April 10, 2006 10:03 AM PDT

Novell: Linux desktop set to take off

SAN FRANCISCO--Linux on desktop computers will begin taking off in mainstream markets in the next 12 to 18 months, Novell President Ron Hovsepian has predicted.

Linux has been widely used on networked computers called servers, but it has comparatively little success on personal computers, beyond technically savvy users. Many companies have argued the open-source operating system is on the verge of breaking out in PCs and have been proven wrong. But Hovsepian sees some changes that he believes make the market ripe.

He's not the first to make such bold predictions, but so far Linux hasn't caught on widely beyond a small, technically savvy minority. Several companies--among them Corel, Linspire (formerly Lindows), Eazel and Suse itself--haven't dented Microsoft Windows' dominance.

Hovsepian believes that Novell's software--he pointed to his company's own forthcoming Suse Linux Desktop 10--has matured enough that three markets will be interested, he said in an interview here Friday.

First are large corporate users with employees who don't need full-featured PCs but rather just basic software such as a Web browser. Second are small business owners who see the savings from Windows license fees going straight to their own wallets. Third are residents of Brazil, Russia, India and China--the so-called BRIC countries--who are price-sensitive and who haven't already made a big investment in Windows, he said. China in particular is interesting because of pressure to curtail Windows piracy, Hovsepian said.

Naturally, he touted his company's upcoming Suse Linux Desktop as the product that will turn the tide. He predicted sales will begin with large "anchor accounts" buying the software for 3,000 to 5,000 computers at a time this year, with more aggressive sales in 2007.

But skepticism remains. Large companies already have a massive investment in Windows tools and technologies, said Gartner analyst Steve Kleynhans, and "sustaining what they've got tends to be easier because it's a more straightforward approach" than switching to new technology. As for developing countries, people want the same software as first-world nations, and that means Windows still has an advantage.

See more CNET content tagged:
SuSE Linux Desktop, Linux desktop, Novell Inc., Linspire, SuSE

166 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
dell
Question is, when a Dell desktop only costs 299, how much is really going to microsoft - $25? So the saving would be $25 per box. True, most businesses are buying XP Pro to get AD connectivity, but they wont get that with SUSE either.
Posted by gggg sssss (2285 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Don't assume; learn!
Cost of Windows OEM is indeed low, but the cost of a full SW stack (including photo editing, DVD burning, office suite, etc ...) is much higher.
What the Linux proposition provides, at least with the latest offering, is a real *complete* stack. You can argue the same is possible on Windows, but people prefer to have all bundle in one package compared to assembling all that mess themselves.
About AD connectivity you're not updated: the latest Linux DO HAVE IT, and SAMBA v4 goes even further (up to AD Domain Controller level).
Posted by (7 comments )
Link Flag
AD connectivity included...
You said: "True, most businesses are buying XP
Pro to get AD connectivity, but they wont get
that with SUSE either."

Yet, AD (I'm assuming you mean Microsft Active
Directory) connectivity is available without
charge for SuSE (and, for that matter, any
distribution, if you want to use it). Albeit,
Novell might suggest that you try out NDS
instead.
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Link Flag
dell
Question is, when a Dell desktop only costs 299, how much is really going to microsoft - $25? So the saving would be $25 per box. True, most businesses are buying XP Pro to get AD connectivity, but they wont get that with SUSE either.
Posted by gggg sssss (2285 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Don't assume; learn!
Cost of Windows OEM is indeed low, but the cost of a full SW stack (including photo editing, DVD burning, office suite, etc ...) is much higher.
What the Linux proposition provides, at least with the latest offering, is a real *complete* stack. You can argue the same is possible on Windows, but people prefer to have all bundle in one package compared to assembling all that mess themselves.
About AD connectivity you're not updated: the latest Linux DO HAVE IT, and SAMBA v4 goes even further (up to AD Domain Controller level).
Posted by (7 comments )
Link Flag
AD connectivity included...
You said: "True, most businesses are buying XP
Pro to get AD connectivity, but they wont get
that with SUSE either."

