Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Red Hat to Enter the Desktop Market

CowboyNeal posted about 7 years ago | from the hat-into-the-ring dept.

Red Hat Software 250

head_dunce writes "It looks like Red Hat is going to release their Global Desktop Linux in September and give Ubuntu a challenge for the Linux desktop market. Red Hat Global Desktop 'would be sold with a one-year subscription to security updates.'" It looks like another choice for the proverbial Aunt Tillie. The release is being delayed in order to provide greater media compatibility, "to permit users to view a wide range of video formats on their computers."

cancel ×

250 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

A day late and a dollar short. (4, Insightful)

gumpish (682245) | about 7 years ago | (#20112391)

Red Hat Global Desktop 'would be sold with a one-year subscription to security updates.'
Hmmm, let's see... on the one hand I can start paying for updates after 12 months.... on the other hand I get free updates for 18 months (or 36 months for LTS releases).

Maybe the execs at Red Hat need to update their hat size as whatever they're wearing appears to be cutting off circulation to their brains.

Re:A day late and a dollar short. (2, Insightful)

rudegeek (966948) | about 7 years ago | (#20112411)

Hmmm, let's see... on the one hand I can start paying for updates after 12 months.... on the other hand I get free updates for 18 months (or 36 months for LTS releases).

Yes, but maybe, just maybe, you'll get some form of support except packages update? You know? Ability to call call center or whatever? I was never a RH follower but I say, give them a benefit of doubt in their desktop market reapperance.

I want to see more good offering on Linux desktop. And RH has muscle to push some changes. They have quite a good brand and following of loyal customers in a business setting.

Maybe the execs at Red Hat need to update their hat size as whatever they're wearing appears to be cutting off circulation to their brains.

I invite you to do grep -r "@redhat.com" . in few bigger FOSS projects. Yeah, I bet they are all stupid. Running so big FOSS-based company. How do they feed them self? Amazing!

Re:A day late and a dollar short. (4, Insightful)

mikael (484) | about 7 years ago | (#20112505)

Hmmm, let's see... on the one hand I can start paying for updates after 12 months.... on the other hand I get free updates for 18 months (or 36 months for LTS releases).

Business people like accountability, and the ability to see that a problem is under control. Being able to
tell them that you have arranged for a field engineer scheduled to visit, or that the support team is working on the problem, is more reassuring to them than saying that that you have sent out an E-mail to a discussion group to see if anyone else has had a similar problem. To them, either you are the person to fix the problem or you can't.

"LTS" is Long Term Support. (3, Informative)

khasim (1285) | about 7 years ago | (#20112685)

It's from Ubuntu.

You can pay for per-incident support from Canonical. Or you can purchase a support contract from them.

Either way, it's as good as what Red Hat is offering ... or better. And it's already established. And it's a very popular desktop distribution.

"LTS" is Linux Terminal Server (1, Informative)

Colin Smith (2679) | about 7 years ago | (#20112711)

HTH.

Hope This Helps.

 

Re:"LTS" is Linux Terminal Server (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112775)

I've never heard of Linux Terminal Server, but Ubuntu definitely uses "LTS" to mean "Long Term Support." From their site, "The 'LTS' version of Ubuntu receives long-term support. 3 years for desktop versions and 5 years for server versions. [ubuntu.com] "

Re:"LTS" is Linux Terminal Server (2, Informative)

Lumpy (12016) | about 7 years ago | (#20112857)

Linux terminal server...

http://www.ltsp.org/ [ltsp.org] the core project.
http://www.k12ltsp.org/ [k12ltsp.org] a turnkey setup for schools just add crappy old throw away PC's and you have instant terminals for that one fast server.
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/linux _terminal_server [freesoftwaremagazine.com] TCO breakdown and executive overview of the above.

Implimenting a Linux terminal server environment is 90000% easier than citrix or windows, and is far FAR more stable. Many schools and business use such a setup. Autozone uses Linux terminal server in every store.

Re:A day late and a dollar short. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112827)

Please explain why businesses use windows then. There is ZERO accountability for microsoft products, you agree to hold them harmless and agree that the software comes with no warranty or accountability when you install it.

