There is no "plan" for getting Linux on the desktop; there never will be. It
will just happen, because the developers will continue to dream up and
implement ideas that will make Linux easier for everyone to use. This will
cause Linux to succeed on the Desktop better than anyone's "Marketing Plan."
1. How does the author know that the desktop user doesn't want different
versions of the same OS? Past evidence refutes this. There were at least
three different "Desktop environments" for Windows 3.1 before Windows 95
came out. Each one had a slightly different look and feel. There are tons of
"shell extensions" for the Win 9x OSes, each one changing how the OS behaves
in some way. Linux allows this to an even greater extent. People love to
play and customize their workspaces (as long as it is within their
capabilities.) The "good" desktop environments will naturally survive and
flourish, and the bad ones will fade away.
2. He means Linux should use Windows terminology to describe OS features.
This is what the "very common user" understands. But the "very common user"
learned Windows terminology initially; they can learn ours too.
3. This is the same point as number 1. Linux doesn't need "marketability,"
because there is no corporation driving it.
4. Where is the evidence for this? Most home users now use "free software"
in the sense that they pirate their Windows software. Once MS goes to a
subscription-based software model, the average home user will like free
software even more."
5. When enough users request Linux as an alternative, and realize that they
can save money by buying a "bare" or Linux-based system, then ALL the major
hardware vendors will do this. Microsoft actively discourages system vendors
from doing this by "scare tactics." Official Microsoft VAR bulletins (I have
received these personally) imply that Microsoft could hold vendors liable if
the user installs a pirated copy of Windows on a bare system. They state
that the only "safe" way to go is to supply a licensed copy of Windows with
EVERY system they (the vendor) sells.
6. Not having a suite of applications that can read and write Office
documents is really the issue here. The file formats that MS uses are
defacto standards right now. But there were word processors before Word, and
spreadsheets before Excel, and there will be word processors and
spreadsheets after Office is gone. The problem is that Office file formats
are proprietary, and Microsoft COULD sue anyone who creates a program that
can read and write these formats. Once Microsoft creates resistance to the
use of their file formats by other programs, open standards for office
documents will evolve, and it will be Microsoft programs that will have to
read and write THOSE formats to stay competitive.
7. The issue is really to run Windows APPLICATIONS on Linux. I don't think
anyone in their right mind would want to run Windows on Linux. While
emulation is a good stop-gap measure, like running DOS apps on Windows, the
best is always a native application. This will happen too. Demand always
drives supply.
8. Why do we need popular commercial apps? What do they bring to the table
that a good, little-known, GPL alternative does not? They cost more. They
have recognizable names. They were written with Microsoft Development tools,
causing them to be bloated virus magnets. Nothing in this list indicates
that such an application works better or is easier to use. As more students
graduate having learned to program on Open Source systems and using Open
Source tools, no one will want to write using Windows tools.
9. Niche companies that create this software write it for what they perceive
to be the largest market. Their market is already limited by the specific
software they create, and the fact that their target customers spend very
little on software. When these companies learn that they can market their
software as a cheaper solution because they can deploy it on a free
operating system and develop and maintain it with free tools, they will jump
on it.
10. The only thing Linux can't do that Windows does is play DVDs. If someone
wanted to, they could pay the royalties for CSS and write a commercial
application to play DVDs. I don't believe there is anything limiting this in
the GPL or anywhere else. The portion of the software that decodes the DVD
can be specifically NOT based on any GPL code and therefore kept secret by
the licensing companies, and the rest can be open, as required by the GPL.
I use both Linux and Windows every day. I use Linux for the things that
Linux does better or cheaper than Windows, and I use Windows for the things
it does better or for the things I can't use Linux for. I really don't care
if EVERYONE uses Linux or not. In fact NO ONE cares. That is the whole
point, and the point that most media and corporate types completely miss.
The people who want to use something other than Windows, will. The people
who want to develop applications or hack around with someone elses program
to make some improvement, will. And they will do this even if no one else
ever tries Linux.
And if Linux NEVER makes it to the desktop in the way that the media and
corporate types mean, so what? There is no board of directors to report to,
no stockholders to satisfy. Because of this, the ONLY thing that will make
Linux go away is lack of interest. And that is just not happening. So with
no timetable, there is no urgency. Linux or some Open Source derivative will
become ubiquitous. And there is no way for Microsoft to stop it, because
there is nothing to fight. The only possible way Microsoft could beat Linux
would be to produce REALLY good software. And that is just not happening
either.
Rich Cloutier
SYSTEM SUPPORT SERVICES
www.sysupport.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Hergenrother" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "GNHLUG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 11:09 PM
Subject: ZD on Linux
> This is interesting reading on a subject which is a common thread on this
> list. Be sure to read some of the TalkBack messages included at the
bottom
> of the reference. I don't expect many to agree with the conclusions, but
I
> think that there are many valid points.
>
> http://cgi.zdnet.com/slink?/adeskb/adt0614/2774791:10151455
>
>
> Karl Hergenrother
> Image Laboratories
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> **********************************************************
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
> *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
> unsubscribe gnhlug
> **********************************************************
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