Yet, AD (I'm assuming you mean Microsft Active
Directory) connectivity is available without
charge for SuSE (and, for that matter, any
distribution, if you want to use it). Albeit,
Novell might suggest that you try out NDS
instead.
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Link Flag
The Foreign Markets
I think the foreign markets represents the biggest opportunity for the Linux desktop. In addition to cost, they don't want to be dependant on Microsoft-USA.

As an example, a recent Associate Press article states "the Norwegian government said Friday it will increase its use of freely shared, open-source software to reduce its dependency on large computer companies like Microsoft Corp."

Similarly, if memory serves, the most outspoken anti-Bush head of state in Latin America is actively promoting open-source amongst Latin countries for the same reason.
Posted by john55440 (1020 comments )
Reply Link Flag
The Foreign Markets
I think the foreign markets represents the biggest opportunity for the Linux desktop. In addition to cost, they don't want to be dependant on Microsoft-USA.

As an example, a recent Associate Press article states "the Norwegian government said Friday it will increase its use of freely shared, open-source software to reduce its dependency on large computer companies like Microsoft Corp."

Similarly, if memory serves, the most outspoken anti-Bush head of state in Latin America is actively promoting open-source amongst Latin countries for the same reason.
Posted by john55440 (1020 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I guess if you keep saying it...
you have to be right sometime.

I still don't see it, they run into the same problem Apple does. Applications, familiarity, and pre-exisiting environments.

I worked extensively with Novell in its day, and it certainly was the better NOS, too bad they aren't relevant anymore.
Posted by hugh dunnit (35 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Agree
They will definitely run into the same problems. One thing that is good to see is that they actually have a focus audience that they intend to sell to which is often lacking in the Linux community. The typical "Windoze sucks, switch to this.." rant isn't exactly going to convince people and businesses that Linux is the way to go. Suse is definitely one of the best Linux distros out there and I think Novell is doing some very positive things to make it better.
Posted by Charleston Charge (362 comments )
Link Flag
Novell not as relevent as desktop Linux is.
Remember that the problem with "applications,
familiarity, and pre-existing environments" is
mostly a hindrance in the US.

Linux penetration is much higher outside the US
and Canada. Most applications that people feel
are not available for Linux are widely available
outside the US save for US-specific things like
tax software, etc. Many Windows applications are
not localized for foreign languages and some
have issues with non-US versions of Windows.

Familiarity is not much of an issue. The popular
Linux desktop environments have all the features
of Windows and operate quite similarly, and in
many cases, more intuitively.
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Link Flag
BUILT-IN DEVICE DRIVERS WILL BE THE KEY
I feel Linux is only going to take off in the mainstream world of computing if a large variety of device drivers are available within the OS for various hardware.

The average user is not going to take a hardware inventory of their computer before installing Linux.
Posted by backgroundnoise (32 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Really?
Have you tried Linux lately? There are more devices
for Linux than any other operating system. True,
the latest greatest device has a driver later than
on Windows, but, your assertion that there aren't
built-in drivers for Linux is an ancient fallacy.
These myths are one reason people are afraid of
switching. Unfortunate.
Posted by Johnny Mnemonic (374 comments )
Link Flag
I don't think that's an issue.
First, Linux already ship with more support for
devices in the basic kernel than Windows does. A
whole lot more. With Windows, it's fairly common
to install a device driver when you install a
piece of hardware. With Linux these days, that's
very rare. The notable exception being certain
models of flatbed scanners and some newer
wireless cards (though most popular desktop
distributions typically have those drivers
installed).

Anyway, in the case of OEMs, the vendor will
pre-install drivers for the supplied hardware
just as they would for Windows (very little OEM
hardware is supported out-of-the-box by
Windows).
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Link Flag
Second thought... Avg. Computer User
On second thought, the "average computer user" I had in mind typically would not be installing an OS before using a computer... They probably would buy a machine with an OS pre-installed.
Posted by backgroundnoise (32 comments )
Link Flag
BUILT-IN DEVICE DRIVERS WILL BE THE KEY
Agreed. Whiles Linux, in my case SuSE Linux 10, has many device drivers, my installation of SuSE 10 is still not finished because of a video driver matching my video card (most likely).
Posted by sfarah (2 comments )
Link Flag
Linux Already Supports More Devices Out of the Box
I think you are confused! Linux already supports way more hardware out of the box than Windows does. Think about it, when was the last time you bought a peice of hardware, plugged it into your Windows machine and DIT NOT have to use the driver CD provided by the manufacture?
The issue is with the manufactures... They need to be providing drivers for their hardware... In the meantime, we the Linux community has had to make due by reverse engineering hardware technology and writing our own drivers.
Posted by SmartLP (2 comments )
Link Flag
Have you tried to install XP on a new PC lately
And some some preloaded image that came with your Dell PC? That was Dell doing the job, not MS.