Are you telling me that businesspeople are not reading that and are operating under the false assumption that there is accountability with microsoft products?

there is MORE accountability with Ubuntu than there is with windows XP or Vista. Just because most It support companies (Like Next IT, Geek Squad, Geeks on site) have incredibly under trained staff does not mean that they are the only source for support. Before I left comcast we were actively looking for Linux trained and experience, and we were getting lots of people with linux abilities applying. Most of the mpeg2 digital equipment in the head ends runs linux. from the combiners to the routers to the encoders for local off the air. All of it runs linux, which upset the heads of IT quite a bit.

Linux skilled techs exist out there for support, yes they are more expensive than the barely capable larger IT support companies that can install virus scan and spend 2 hours fixing a simple networking issue. but you get what you pay for.

Re:A day late and a dollar short. (3, Interesting)

JimDaGeek (983925) | about 7 years ago | (#20113137)

There is accountability because managers and execs can bypass blame and point right to Microsoft or another vendor. If they were to do that with a Free OS like Ubuntu, the blame comes back to them for "using something that was free to try to save money". Note, I don't agree with this stupidity, but it seems pervasive in American management.

I cut my teeth on Red Hat and like the way it is set up. The only reason I started to use Ubuntu more is because of how vast the repository is and how well all the packages play together. With Fedora, you can add 3rd party repositories, but you will run in to conflicts. This is the only reason I dropped Fedora for Ubuntu.

I say give Red Hat a chance and wait and see how it turns out. If they include LEGAL codecs, that could be huge. With Ubuntu to play proprietary audio/video codecs you have to use unauthorized software. To a home user this isn't a bid deal, but to companies it is a deal breaker. Most license holders won't go after Joe Linux User for using an MP3 codec. However, with a company, that could lead to some nice cash for infringement.

Re:A day late and a dollar short. (5, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 7 years ago | (#20112571)

That's right. We should all try to price everything identically and then somehow end up with choices of different products and services that cater to different needs despite all of that.

Well, maybe not. Perhaps we should see what RedHat plans to produce that justifies the expense. Me, personally, I've subscribed to pay services in lieu of free services because I felt the pay service was worth spending money on, it wasn't excessively priced, and I'd rather support an organization dedicated to providing me with a service than one that ultimately is responsible only to itself, or to a myriad of advertisers with their own agendas.

I'm not knocking Ubuntu, and without seeing RedHat's product, it's impossible for me to judge as to whether it'll be worth the money, but the notion that we can make that judgement right now purely on the basis of cost per month of service is ridiculous.

Re:A day late and a dollar short. (1)

notjim (879031) | about 7 years ago | (#20112889)

Are "people who don't pay for support" such a profitable part of the Ubuntu user base?

Re:A day late and a dollar short. (1)

kklein (900361) | about 7 years ago | (#20112947)

You spelled "ridiculous" correctly? 'Round here we definately spell that "rediculous." You know, because we're illiterate.

Re:A day late and a dollar short. (1)

josephdrivein (924831) | about 7 years ago | (#20112851)

Red Hat Global Desktop 'would be sold with a one-year subscription to security updates.'
Hmmm, let's see... on the one hand I can start paying for updates after 12 months.... on the other hand I get free updates for 18 months (or 36 months for LTS releases).
I'm a Linux user, I've been using Debian for quite a long time.
I don't use Linux because it's free. I use it because I like it, I think it is rationally organized - well at least most things are - and it makes me more productive (than Windows).

If I think of the time I spend in front of a pc, I have to admit I'm willing to pay to support the developers, even if I'm a student.

A very cheap OS may be fine, but an effective one is better.

Re:A day late and a dollar short. (0, Flamebait)

ZorinLynx (31751) | about 7 years ago | (#20113203)

This is the biggest problem with Red Hat in my eyes.

Yes, you can pay for support, but you HAVE NO CHOICE. There's no free version of the same system that they distribute, sans support, with security updates and such.

And yes, I know about Fedora. Their release cycle, however, is too short to use in a serious environment. Within a year or so the release is desupported and open to any security problems that may arise.

Of course, CentOS may pick up this desktop version of Red Hat Linux and release it just like they have with RHEL, but it'd still be nicer for Red Hat to provide their OS free to the community like they used to before they split off the Fedora project with its insanely short release cycle.

More choice (2, Insightful)

bvimo (780026) | about 7 years ago | (#20112395)

Another quality distro for the desktop is good news.

Re:More choice (-1, Troll)

cheater512 (783349) | about 7 years ago | (#20112399)

RPM hell isnt a good distro.

