An OS is an OS is an OS
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| jimf Dec 25, 2005 7:34 PM EDT |
"Linux represented a powerful operating system in its own right" I'm not sure I get your point here Tom... As is Unix, as is NT, as is BSD, and is OS/2, as is OSx.... etc. Any of us with even a hint of technical knowledge understand that the OS is and entirely separate issue than the GUI interface or shell. If the general population doesn't that's nothing new and maybe not even important. Let them ascribe it all to 'magic'. As far as Linux in the server arena, I see this as a pretty much a done deal in both the technical and Business perception. Nothing even comes close, and even the long time MS administrators that I know are keeping up with their Linux skills in anticipation of a switch to Linux at some point in the future. This 'Market' will ultimately be decided by people who have the technical credentials to make the most viable choice. Desktop Linux is an entirely different issue, as many of the users have far less technical expertise, and in some cases really do believe the whole process is magic. Many Desktop users could care less about Linux's technical credentials, they just want a stable working environment that a GUI in Linux can supply. Whether perceived as an alternative or not, it is impossible to eliminate the public perception of a Linux GUI as an competitor to Windows... Nor would it be desirable to do that. MS had a few more years to develop their OS/GUI, but in the last couple of years, several Linux GUIs have become more than competitive in any function that matters. What I see now is that both Gnome and KDE are a lot more secure and functional than anything MS offers. Ultimately, I don't think you'll have to step away from the desktop to see Linux 'kick everyone's butt'. |
| tadelste Dec 25, 2005 8:24 PM EDT |
I don't see much difference in what you wrote or I wrote with one exception. NT and OS/2 are not powerful operating systems in their own right. Neither scale and neither function well away from the GUI. They sure run older Intel chip sets and processors swell but that's whether they stop. Linux wasn't build to compete with Windows and that made it very functional without a gui and still does. You just don't have the command set or tools with Windows to do much unless Microsoft built a little GUI program and an API to provide the functionality. Porting command line programs to Windows is a serious pain in the butt. Cygnus did it, but look at what they had to do to get there and in the Windows environment, that stuff doesn't work well. It also stops doing much at loads which don't cause a breeze in the cabinet of a Linux box. Also, I wasn't concerned with the perception of desktop users who I referred to as the kiddie network. They can think that Linux competes with Windows all the want. Without the kiddies, OS/2 didn't have much of a home. Neither would a Mac and neither would Windows. That allows, in my reckonin' for Linux to stand on her own two feet, so to speak, Jim. |
| jimf Dec 25, 2005 9:04 PM EDT |
I guess what I do not understand is how any of this affects the positioning of how we present Linux? As a server, Linux is obviously well understood and utilized. As a Desktop, I can't see how Gnome and KDE could be presented in any other way than as alternatives to 'other' desktops. Perhaps better public education, but, I thought that was what we were trying to do? As for Linux being a far more capable and flexible OS, well... Duh :D . Otherwise, I really like the piece Tom :) It certainly got me thinking. |
| mjjohansen Dec 26, 2005 12:31 AM EDT |
As a Slackware and BSD user, I was wondering why you make it sound like BSD didn't exist in the server market, and like Linux was flying in circles around every other server operating system. Besides that, it was fun to be reminded of the MS Linux defence - a great classic. I heard that a very large portion of the wireless routers in the MS development labs were Linux powered, too... |
| jimf Dec 26, 2005 1:50 AM EDT |
mjjohansen, BSD is, arguably, a better server platform than Linux, but, I really don't see it has the market share and doubt that it will ever achieve that popularity. Not fair, but, not the first time a superior a superior concept has failed for lack of popular support |
| AnonymousCoward Dec 26, 2005 4:16 AM EDT |
jimf: show me MS IIS or MS SQL Server or MS Exchange running on anything but MS Windows and I'll concede your point about the interchangeability of OSes WRT servers. Ditto the Windows GUI shell on anything but MS Windows for desktops. You can run KDE and most of the apps on MS Windows (a bit shakily, but it's there); but vice versa, except in an outright emulator? She's a not gunna fly. You can run FOSS webservers, databases, yadda yadda on Microsoft's OSes, but never vice versa. This asymmetry, this incapacity on the Microsoft applications' behalf, is a deliberately cultivated marketing tool, and it can bite you on the ass without warning. |
| jimf Dec 26, 2005 6:09 AM EDT |
Whoa AnonymousCoward! Never said any of that, not gonna go there. Only said an OS is OS, nothing about any of them being =... :D |
| tadelste Dec 26, 2005 8:02 AM EDT |
Quoting:As a Slackware and BSD user, I was wondering why you make it sound like BSD didn't exist in the server market I wasn't aware of that intention. I didn't mention Solaris, Open VMS, zOS and numerous others. So, apologies if that's what you took from it. BSD and Linux evolved separately. This subject was Linux - not as an alternative to other server operating systems but just as a product that stands on its own. The term alternative might be problematic with some. I meant to use it where alternative necessitates a choice between mutually exclusive possibilities; "`either' and `or' in `either this or that' -- Linux wasn't built to compete with Windows. It isn't a clone of Windows. It's an alternative if you say it's one of many choices or options people can use. But as an operating system built from the ground up, it's more than an alternative or it can do more than the thing it's compared to everyday. |
| mjjohansen Dec 29, 2005 12:08 AM EDT |
I agree with your intention. IMO, one of the most important things in the Linux community is to perceive the system as an independent project, or one is bound to be limiting the perspective. |
| tadelste Dec 29, 2005 9:06 AM EDT |
mjjohansen: Thank you. I think you articulated the message succinctly. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!