If you take a new PC, and install Windows XP on it, your driver support is close to ZERO. It will not detect your videa card, IDE controller, ... Except for some generic drivers. If you want to use you hardware fully, expect to get out some CD's with some old versions of drivers on it, or dl them from the web.

I've been installing Opensuse on lots of different hardware, (4 yr old penPC, 3 yr old laptops, 0 year old desktops), and they all worked. No missing pieces. The newest PCs are now running the 64 bit version of OpenSuse, latest new I heard from XP-64 was that is was not usable...
Posted by Steven N (487 comments )
Link Flag
BUILT-IN DEVICE DRIVERS WILL BE THE KEY
I feel Linux is only going to take off in the mainstream world of computing if a large variety of device drivers are available within the OS for various hardware.

The average user is not going to take a hardware inventory of their computer before installing Linux.
Posted by backgroundnoise (32 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Really?
Have you tried Linux lately? There are more devices
for Linux than any other operating system. True,
the latest greatest device has a driver later than
on Windows, but, your assertion that there aren't
built-in drivers for Linux is an ancient fallacy.
These myths are one reason people are afraid of
switching. Unfortunate.
Posted by Johnny Mnemonic (374 comments )
Link Flag
I don't think that's an issue.
First, Linux already ship with more support for
devices in the basic kernel than Windows does. A
whole lot more. With Windows, it's fairly common
to install a device driver when you install a
piece of hardware. With Linux these days, that's
very rare. The notable exception being certain
models of flatbed scanners and some newer
wireless cards (though most popular desktop
distributions typically have those drivers
installed).

Anyway, in the case of OEMs, the vendor will
pre-install drivers for the supplied hardware
just as they would for Windows (very little OEM
hardware is supported out-of-the-box by
Windows).
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Link Flag
Second thought... Avg. Computer User
On second thought, the "average computer user" I had in mind typically would not be installing an OS before using a computer... They probably would buy a machine with an OS pre-installed.
Posted by backgroundnoise (32 comments )
Link Flag
BUILT-IN DEVICE DRIVERS WILL BE THE KEY
Agreed. Whiles Linux, in my case SuSE Linux 10, has many device drivers, my installation of SuSE 10 is still not finished because of a video driver matching my video card (most likely).
Posted by sfarah (2 comments )
Link Flag
Linux Already Supports More Devices Out of the Box
I think you are confused! Linux already supports way more hardware out of the box than Windows does. Think about it, when was the last time you bought a peice of hardware, plugged it into your Windows machine and DIT NOT have to use the driver CD provided by the manufacture?
The issue is with the manufactures... They need to be providing drivers for their hardware... In the meantime, we the Linux community has had to make due by reverse engineering hardware technology and writing our own drivers.
Posted by SmartLP (2 comments )
Link Flag
Have you tried to install XP on a new PC lately
And some some preloaded image that came with your Dell PC? That was Dell doing the job, not MS.

If you take a new PC, and install Windows XP on it, your driver support is close to ZERO. It will not detect your videa card, IDE controller, ... Except for some generic drivers. If you want to use you hardware fully, expect to get out some CD's with some old versions of drivers on it, or dl them from the web.