Re:More choice (1, Insightful)

ettlz (639203) | about 7 years ago | (#20112419)

The only people stuck in RPM Hell are those too ignorant to learn how to use rpm or yum.

Re:More choice (1, Insightful)

KingSkippus (799657) | about 7 years ago | (#20112485)

The only people stuck in RPM Hell are those too ignorant to learn how to use rpm or yum.

Because, of course, average computer users who just want to check e-mail, write a few letters now and then, and browse the web should be proficient at using a tool that, although created with the best of intentions, is still pretty onerous even to more experienced users in order to install and update software...

With attitudes like this, it's no wonder Microsoft is still the desktop leader. Say what you want, but except for DRM, at least when they see a usability problem in their software, instead of sitting back and talking about how ignorant the users are, hoping that someday maybe the users will be more motivated to learn something they shouldn't have to, they actually work to make their software work the way people expect it to.

Re:More choice (1)

siride (974284) | about 7 years ago | (#20112517)

No no no. You don't get it. The average computer user wouldn't be installing RPMs from the command line. They'd be using the graphical tool which does the right thing. Rather, the complaints are from the people savvy enough to use the command line, understand package managers, but who won't bother to do one ounce of research to realize that the yum command line tool is preferred (in other words, people [geeks] who honestly SHOULD know better -- I'm talking about the Linux afficionados who are convinced that RPM sucks). Grandma won't be using the command line. Grandma will click on an RPM link in Firefox and it will open with "Software Installer" and everything will work fine. Or she will go to Add/Remove Software and click on checkboxes. At no time will she have to touch the command line or use the RPM tool.

Re:More choice (4, Informative)

KingSkippus (799657) | about 7 years ago | (#20112617)

Well, that's true, but I also think that part of the problem is people who create packages that don't understand how to use RPM. I can't tell you how many times I've seen installation instructions that include things like "use --force to bypass the version checking..."

Of course, then we get into how complicated RPM is for normal software developers to use. I mean, just because I write awesome nifty C++ code doesn't mean I'm an expert in RPM. (Nor should it, really.)

What we need is a way for installation configuration to be simplified both for end users and developers. I can't tell you how many times I've churned out some widget to do something and ended up spending more time tweaking installation packages than I did on writing the thing it was installing.

Re:More choice (1)

siride (974284) | about 7 years ago | (#20112713)

Yes, they don't. The problems are either that they don't use autotools, or they use some ass-backwards build/install system that doesn't allow for relocatable builds and configuring options. I found one package that required you to manually copy files and modify the system JRE to work! That's just ridiculous. If they used normal source packaging conventions, making an RPM would be a breeze. I made an RPM for a nicely autotooled package in a matter of minutes. And I'm not THAT experienced in RPM.

I think it's part of a larger problem that software developers often don't want to, or care to, do things the right way. And so they end up spending more time fighting with the system they are using than just taking 5 minutes to do some research. At my place of work, we have had a lot of hackery to force Java components to be of a certain size. This involved overriding setSize(), setBounds() and making hacks into layout managers. All of that could have been avoided by just using Java's layout management system as it is intended. We're in the process of undoing that mess now, fortunately.

But maybe I just care too much about the technology as a thing unto itself, instead of something I have to fight with for 8 hours a day so I can get a paycheck.

Re:More choice (1)

level_headed_midwest (888889) | about 7 years ago | (#20113047)

RPM dependency hell is generally caused by the manual installation of third-party RPMs. That used to be rather common a while ago when the official RPM repositories had something like 2000 packages while Debian and the DEB distributions had 20000 or so packages and largely skirted around this as you'd be much more likely to find what you needed in the repos rather than having to get it yourself. Now that the RPM repos have about as many packages as the DEB ones, the dependency issues are largely gone and it's very similar to use an RPM vs. a DEB distribution.

Re:More choice (1)

ChrisMaple (607946) | about 7 years ago | (#20113087)

It's not so much that Microsoft is doing things right, but a combination of things that make the Microsoft world easier for users.

In the Microsoft world, there are maybe 5 active OSs, or about 15 counting service packs as different OSs. Most Microsoft users have learned not to install free software because so much of it is malicious, so there's less variety. Most non-free software pretty much plays by the rules, doesn't change Microsoft-supplied DLLs, etc.. Most Microsoft users are less adventurous, so they haven't installed hundreds of programs. The net result is an environment that has a fair amount of predictability for the installation of a new program.

