, right? Seeing as I'm the guy who created it?
No, not necessarily - both my brother and sister, as well as my parents, are now happily running my distro, and I can't think of a single problem we've had since then. (Before they were using Windows, and it took *forever* to convince them to switch - they didn't believe me either, until they saw it that is ;-)
Also, despite what so many people say about only geeks and UNIX hackers run Linux, it's not necessarily true. I get a lot of e-mails from users, and a lot of them are just ordinary people who were using Windows before, then heard about Linux and decided to try it out. And yes, a lot of them are first-time users - so much for Slackware being hard to use.
Just one last thing to all you "Microsoft trolls" - please, just do yourself a favor and try Linux for yourself. Seriously. I've already posted the link to my system, or if you'd prefer there are hundreds more at sites like www.distrowatch.com. Try it out today, you just might like it!
It's just too funny how most of you can't talk about Linux's pros alone without resorting to cheap shots at Windows. Religious zealots will be religious zealots. I'm guessing that if I put up caricatures of Tux being made fun of I'd be threatened with death too, eh?
Double-standards are the currency of Linux zealots worldwide. Someone bashes Microsoft? They're a freedom fighter. Someone points out a negative truth about Linux? They're a paid Microsoft shill.
Keep talking. We just had a great laugh around the office at the lot of you. :-)
Notice how all the bearded UNIX geeks are getting Powerbooks? Best of both worlds, my friend.
They don't say where these numbers are obtained. Perhaps the real world numbers are closer to those given by the Distributed Computing organisation- Folding@Home.
Of over 1.4 million computers helping out with these project-
84.7% use MS OS
10.6% " Linux OS
4.6% " Mac OSX
Yes it comes out at 99.9% (rounding out)
I am still on MS XP,but Linux is getting closer for me - Very soon I will be there
Bruce Sinton
WINE faster than Windows ... "
Why not? WINE isn't emulation, it's a duplication of the Windows API. There's no reason why it can't be as fast, if not faster.
Aside from the Windows vs Linux thing.
You dont see the irony in your own comments.
Making broad sweeping statements.
Calling people psychotic, religious zealots etc..
Making allusions to fundamentalist Islam.
You forgot the fact that ALL Linux users eat babies as well.
I know your enjoying all this but you reallly, wake up and smell the shit your shovelling.
Ben: I didn't say it was technically impossible, I just said it's not the case. I've used WINE extensively before, and it simply is not as fast as true Win32. Benchmarks can be rigged in either direction, so I'm just going by feel.
Jay: Take a look around. Look at the comments left here. Freud would have a field day -- you know that, right? Someone makes one anti-Linux comment, and 90 zealots crawl out of the woodwork to "correct" the comment and proclaim how great Linux is, all while simply pulling cheap comparisons against Windows to accomplish that goal.
Step back, and take a look. Doesn't it strike you as odd that so many people treat Linux like a religion, and go absolutely fanatical about it? It does me. I use Windows, and I like it. I use OS X, and I like it. I use FreeBSD, and I like it. I don't go around preaching their virtues like a prior of the Church of GNU/Linux.
The case is simply one of opinion. Everything I've seen so far from the Linux crowd has been less than impressive. The previous three OSes have Linux beat on the desktop, server, and application breadth/compatibility front. Some people obviously can't handle the idea that others out there don't share the same opinions.
The windows world doesn't want to hear that there are alternatives.
And those same people tell you how much better, safer, user-friendly this OS is...
-> Well, then - how come there are TONS of books on
i) installing, ii) fine-tuning, iii) protecting - Windows, when this is all automagically done for you ?!?
-> Also, that by all accounts (lookup and serious website that deals with security) : that all Windows version are the most hacked (best defense heard : because it's the most widespread | With that logic in mind UNIX should be the most hacked OS in history - it's been around forever).
-> I seen many consultants come & go, they come in with the hi-powered laptops/desktop, try to do something simple like : connect/authenticate to the M$ network, and print to the M$ print server, typically - it takes them 1/2 day.
VS
My solution : Install Xandros 2.0/3.0 from scratch on the same unit (or partition) in less than 20 minutes. 10 minutes later (yes that's 30 minutes for you math wizards) the aforementionned consultant is authenticating to the network, printing *.doc to the print via OpenOffice 1.x.
>> And some still say Windows is easier.
I guess we will have to redefine that word :
Endless hours wasted clicking a mouse on really nice looking icons - but no result. However it was really _EASY_ ;-)
G'day folks.
OSS_Fan.
Perhaps you are right about them being zealots
But from where I'm standing you look the same
In any event, the dispute over Windows, Linux or OSX, is a users choice, but this choice is also closly related the hardware/software support. An OS being free doesn't mean its better, however, with the market the way it is, a free OS with free utilities, is more likely to be excepted, or atleast tried. The costs of M$ software is the *cause* of the all the people simply installing without paying (they are at fault there - someone pirates the software because they can't afford to buy it, so M$ increases the prices, thus causing more and more people to go with pirated copies since they can't financially afford to purchase it, causing M$ to increase the price to keep the revenue up). What would happen if M$ went to a Freeware platform, including all software from the OS to Office and even the games (everything), and only charged for support? Would Linux die? No. Would Windows gain a better footing in the market place. Most likely. But the chances of M$ doing this, is slim to none. So people will continue to use what they can get, legal or not.
But, Linux is worth everyone's test, you loose nothing. You didn't have to pay for it. And the installers help you to keep your current OS available. There are even Live versions now so you don't even have to install. So, its worth the test. And all your manufactures that aren't support Linux, your causing more problems then your solving.
If you think I'm a zealot, that's fine. You're entitled to your own beliefs too. :-P
>emerge sync && emerge -uDN world
>
>in Fedora/Red Hat:
>yum -y update
>
>in Ubuntu/Debian/Kubuntu:
>apt-get --update
>
>In windows:
>???????
Are you sure about that?
C:\>???????
'???????' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
C:\>
D'OH!!!!
If I can do this on eComStation, then IBM and others can do it on Linux. The day of business on Windows only is coming to a close.
People who support open source & choice are fascists? But those who support the alternative(a monopoly),presumably aren't??
Oops,polarity is reversed.
The Universal truth is as bellow:
1. The best OS depends on the user type
- good win admins preffer win
- good nix admins preffer unix
- if they know both propperly, they preffer unix (because of its felxibility and better security - people say)
- end-users want to use computer without much hussle. Linux is no good here, for many many reasons
In what the move is concerned: well ... I'm not ibm's manager or whatever. I think they know better what they are doing. They have been in the market for ages now ... Doesn't that count???
Now you guys ... linux fans, windows fans, try to chill ... try to look at thing realistically: Microsoft is not done yet - is not that easy!! Linux is there... but still w/ a lot of work ahead - which is being done ...
Now ... we'll see ...
Cheers to all
It seems that we are kind of missing another side of the coin here.
With IBM moveing to Linux in Germany, it would be more of a financial sense. Meaning that maintence contract for their IBM desktop/servers will be mainly Linux base.
Therefore it would make bettter sense to convert Germany to a linux base system internally also so you can use the same support people internally as externally.
Saying that both IBM and Microsoft are both corporations that are out to make money. Although IBM is helping the open source community, they are also making most of their money in supporting these systems.
It doesn't matter which system they run on, switching between Microsoft or Linux. They both have their expenses.
Linux is more costly on the maintence side and Microsoft is more costly on the Licensing side of things.