I've been installing Opensuse on lots of different hardware, (4 yr old penPC, 3 yr old laptops, 0 year old desktops), and they all worked. No missing pieces. The newest PCs are now running the 64 bit version of OpenSuse, latest new I heard from XP-64 was that is was not usable...
Posted by Steven N (487 comments )
Link Flag
It´s not...
a matter of being pro or against micros..tware nor much less being pro or against some bush.
It´s a matter of adhering to what is best, AND, evolves in the right direction.
Or is everyone here not aware of the amount of trash included in the micros..tware ´products´, especialy since some unorthodox events in the US.
No one I know, me included, is pro those events. No one is pro piracy.
But, waiting for five years for a new version of IExplore just to find it is only coming to market because Firefox has some niceties it doesn´t, is at least frustrating.
More so when one can expect for a torrent of new bugs accompanying that ´new version´.
And, is anyone here aware of the fact that the ´products´(they even call them "solutions" - LOL...), always come with unccountable programming mistakes, straight evil features and, some small and subtle changes to ´the desktop appearance´???
Nonetheless, they´re always slower, larger, use much more resources AND, always cost more than previous versions???
Where would General Motors be if they offered the same ´working to promises guarantees´, diminished performance, increased use of fuel, lessened security, etc. on their products?
Would anyone here like to be flying on Boeig 777s, managed by the XP kind of ´operating system´? Or would anyone like to have their heart monitored, in an Intensive Care Unit, ´running´ under the same ´products´????
I wouldn´t.
Posted by scoobbs (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
It´s not...
a matter of being pro or against micros..tware nor much less being pro or against some bush.
It´s a matter of adhering to what is best, AND, evolves in the right direction.
Or is everyone here not aware of the amount of trash included in the micros..tware ´products´, especialy since some unorthodox events in the US.
No one I know, me included, is pro those events. No one is pro piracy.
But, waiting for five years for a new version of IExplore just to find it is only coming to market because Firefox has some niceties it doesn´t, is at least frustrating.
More so when one can expect for a torrent of new bugs accompanying that ´new version´.
And, is anyone here aware of the fact that the ´products´(they even call them "solutions" - LOL...), always come with unccountable programming mistakes, straight evil features and, some small and subtle changes to ´the desktop appearance´???
Nonetheless, they´re always slower, larger, use much more resources AND, always cost more than previous versions???
Where would General Motors be if they offered the same ´working to promises guarantees´, diminished performance, increased use of fuel, lessened security, etc. on their products?
Would anyone here like to be flying on Boeig 777s, managed by the XP kind of ´operating system´? Or would anyone like to have their heart monitored, in an Intensive Care Unit, ´running´ under the same ´products´????
I wouldn´t.
Posted by scoobbs (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Here's a question
Do you really WANT the general public using Linux?

Software goes to the lowest common denominator and will that get linux dumbed-down (or in otherwords, reduce choices for the sake of ease of the average consumer)?

Just a question.
Posted by dragonbite (452 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Embeded/Dedicated Systems
I dont think it'll get "dumbed" down just customized to the application. I've setup bootable CD Kiosks that launch a browser and or thin-stations to run RDP or VNC in various networks to put into place dedicated machines. I've also setup basic work stations for Office and Browsing etc. These tasks linux works great on. Just because you can put a nice clean setup into place for these tasks doesnt mean its going to loose its ability to run a robust and stable server or desktop environment for a power user.
Posted by devrdander (10 comments )
Link Flag
Linspire versus Gentoo...
That's not a concern. Linspire, which is far
simpler than XP to operate, and Gentoo, which
would be confusing as hell to your average
office-worker-in-a-dead-end-job, can still run
the same applications and are both popular with
the people that use them.

It seems to me that Microsoft even acknowledges
that different versions with different feature
sets are appropriate for different people and
the need for multiple versions of the OS (3
versions of XP, and soon 7 versions of VISTA to
start).
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Link Flag
yes
Some distro has to do it. Lets take a look at the current situation of linux pre loaded boxes. Linspire is the only thing really main stream. Sure, you can get boxes from places online and have your choice but you then are not the "average desktop user". They buy from mainstream outlets. In that place only linspire does the trick. Why? Cause its a dumbed down version in that you use their wharehouse and get what they want to give you. And it works.

Someone needs to do that for the business subset. Make it so all thier IT needs to be competent at is networking. Give auto updates that work and you will have a winner. Keep linux in its present state and all you will have is happy geeks(like me).

