Linux users fret about desktop fate

CNet News ^ | Nov 4, 2003 | Robert Lemos

[Leroy S. Mort]

Two major moves by well-known Linux companies have the open-source community worried that the consumer is being left behind.

On Monday, in an expected move, Red Hat said that it would stop supporting all consumer versions of Red Hat Linux by the end of April and that it planned to support only its business version of the operating system. On Tuesday, enterprise software maker Novell surprised the high-tech world when announced an agreement to buy software maker SuSE Linux for $210 million.

For the business world, the deals seemingly confirmed the corporate role for the communal operating system. However, many Linux enthusiasts worry that the Linux community may have lost its two most popular distributions--Red Hat Linux and SuSE Linux--in a corporate equivalent of a one-two punch. Two major moves by well-known Linux companies have the open-source community worried that the consumer is being left behind.

On Monday, in an expected move, Red Hat said that it would stop supporting all consumer versions of Red Hat Linux by the end of April and that it planned to support only its business version of the operating system. On Tuesday, enterprise software maker Novell surprised the high-tech world when announced an agreement to buy software maker SuSE Linux for $210 million.

For the business world, the deals seemingly confirmed the corporate role for the communal operating system. However, many Linux enthusiasts worry that the Linux community may have lost its two most popular distributions--Red Hat Linux and SuSE Linux--in a corporate equivalent of a one-two punch. "When you go into a CompUSA or Best Buy, the only versions of Linux that you can find on the shelves are Red Hat and SuSE," said Jack Alderson, a Linux and Sun systems administrator for custom-chip maker X-Fab Texas. Alderson fears that Novell will stop creating consumer-oriented versions of SuSE Linux, which he uses at home. "With Red Hat's announcement, that pulled them off of the shelf and out of the general public's view. All there was left was SuSE. Now that's going to disappear also."

The moves could return consumers to a choice of Linux distributions from smaller companies--such as Mandrake, Xandros or Lindows--or from community projects such as Debian, Fedora, Gentoo and Slackware.

Novell appears to be planning to carry SuSE's open-source torch, but it hasn't made specific comments regarding lower-priced versions of its Linux products.

"Novell is committed to the open-source community," Chief Executive Jack Messman said Tuesday in a conference call. "With SuSE, we gain access to and will continue to actively support key SuSE-sponsored open-source initiatives."

While SuSE's high-end server products retail for $450 or more, SuSE 9 Professional--which includes publicly available Linux server packages--only costs $80.

Charles Philip Chan, a Toronto resident who has used Linux for about a decade, believes that Novell's acquisition is additional validation for the open-source operating system.

"On one hand it is good, because it looks like Linux is moving in the commercial space," he said, adding that consumers still have a lot of choice among community projects on the Internet. "There are a lot of other distributions out there."

However, Chan said the consumer market will likely expand at a slower rate, because there will be fewer versions on shelves at retail stores. While Red Hat Linux won't be available at retail, the company is supporting a community project, Fedora, to create distributions based on cutting-edge Linux technology.

Arthur Tyde, the founder and former president of the Bay Area Linux Users' Group, is optimistic about SuSE remaining a choice for consumers. SuSE Linux 9 has already been released, and he fully expects to see the next version at retail.

"I think it is wait and see," he said. "It might not affect the community at all. From a consumer standpoint, I think you will still see SuSE Linux in CompUSA."

Moreover, while some have viewed troubled Novell's purchase plans as a potential threat to SuSE, Tyde said that Novell is just getting a second chance and who knows what the company will do with SuSE.

"You have to think about what they are really buying," he said. "They are not buying the rights to all that code. They are buying credibility to that space."

And, Tyde said, for Novell to gain credibility in the Linux community means keeping consumer product on the shelves.

[BibChr]

You have LindowsOS? Ver. 4? What do you use with it? What do you use it on? Run into any problems?

Anyone else?

Dan

[dyed_in_the_wool]

It takes more machine than Win2K, runs pitifully slow, crashes and doesn't recognize WinXP network printers.

Answers: Wrong, Not configured correctly, XP doesn't share nicely.
I know someone who's getting ready to dump Win2k because it won't run his printer. So who's right. He's got a degree in CS and two masters (one in IS).
Windows has software problems, if for not other reason than YOU can't fix it.
Linux typically has hardware problems and the user doesn't know enough to fix it.

Use what works for you but don't spread FUD.

[snooker]

Novell is already on their way with netware for Linux. They started some time ago. Netware for Linux is the bridge which keeps the Novell name in the corporate shops. It also might stop the trend to dump netware as old and outdated. With SUSE, netware and XD2 this is going to be some package. Server side and desktop, with support options.

