When Mono is completed, Linux is the option for the desktop.
When Mono is completed, Linux is the option for the desktop.
[From Frans Bouma's
blogin Boldface, My comments in italics]
Randy Holloway wrote about
his vision on
Linux and then especially about Linux on the desktop. I
disagree with his vision, I think Linux is definitely an option for
the desktop at the moment and thus also in the foreseably future.
It will become the option for the desktop when Mono is
completed. The reason for this is simple: a lot of Windows programs
will be written using .NET. If you can run these programs on Linux
too, using Mono, what's keeping you on Windows? Perhaps the games.
But definitely not the business applications, since the Linux
version for spreadsheets, browsers, wordprocessors, emailprograms
and other every-day software are solid today, even when
compared to Microsoft Office XP.
Linux desktop office applications do not rival those of
Windows, in particular Office 2003. We have to be careful when we
make generic statements such as this becuase the end result is
disappointment and frustation for corporate Linux
neophyte.
Imagine a corporate power user that has used Excel to
produce Pivot tables (like I do) that provide me with a critical
success factors dashboard for my enterprise. If I was to move to
any of the incarnations of open office this would be lost. Now, for
the corporate user -knowledge, information worker- that I believe
Randy has in mind this remains a problem re. Linux as a desktop
offering today.
On the other hand, how true is the position that I presented
above? By this I mean, how many knowledge workers actually make use
of Pivot Tables in Excel? Something tells me I am the exception
rather than the norm. Thus, moving away from Desktop productivity
tools of type "Office 200x", and looking at email, and web browsing
etc. Linux certainly matches Windows pound for pound, but is this
enough? What is the current "activation threshold" for Windows vs.
Linux for a Desktop user (who just wants email and web browsing)? I
think this is Linux distribution dependent, now the last time I
attempted this experiment (at least over a year ago) Windows won
flat out becuase I had to wrestle with X Configuration en route to
getting a graphical desktop (I believe this has improved vastly of
late, but I need to perform this experiment using current 8.x and
higher Linux distros.).
I've hated Linux and especially its most hardcore supporters,
for years. However, you can't have an unbiased vision on what is
best for a given company to use as the OS of choice if you are
biased yourself. Mono changed me, I really think Mono is the best
Linux has ever experienced: it makes transitions of software
written for the Windows platform to a free (as in beer, I don't
believe in the GPL-philosophy) OS possible.
Mono is going to be the most significant Linux <-->
Windows harmonization effort over the long term. This is because
parity will no longer be about getting the likes of Open Office to
reach functional parity with "Office 200x" as future Windows
applications will be "managed code" in nature (a strategic
Microsoft goal over the long term), and Mono's goal is to run
"managed code" outside the Windows platform (this applies to Linux,
UNIX, and other platforms).
Besides Mono, I do think Linux is a good platform to use for
everyday business applications today, because the office tools can
use Exchange, they can read/write MS Office documents, so why
bother investing in MS software when you can save that money and
choose the alternative? The only problem is: when you have a lot of
desktops to admin as a sysadmin, and you want to do that with the
easy tools in Windows server 2003, you're out of luck.
Linux is a good platform for everday business applications,
but not quite goodenough in the area of unravelling it's
value proposition to the point of obvious simplification
forcorporate decision makers. This is the current hump in the
road to this critical destination in my humble opinion.
Randy and Frans are making very good points that shed light
on some of the less covered aspects of the Linux vs. Windows
debate.