I think the evolution of online tools in the future will be the marrige that finally sells the linux way of life.
Posted by R Me (196 comments )
Link Flag
Here's a question
Do you really WANT the general public using Linux?

Software goes to the lowest common denominator and will that get linux dumbed-down (or in otherwords, reduce choices for the sake of ease of the average consumer)?

Just a question.
Posted by dragonbite (452 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Embeded/Dedicated Systems
I dont think it'll get "dumbed" down just customized to the application. I've setup bootable CD Kiosks that launch a browser and or thin-stations to run RDP or VNC in various networks to put into place dedicated machines. I've also setup basic work stations for Office and Browsing etc. These tasks linux works great on. Just because you can put a nice clean setup into place for these tasks doesnt mean its going to loose its ability to run a robust and stable server or desktop environment for a power user.
Posted by devrdander (10 comments )
Link Flag
Linspire versus Gentoo...
That's not a concern. Linspire, which is far
simpler than XP to operate, and Gentoo, which
would be confusing as hell to your average
office-worker-in-a-dead-end-job, can still run
the same applications and are both popular with
the people that use them.

It seems to me that Microsoft even acknowledges
that different versions with different feature
sets are appropriate for different people and
the need for multiple versions of the OS (3
versions of XP, and soon 7 versions of VISTA to
start).
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Link Flag
yes
Some distro has to do it. Lets take a look at the current situation of linux pre loaded boxes. Linspire is the only thing really main stream. Sure, you can get boxes from places online and have your choice but you then are not the "average desktop user". They buy from mainstream outlets. In that place only linspire does the trick. Why? Cause its a dumbed down version in that you use their wharehouse and get what they want to give you. And it works.

Someone needs to do that for the business subset. Make it so all thier IT needs to be competent at is networking. Give auto updates that work and you will have a winner. Keep linux in its present state and all you will have is happy geeks(like me).

I think the evolution of online tools in the future will be the marrige that finally sells the linux way of life.
Posted by R Me (196 comments )
Link Flag
RE:
I don't believe my comments are based on legacy information, as they are based on a quite-recent installation of Fedora Core 5. Now I don't claim to be an expert on Linux, but those are issues I encountered during my install. Fedora Core 5 is Linux, right? :)
Posted by backgroundnoise (32 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Fedora Core 5 is a distribution...
In particular, it's a development testbed for
RedHat's Linux distribution. Fedora would not be
my first suggestion for a casual user. That's
not it's intended audience.

If you wanted to try something quite
specifically geared towards a desktop
environment, you'd probably look at the latest
Mandriva, SuSE, or maybe even Ubuntu or Kubuntu.
Each targets a slightly different user
experience. If you want something absolutely
business-consumer oriented, Xandros is a good
bet. If you want something targeting the
low-end/commodity user, Linspire might be a good
choice.
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Link Flag
RE:
I don't believe my comments are based on legacy information, as they are based on a quite-recent installation of Fedora Core 5. Now I don't claim to be an expert on Linux, but those are issues I encountered during my install. Fedora Core 5 is Linux, right? :)
Posted by backgroundnoise (32 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Fedora Core 5 is a distribution...
In particular, it's a development testbed for
RedHat's Linux distribution. Fedora would not be
my first suggestion for a casual user. That's
not it's intended audience.