I have been a user of XD2 + red carpet and have got a few clients who use and like it as well. It is a step up over the base gnome.

RedHat and Novell are going to give MS fits.

I just downloaded and installed the latest Fedora Core(old RH Linux) and it looks really good. This may be the new debian with a newbie grade installer. Time will tell wether fedora is just a hobby version or the real deal that small businesses can use as servers and desktops. It has promise.

[mpreston]

"Windows came with my computer. Since there is no discount without an operating system, it was free. I had to pay to get Linux."

Windows wasn't free, you paid for it. Probably in the $150 range. Linux is free. While you will pay $79 for SuSE Pro, that's for support. Pro includes OS, Server and a complete Office Suite. About 1/6th the cost of a comparable Microsoft package.

[HamiltonJay]

Why, FREEBSD is far more stable than the best Linux implimentation out there... Linux gets a lot of press, and such, but FreeBSD is a far more stable OS.

IF linux community joing the FreeBSD community, you would without question have a stable reliable desk top OS inside of 3-5 years....

BSD has already been turned into a reliable desktop OS by Apple, so doing the same with FreeBSD on intel is not a huge leap.

[taxcontrol]

Wow - I was not aware that they had made such a drastic change. Thanks!

[HamiltonJay]

XP is complete crap... we've largely backed back to Win2K on all windows boxes because XP just doesn't work right across the board.

[jimt]

Red Hat's chief executive has said that Linux needs to mature further before home users will get a positive experience from the operating system, saying they should choose Windows instead.

An honest admission in line with my experience.

While I've got my laptop booting DOS 6.2, Windows 95 and Windows NT in separate partitions, I've had hell getting any variant of Linux operating, and I've tried four or five on a clean hard disk, using installation options from full auto minimal to "expert". X-Windows had continuous problems with a 1024 X 768 standard LCD display, and performance was sluggish, to say the least.

The MS operating systems even have no trouble with the "Selectbay" interchangeable drives, which include a floppy, a zip drive, a floptical drive, a CD, a CDR and a DVD drive.

But when I can't get the blasted display working properly, my enthusiasm drops very quickly.

[snooker]

Why not install it? The old RH versions update to the free fedora releases. So you can install, play around, and either use it as is or 'up2date' it to fedora.If it is RH9 RH supports it normally until 4/04.

Fedora is sponsored by red hat and more or less takes the place of the old retail packs. RH is switching to Enterprise for sales.

[snooker]

FreeRepublic runs Red Hat.

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.freerepublic.com

[LTCJ]

I've been toying with SuSE since 6.3 - through 6.4, 7.3, and recently 8.2. I have to say that 8.2 was the watershed for me. The installation and config recognition went so well that it is now the primary OS for my family's main computer. My wife and son have taken to it like ducks to water - suprizingly quickly.

Oddly enough, last night I upgraded the MS side of the dual boot from W98SE to W2000 Pro and the MS upgrade had WAY more problems with the installation than SuSE 8.2 had - both hardware and software.

I'm currently shopping (motherboard/processor/graphics card) for a new system tailored for SuSE 9.0 as primary with W2000 as legacy boot backup. I will happily receive any suggestions from those running S9.0 as to what has worked well for them. I'm willing to go with packaged systems, too, if they come without the MS Tax.

[ThinkDifferent]

they don't realize how difficult it is to produce a mass market consumer operating system

I don't think it's a question of difficulty (there are lots of advanced features in the Linux kernel), but of desire. Kernel hacking is "fun", documentation and user interface analysis isn't. Microsoft and Apple have the advantage of being able to pay people to do the "boring" stuff.

[B Knotts]

Well, you paid for Windows, regardless. I generally build my desktop machines, so I avoid the Microsoft tax. And servers can be purchased with no OS. Then, I install Debian via net install.

And if you have a slow net connection, you can buy a CD from cheapbytes.com for cheap ($6.99 for the new Fedora release). They also have Knoppix, which you don't even need to install (you just boot it from the CD).

[Coral Snake]

I've looked at the Fedora (actually the new name for Free Red Hat) project and I think it is worth a try once they get a full version of Fedora Core available on CD at Cheap Bytes or someplace. (don't have broadband for those LOOOONNNNGGGG linux downloads) ;c)

They also seem to be getting Gnome up to speed to be competitive with KDE. This is good news for those who want to develop on Linux commercially as in Proprietary. Gnome, GTK2 and WxWindows for GTK (for C++ developers) are all LGPL. On top of that I also think Gnome has better anti aliasing and better "eye candy" (an important selling point with consumers) than KDE.

