[LINK] Linux poised for desktop failure: Gartner

[Jeff Waugh]

>>There are very few proponents of the 'Linux' desktop setting their
>>sights on the consumer market. We're largely aiming for the corporate
>>desktop. Very different market, which does not involve many of these
>>issues.
>
> Good to hear. Just a couple of points though. Those people who work  in
> corporates tend to do a lot of work from home. Generally speaking,
> they buy their home hardware and software on the basis that it
> reflects the platform the corporate is using (unless Spoiled Brat No  1
> specifies that it has to be able to run some game or MP3 package or
> whatever.) You can't separate one from the other that easily ... and  I
> doubt that Joe Public would do so.

Nup, not yet, that's why we're compatible.

>>See Gnumeric, OpenOffice, Evolution. Definitely a consideration that
>>has been taken on and embraced by the Free Software community.
>
> Not a fraction of what MS offers.

You were talking about user habituation. We're happy to keep users
comforable by producing software they'd be familiar with from the get go.

> I wouldn't have included VB ... I find it a coding abomination ...  but
> there you go.

It's a fairly inarguable achievement from Microsoft's perspective. They've
won a lot of market share (user and developer) based on VB alone.

> No points for ODBC? ADO? No points for MDAC?

No, everyone has database abstraction libraries.

> No points for getting
> Windows to work on such a widely divergent hardware spec?

No, that's why I gave them points for *defining* the hardware spec.

> No points
> for establishing a recognised GUI standard? No points for
> ActiveX/Win32API (despite their horrendous security implications)?

Oooh, gee. No.

> No points for .NET and it's CLR/CLI structure?

Points given in the second list, but not in the first. Once they've achieved
something with it, it can go in the first list.

> No points for their wicked fast (but now obsolete) JAVA JIT compiler?

Given their aims with it? No.

> There must be something MS has done that tickled your fancy.

Yeah, I listed them. VB was first.

> No points for MP3 and
> DivX - both of which were based on core MS data compression libraries?

Think you need to do some more research there... Not at all true.

> Mmmm ... there's a few there (some of which I wouldn't have
> included). Large parts of the OpenGL spec for example rely on bits of
> DirectDraw

Which is why OpenGL has been around for so long, and implemented on so many
platforms where DirectDraw is not present? More research for you.

> Largely speaking Linux (because it was built from the ground
> up) has been in 'catch up' mode for most of its history. At present  my
> estimate is that it's close to being on par with some of the older
> OS's .... but not from a naive user requirement.

But we're fast, aren't we? 11 years to supercomputing and enterprise
installations, NSA security contributions, long-standing competitors
standardising on our ABI/APIs, desktop software and platform standards?

Phew. Not long now.

> Where LINUX excels is in providing a host of development tools and an
> open environment for development.

A big chunk of Microsoft's success can be attributed to their developer
support, and winning the hearts and minds of third party developers. Given
that they've pissed most of them off by now, and Free Software is providing
a fresh and powerful development experience... History repeats.

Free Software's killer app is Freedom. Open Source's killer app is its
collarborative methodology.

- Jeff

-- 
  So, "Jeffrey" seems to mean "the ineffectual, victimised guy in
  American movies" in four different languages.