If you wanted to try something quite
specifically geared towards a desktop
environment, you'd probably look at the latest
Mandriva, SuSE, or maybe even Ubuntu or Kubuntu.
Each targets a slightly different user
experience. If you want something absolutely
business-consumer oriented, Xandros is a good
bet. If you want something targeting the
low-end/commodity user, Linspire might be a good
choice.
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Link Flag
And in 18 months....
...they will say in the next 12 months...and on and on and on we go.
Posted by ZeroJCF (51 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Just like
Microsoft trolls will keep saying that Linux isnt ready or its to hard even when they have never tried it. Ubuntu and Suse are so easy my grandmother could install and use them.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
and in 18 months
Are you talking about Linux or Microsoft and Vista? I have used Windows since the beginning, that doesn't mean I like it. I have been tired of the promises and the wait for fixes and updates for many years: Why do I keep using it, because, until recently all the hardware has been designed for Wintel! Thankfully that is finally changing, the momentum is growing and it will reach the point where it doesn't matter which OS you want to use, if it is designed to run on Intel, IBM, or AMD it will work no matter the OS. Oh and I do use Linux, Solaris 8, and even occassionaly BeOS, which is no longer supported, except in the wild!
Posted by dland51 (91 comments )
Link Flag
And in 18 months....
...they will say in the next 12 months...and on and on and on we go.
Posted by ZeroJCF (51 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Just like
Microsoft trolls will keep saying that Linux isnt ready or its to hard even when they have never tried it. Ubuntu and Suse are so easy my grandmother could install and use them.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
and in 18 months
Are you talking about Linux or Microsoft and Vista? I have used Windows since the beginning, that doesn't mean I like it. I have been tired of the promises and the wait for fixes and updates for many years: Why do I keep using it, because, until recently all the hardware has been designed for Wintel! Thankfully that is finally changing, the momentum is growing and it will reach the point where it doesn't matter which OS you want to use, if it is designed to run on Intel, IBM, or AMD it will work no matter the OS. Oh and I do use Linux, Solaris 8, and even occassionaly BeOS, which is no longer supported, except in the wild!
Posted by dland51 (91 comments )
Link Flag
Sure
FC5 is targeted to a business audience, if you want a linux dist thats for the home end user like I said try Ubuntu. If you want a commercial OS to roll out in an enterprise in a customized fashion and or run a server, try FC5.
Posted by devrdander (10 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I wouldn't use FC in an Enterprise
Why would I use a distro that is labeled as "bleeding edge" for something I want to be stable?

If you are trying to go for the cheap, and don't mind not having the corporate support then go with CentOS (<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.centos.org" target="_newWindow">http://www.centos.org</a>)! It's Red Hat without Red Hat, which means it has the built-in security and stability of Red Hat without the expensive service contract.
Posted by dragonbite (452 comments )
Link Flag
Sure
FC5 is targeted to a business audience, if you want a linux dist thats for the home end user like I said try Ubuntu. If you want a commercial OS to roll out in an enterprise in a customized fashion and or run a server, try FC5.
Posted by devrdander (10 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I wouldn't use FC in an Enterprise
Why would I use a distro that is labeled as "bleeding edge" for something I want to be stable?

If you are trying to go for the cheap, and don't mind not having the corporate support then go with CentOS (<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.centos.org" target="_newWindow">http://www.centos.org</a>)! It's Red Hat without Red Hat, which means it has the built-in security and stability of Red Hat without the expensive service contract.
Posted by dragonbite (452 comments )
Link Flag
blowing smoke
now, anyone who knows me, knows I love Linux and Open-Source, and I really do believe it's where software is headed...but if you believe that a change this monumental is going to come about in just one short year, after it's taken this long to even make Linux REMOTELY viable to SOHO (Small Office and HOme) users, you're kidding yourself...however, that doesn't neccesarily mean it won't happen, it's just not bloody likely.
Posted by randomtransit (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Corporate not consumer
Quote:
------------
He predicted sales will begin with large "anchor accounts" buying the software for 3,000 to 5,000 computers at a time this year, with more aggressive sales in 2007.
------------

Basically, the large enterprises will migrate first for users with limited requirements.
Think about it: for most users in companies the systems come pre-configured with everything they need (according to the company). They are not expect to install or support the system.
Most people in offices use a Wordprocessor, Spreadsheet, Email program, IM, web browser. Most other things are optional.
In this environment Linux and OpenSource is ideal. Something like Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox and Thunderbird.

Create an installation image with all the security in place and all the applications installed.
Replicate across all the users.

A nice secure client environment which is less likely to be affected by viruses or spamming software.
Security is set at a level appropriate for the organisation.

Except for users who need scripting or other advanced features this will definitely do what they require.