I really do think that once Gnome is fully up to speed that it will be the OS/X equivalant desktop for Linux because of its combination of proprietary software friendlines for commercial developers and "eye candy" for consumers. Also at least on my machines Gnome is a quite a bit faster and less crash prone than KDE.

Therefore I don't really think that we have to worry much about future commercial desktop versions of Linux. In fact I see new companies rising to use Fedora Core as the basis of a new generation of commercial Gnome based Linux desktop distros that will replace today's KDE based ones.

Actually I'm Thinking of building a desktop Linux distro based on Fedora Core to be called Patriot Linux if it is actually as good as it looks in screenshots.

Guns, Linux and Liberty. ;c)

[Poser]

1. Perhaps my computers are more expensive with Windows XP, but I can't buy them cheaper without it so... it didn't cost me anything that I could have recovered.

2. Yes. It isn't configured correctly but... I can't figure out how to configure it correctly. I've been working with microcomputers since the first CP/M Altos.

3. I'm NOT running a server. I don't care how well it works on a server. That is completely and utterly irrelevant to me.

4. It IS slow and it DOES take more resources to run than WIN2K.

5. It DOES crash. Win2k didn't.

6. I don't know what the heck FUD is, but all I'm spreading is the facts as they happened to me.

7. I have a T1 line, but downloading 2 gigabytes is ridiculous even with that capability. Three different FTP sites have crashed while I was downloading. Perhaps Redhat's FTP sites are slower and less reliable than some, but the download would take most of a day at the speed they fed my lines.

Here's what I do know. I buy Windows machines and hook them up. They work. When I do a clean installation of XP, it works and it recognizes all of my hardware and it runs all of my software.

I decided to try Linux because there are so many people who cream their pants at the mention of its name. They claim it is free, runs flawlessly and never crashes. Many say it will run on older computers and run fast. It turns out that it is way too big to download so it isn't free. It didn't run worth a damn on my Win2k machine. It doesn't recognize my network printers and the documentation is so completely undecipherable that I can't figure out how to configure it properly.

Your friend may have two Master's degrees. I'm a college professor. I teach Business Computing. I've got plenty of degrees. They aren't helping with Linux. And no... I do not plan to try to rewrite the Linux code. I have enough of my own applications to deal with.

I haven't given up yet. I plan to try a few more versions of LINUX to see if there is one that will run as an acceptable desktop operating system. So far, my experience has been terrible.

Now I hear that Redhat and another major desktop Linux provider are both likely to drop Linux as a desktop environment. I've had several different people recommend several different versions of Linux from several different companies. I have no way to know if any of them are going to install easily and run. From what I have seen, I'll need a Linux expert to do the installation. I'm going to try a maximum of three more versions before I give up on Linux and stick with Windows and Unix.

As an experienced computer user who has been building PCs for 21 years and running them for 27 years I should be able to install a good operating system without a hundred hours of experimentation and manual reading. When I'm done, the operating system should run at least as fast as Windows on the same machine. If it doesn't, all the hype is just that, hype.

[Liberal Classic]

Interesting news, and in other interesting news, Novell just bought SuSE Linux following closely on the heels of their purchase of the Ximian commercial Linux desktop company in August. Novell is now a Linux company, and it appears they are gunning for the vacuum left by RedHat's retreat.

It's always amazing how quickly market conditions had change. Anyone remember when the joke was that OSF stood for "Oppose Sun Forever?"

[B Knotts]

The easiest one to install is Mandrake, in my opinion.

I use Debian, as I find it easiest to maintain, but it is definitely not for novices.

[dyed_in_the_wool]

Okay, let's play...

but I can't buy them cheaper without it so... it didn't cost me anything that I could have recovered.

Yes, you can. Got to http://mwave.com and you can configure a machine and save $$ by NOT buying an OS.

Yes. It isn't configured correctly but... I can't figure out how to configure it correctly. I've been working with microcomputers since the first CP/M Altos.

I don't care how long you've been 'working on computers', if you don't know what you're doing, stay away. RTFM and all that. 'man' pages. Read the "How-To's" that are out there. The information is free and easy to find.

I'm NOT running a server. I don't care how well it works on a server. That is completely and utterly irrelevant to me.

So why are you running it? To sound 1337? So you can check out the groovy desktops? What do you want to do? Linux may not be the answer.

It IS slow and it DOES take more resources to run than WIN2K.

