Red Hat unveils Linux system for desktops

newsobserver ^ | May 4, 2004 | MATTHEW FORDAHL

[stainlessbanner]

SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) - In a sign that demand is growing for alternatives to Microsoft Corp.'s Windows software, Red Hat Inc. will release a version of the Linux operating system and other programs tailored for desktop computers in corporations, universities and government agencies.

Red Hat Desktop, announced Tuesday in London, will be targeted at organizations that are looking to upgrade their PCs but don't want or need all the features that ship with the latest version of Windows, said Matthew Szulik, Red Hat's chief executive.

"These organizations now, for the very first time, have an alternative to the historical Microsoft-desktop paradigm," he said.

Red Hat Desktop includes the Linux operating system, a Web browser and office productivity tools. It's entirely open-source software, meaning the underlying code is developed, freely distributed and improved upon by a worldwide network of programmers.

Szulik said Red Hat Desktop is less expensive to administer and more secure than Microsoft's offerings. It will cost on average about $5 a month per machine, with additional support services available, he said.

"What we wanted to was make sure that we were able to build a product that solved economic problems for customers," he said.

Linux today is much more widely used as a server operating system than a desktop OS, but observers expect it to start gaining momentum on the PC. Novell Inc.'s SuSE Linux distribution and Sun Microsystems Inc.'s Java Desktop System also target desktop computers.

Szulik said Red Hat Desktop will not be targeted at consumers.

[stainlessbanner]

another one

[BibChr]

Anyone ever use Lindows?

Dan

[rdb3]

The Penguin Ping.

Wanna be Penguified? Just holla!

Got root?

[smith288]

Anyone ever use Lindows?

Next to zero WIFI support. I dumped it for XP so I could play my MVP 2004

[Petronski]

I haven't tried Lindows, but I was reading some wonderful things about SUSE 9.1, being released Friday. I'm also interested in trying Sun Java Desktop (but that's a retail item; SUSE can still be had--legally--on eBay for about $12).

[RayChuang88]

I'd rather use SuSE Linux 9.1--if only because it has far more hardware support and the backing of Novell.

[Grit]

download?

[Petronski]

SUSE 9.1 seems like a really sweet setup, including the 2.6 kernel and some snazzy midsized German word processor called Wordmaker. I have so many microsoft apps, though, that any use of linux would just be experimental.

[B Knotts]

No, but I use Debian, upon which Lindows is based.

Debian is, IMO, easier to maintain than RPM-based distributions (e.g. Red Hat and friends).

[ryanjb2]

The one problem I have with Linux is the GUI is very inconsistant. One application will look totally differant from another. One application will have nice looking buttons, text boxes, forms, etc, and the other will look horrible, like it was drawn by a ten year old.

I use SuSE 7.3 and KDE.

[Petronski]

SUSE has come a LONG way since 7.3 came out.

[Eala]

Debian is, IMO, easier to maintain than RPM-based distributions (e.g. Red Hat and friends).

After 6 years of RedHat, I switched to Knoppix (Debian-based). I quite agree about maintainability. (DOn't know how SuSe rates in this regard...)

[bcoffey]

I have so many microsoft apps, though, that any use of linux would just be experimental.

I use SuSE for 95% of my work and the VMware app to host MS Windows within a Linux/X window. VMware just announced support for SuSE 9.0 and I'm told it will work fine with 9.1 as well.

Freepmail me if you'd like a screen shot of my dual Linux/Windows desktop.

[Jack Black]

After the Redhat version 9 debacle I won't be patronizing their firm again. About 10 days after I bought a copy they announced they were dropping support. The versions that one was supposed to migrate to were mondo-expensive. The bug fix stuff was also expensive, more than XP. Of course you don't need it as much.

My take away was that Linux is usable for some tasks, especially simple stuff like web browsing and text composition. It won't play all the cool games, run high end A/V software like Cubase and Cakewalk and have the odd little utility you want instantly available. It is also one big step harder to use & install so it's not a good choice for a true naive user. On the other hand it is VERY stable, running, literally for months. Chicken and egg? If I *could* run the more difficult apps like Lotus Notes on it would that hurt the stability? Can't do it so I can't say.

I would go Suse now, they seem a little more serious about the average user. Redhat only wants big corporate customers, or at least that was their message to me.

[chilepepper]

I've played around *alot* with Fedora. Fedora Core 1 is extremely impressive, and might really be called RH9.1

I've installed Fedora Core 2 which is still a bit raw, as one would expect since it is still in pre-release (3rd beta).

It has the Secure Environment Linux enhancements which evolved from the NSA and can be made really secure, but is a PITA to set up since its first reaction to everything is "no, you can't do that!". fortunately, one can turn off these enhancements so it reverts to the same RH9 or Fedora Core 1 behaviour. But at some point these enhancements will help make the already pretty secure Linux even more so...

[ezo4]

sounds like mandrake allready has this on one bootable cd