I do expect to see more Linux being installed in these environments and the next 12-18 months is also valid if you take into account the following.
Move to Vista for corporates  a time to consider their OS Strategy
OS/2 end of life  very few consumers are using it but it has been very popular in Banks. If they have to move to a new OS then they may consider Linux, especially for what use to be terminal based solutions. In financial institutions being able to lock down the user and security is a large requirement.
Posted by ahickey (177 comments )
Link Flag
blowing smoke
now, anyone who knows me, knows I love Linux and Open-Source, and I really do believe it's where software is headed...but if you believe that a change this monumental is going to come about in just one short year, after it's taken this long to even make Linux REMOTELY viable to SOHO (Small Office and HOme) users, you're kidding yourself...however, that doesn't neccesarily mean it won't happen, it's just not bloody likely.
Posted by randomtransit (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Corporate not consumer
Quote:
------------
He predicted sales will begin with large "anchor accounts" buying the software for 3,000 to 5,000 computers at a time this year, with more aggressive sales in 2007.
------------

Basically, the large enterprises will migrate first for users with limited requirements.
Think about it: for most users in companies the systems come pre-configured with everything they need (according to the company). They are not expect to install or support the system.
Most people in offices use a Wordprocessor, Spreadsheet, Email program, IM, web browser. Most other things are optional.
In this environment Linux and OpenSource is ideal. Something like Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox and Thunderbird.

Create an installation image with all the security in place and all the applications installed.
Replicate across all the users.

A nice secure client environment which is less likely to be affected by viruses or spamming software.
Security is set at a level appropriate for the organisation.

Except for users who need scripting or other advanced features this will definitely do what they require.

I do expect to see more Linux being installed in these environments and the next 12-18 months is also valid if you take into account the following.
Move to Vista for corporates  a time to consider their OS Strategy
OS/2 end of life  very few consumers are using it but it has been very popular in Banks. If they have to move to a new OS then they may consider Linux, especially for what use to be terminal based solutions. In financial institutions being able to lock down the user and security is a large requirement.
Posted by ahickey (177 comments )
Link Flag
Almost There, not quite
I use Linux, and chose Suse 10 Pro, simply because it is a nice balance of server and work station functions.

I have been using Linux for 6 or so years, and am amazed how far it has come along.

However, it is not for the average user.

Try upgrading/updating a program. Can you imagine a Win-doze user dealing with dependencies? Until the files are as easy to install and remove as they are in OS X or (god forbid) windows, it is a tough sell.

Plus, DivX in Linux is spotty at best, wireless not quite there and still no lightscribe...

maybe in a couple of years...
Posted by dynsight (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You is the answer.
Yast online update or YOU is your source for updates. If it isnt available there, RPM will replace an updated package, and handle all the dependencies.
Programs are esier to remove on SuSE, yast deletes them with a few clicks, and it dosent forget half of them like Windowz dose.
Next I will remind you that OS X is UNIX, get MPlayer for divx, and lightscribe is waste of time.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
You is the answer.
Yast online update or YOU is your source for updates. If it isnt available there, RPM will replace an updated package, and handle all the dependencies.
Programs are esier to remove on SuSE, yast deletes them with a few clicks, and it dosent forget half of them like Windowz dose.
Next I will remind you that OS X is UNIX, get MPlayer for divx, and lightscribe is a uselessfeature. Come on because you cant etch a pretty picture on a cd is a reason not to use Linux. I tell you what, Ill trade that for not having to deal with spyware any day.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
Almost There, not quite
I use Linux, and chose Suse 10 Pro, simply because it is a nice balance of server and work station functions.

I have been using Linux for 6 or so years, and am amazed how far it has come along.

However, it is not for the average user.

Try upgrading/updating a program. Can you imagine a Win-doze user dealing with dependencies? Until the files are as easy to install and remove as they are in OS X or (god forbid) windows, it is a tough sell.