This is so insane, I don't know where to begin. The only thing I can imagine is that you turned everything on when loaded it. Your probaby have more services running than you know what to do with. The Linux core requires precious few resources. I believe the last kernel would still run on 486s! And there are still versions that run on 386 machines.

It DOES crash. Win2k didn't.

Linux does not crash. It can hang. You can get kernel panic. But if it freezes, you can hit ALT + F2 and open a new terminal and su in and kill whatever processes where going on in your first session.
Your lack of knowledge on this and your assertion that Win2K 'never crashes' are the biggest load in your whole post. It may not have crashed for your yet, but it will. Because it does. And Win2K is the least likely to do this. But it still will.

I don't know what the heck FUD is, but all I'm spreading is the facts as they happened to me.

FUD == Fear Uncertainty Doubt
You don't know what you're doing and discouraging others, possibly less foolish than you, from trying.

I have a T1 line, but downloading 2 gigabytes is ridiculous even with that capability. Three different FTP sites have crashed while I was downloading. Perhaps Redhat's FTP sites are slower and less reliable than some, but the download would take most of a day at the speed they fed my lines.

Red Hat caps the speed of downloads. Use a mirror. In fact, Red Hat makes this exact point on their site.

I should be able to install a good operating system without a hundred hours of experimentation and manual reading.

Stay away from Linux. If you're not prepare to even read the download instructions on Red Hat's site, you won't be able to get anything to work.

Here's what I do know. I buy Windows machines and hook them up. They work.

Port 139 is exposed. They work for crackers, too.

I'm a college professor. I teach Business Computing.

So, you're not a computing professional. That explains a lot.

Look, I can recommend some good books and websites. But, like I'm sure you tell your students, if you don't do the work, you're not going to get the results.
Download a copy of Mandrake. That's the easiest and you can say you 'run Linux' since that sort of thing matters to you. (CP/M on Altos indeed).
But don't make up statements about resources on crashing. If somebody who didn't know how to drive bought a car and crashed it would you blame Dodge?

[snooker]

My RH versions run nicely as desktops. I use a 500mhz PIII 384mB 20GB 5400 rpm disk as a base test bed system. I purposely use a low end system to test end user performance. There is little user performance difference between this system and P4 systems except when the task is CPU specific. You can't expect low end HW to load as fast regardless which OS is installed.

Over my cable modem line I generally get 350+kByte average transfer rates. In some cases I get rates over 500kBytes. That is all the 10mb enet cable modem can spit out.

Performance with the latest Fedora release, 'yarrow', is marginally faster than the prvious RH9 release due to kernel tuning additions. Fedora replaces the old Red Hat. If you want commercial then I go with SUSE. Fedora is free so upgrading an old PC is a lot cheaper than any other way. Support and updates are available auto-magically online at the RH sponsored fedora ftp site and user mail lists.

I think you have setup problems since the stock RH or SUSE CDs install and perform at this speed for me. Linux is not slow when compared to the Win98 or WinXP it replaces on the exact same hardware. Since I have my test bed system set up to change hard disks for testing, one disk one OS, I can swap between the OSes and see how the exact same hardware performs. Linux is provably faster.

Here is what I do. I buy RH or SUSE Linux box sets, usually under $40. Install Linux on old Win98/Win2000 or even new WinXP PCs. They install in under a hour total. They just run.

Problems I have mostly is with newer machines, where particulary HP, designs their hardware 'windows specific'. That is fixed by just buying new white box systems with stock Intel motherboards. Right now I use D965PERLx boards. Problems I encounter with older machines is some of the old legacy enet cards are crap. Usually fixed with a new $20 card from the local shop. Old video cards are generally fixed by buying new cards for under $50. Both make the systems run better regardless what OS is installed.

The systems I install are generally used for internet and business with OpenOffice. The customers then use the money saved to actually run their business rather than pay for more software and hardware upgrades.

Most of my clients are money sensitive, not OS sensitive. We set up a church as an recent example. As long as the browser and office package work they are happy. May not work for all, works for me.

Lately buying pre-installed new systems with Lindows from Walmart online is catching on with clients I have. Cheap, warranty and they just run. Not everyone cares about the latest $10 widget working with their PC. If you care, then maybe sticking with Windows suits you.

I know what FUD is, it mostly comes out of Redmond.

[Poser]

My evaluation of your post:

Several insults and ad hominem attacks that I will ignore

Confirmation that you can't expect to get Linux running without spending 100 hours reading manuals

Thanks. You have been very helpful.