Plus, DivX in Linux is spotty at best, wireless not quite there and still no lightscribe...

maybe in a couple of years...
Posted by dynsight (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You is the answer.
Yast online update or YOU is your source for updates. If it isnt available there, RPM will replace an updated package, and handle all the dependencies.
Programs are esier to remove on SuSE, yast deletes them with a few clicks, and it dosent forget half of them like Windowz dose.
Next I will remind you that OS X is UNIX, get MPlayer for divx, and lightscribe is waste of time.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
You is the answer.
Yast online update or YOU is your source for updates. If it isnt available there, RPM will replace an updated package, and handle all the dependencies.
Programs are esier to remove on SuSE, yast deletes them with a few clicks, and it dosent forget half of them like Windowz dose.
Next I will remind you that OS X is UNIX, get MPlayer for divx, and lightscribe is a uselessfeature. Come on because you cant etch a pretty picture on a cd is a reason not to use Linux. I tell you what, Ill trade that for not having to deal with spyware any day.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
Yeah, I'm holding my breath...
When you can run your current apps on this platform then you'll have a product worth mentioning. If an enterprise were to make such a radical change as moving from a complete Windows/active Directory architecture to another architecture this isn't it. They would be better off deploying thin clients with Windows in the Data Center.
Widely deployed Linux at the desktop will happen at earliest when I am able to purchase my GM Hydrogen powered car and gas it up at my local Hydro-station.
Posted by fred dunn (793 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Im sure you know...
it all , or is that you are a know it all. Writing about the way Linux is lacking from your Windows desktop? If I really want to run Windowz apps on Linux , its easy. Wine is a great emulator. Cant say the same thing about Windowz being able to run Linux apps can you?
Windowz is a security nightmare, and you dont have to wait fopr it to happen. The only reason it is a on most desktoips is anti competive contracts, dirty tricks, and paid off polititions.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
Yeah, I'm holding my breath...
When you can run your current apps on this platform then you'll have a product worth mentioning. If an enterprise were to make such a radical change as moving from a complete Windows/active Directory architecture to another architecture this isn't it. They would be better off deploying thin clients with Windows in the Data Center.
Widely deployed Linux at the desktop will happen at earliest when I am able to purchase my GM Hydrogen powered car and gas it up at my local Hydro-station.
Posted by fred dunn (793 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Im sure you know...
it all , or is that you are a know it all. Writing about the way Linux is lacking from your Windows desktop? If I really want to run Windowz apps on Linux , its easy. Wine is a great emulator. Cant say the same thing about Windowz being able to run Linux apps can you?
Windowz is a security nightmare, and you dont have to wait fopr it to happen. The only reason it is a on most desktoips is anti competive contracts, dirty tricks, and paid off polititions.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
It will never happen until binary support exists
Other than special managed situations, Linux will be a geek only desktop until there is binarly compatibility for windowed applications and drivers!

Driver support is vital outside very managed desktops. Drivers that need to be compiled agaist the current kernel doesn't cut it. Worse is, they often don't even exist because a HW vendor can't release a standardized driver.

Applications must be able to be preserved, without compiling against a current windowing system.

Learn from the desktop master, MS did a fairly decent job of binary compatibility, changing it very infrequently.

It remains a shame that Linux remains stuck in the dark ages in this regard! It does so much so well.
Posted by gerry-g (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You just need some Wine
You seem to be reading off of a "Get the Fud" web site. Hardware detection and setup is so advanced with Linux you can run the OS from a CD. The ideas you sugest may have been true 5 or 10 years ago, but welcome to 2006. The only thing stoping linux is pre concived ideas brought to you from M$ that windows users keep repeating.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
It will never happen until binary support exists
Other than special managed situations, Linux will be a geek only desktop until there is binarly compatibility for windowed applications and drivers!

Driver support is vital outside very managed desktops. Drivers that need to be compiled agaist the current kernel doesn't cut it. Worse is, they often don't even exist because a HW vendor can't release a standardized driver.

Applications must be able to be preserved, without compiling against a current windowing system.

Learn from the desktop master, MS did a fairly decent job of binary compatibility, changing it very infrequently.

It remains a shame that Linux remains stuck in the dark ages in this regard! It does so much so well.
Posted by gerry-g (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You just need some Wine
You seem to be reading off of a "Get the Fud" web site. Hardware detection and setup is so advanced with Linux you can run the OS from a CD. The ideas you sugest may have been true 5 or 10 years ago, but welcome to 2006. The only thing stoping linux is pre concived ideas brought to you from M$ that windows users keep repeating.
Posted by Kilz (85 comments )
Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.