In the Linux world, there are many (>100?) distributions, each with many versions, more than 40 kernels (in 2.4 and 2.6, not counting sub-sub-versions, patches, and modules), libraries that need to be updated (sometimes breaking other programs), and inconsistent locations for binaries and libraries. Much software is free and non-malicious, so there's a lot more installed. Sometimes rpm is onerous, so programs are installed via tarballs, which rpm can't track. There's no overriding authority saying "this is how things must be done", and many writers wouldn't pay attention anyway. In short, the environment is much more diverse, so it's much harder to make installations "just work", and in many cases there's no-one paying a salary to make it so.

Re:More choice (1)

itlurksbeneath (952654) | about 7 years ago | (#20113159)

Because, of course, average computer users who just want to check e-mail, write a few letters now and then, and browse the web should be proficient at using a tool that, although created with the best of intentions, is still pretty onerous even to more experienced users in order to install and update software...
Technically, the average computer user you mentioned above should just click on the "you've got updates" button when it says there's something new to download.

Re:More choice (2, Interesting)

siride (974284) | about 7 years ago | (#20112429)

Compared to DEB, RPM is a much superior format. The problem with RPM is not RPM itself but the idiots who try to use the rpm command-line tool like apt-get and then complain when it doesn't do what they expect it to do (because that's not what it's supposed to do). You are supposed to use "yum", which works just like apt-get. It even lets you install RPMs that you've already downloaded. E.g. "yum localinstall foo.rpm". It will even download dependencies for you! It's also really fast in fc6 and f7.

The only negative I can see is that there aren't as many packages available in the Fedora repositories. That's hardly a fault of RPM, though.

Re:More choice (1)

cheater512 (783349) | about 7 years ago | (#20112581)

Compared to Portage (ignoring compiling), its seriously out of date.

Re:More choice (1)

siride (974284) | about 7 years ago | (#20112607)

Care to explain how? Have you ever actually made an RPM? I mean, opened up a specfile in an editor and made a piece of software to be packaged as an RPM? As someone who has, I can say that RPM is VERY full-featured. I suppose RPMs lack USE-flags, which is about the only thing I can think of that RPMs lack compared to Portage. But it's really easy to just download the source-RPM, edit the specfile and then rebuild it. Or, since it usually doesn't matter, just use the RPM as is. USE-flags often just bring in more complexity than benefit. And half the time, I end up having to recompile with new USE flags anyways because I realize that one USE flag I had disabled I actually ended up needing.

I'm a Gentoo user, BTW. Use Fedora and CentOS at work. Portage is frustrating. You can download a random RPM and have it work. You can't just download an ebuild and have it work.

Re:More choice (1)

juhaz (110830) | about 7 years ago | (#20112647)

It wouldn't be particularly hard to implement something like "USE-flags" either, just have a convention for the macro name that all spec files look keywords from, and you could pass flags to rpmbuild with --define.

Re:More choice (1)

cheater512 (783349) | about 7 years ago | (#20112677)

Your overly simplifying.

USE flags dont always simply match up to configure flags.

Re:More choice (2, Interesting)

siride (974284) | about 7 years ago | (#20112725)

But he never said that they would have to with RPM either. All he said is that they could use --define on the rpmbuild command line to pass in information to the specfile, which is free to interpret that information however it wishes, including, but not limited to, modifying configure flags.

Re:More choice (1)

level_headed_midwest (888889) | about 7 years ago | (#20113073)

Installing the RPMs using rpmbuild and compile flags/options set requires that they be compiled before install. That would work, but doing that would pretty much defeat the advantages of using a binary distribution in the first place- speed of installation of packages. Alternatively, an option could be to have a few different options be able to be passed to the RPM installer and it would then pick one of a few compiled binaries to actually install, ignoring the rest. That would preserve the speed but lead to less choice than a real compile-your-own system and much bigger binaries than a one-size-fits-all method.

Re:More choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112707)

# rpm --force --nodeps foo.rpm

How hard is that? No problems! :-P

Re:More choice (2, Insightful)

rudegeek (966948) | about 7 years ago | (#20112431)

RPM is not a distro, for fuck sake. It's a package format. You know? Files and metadata? Can we stop this 'RPM is bad, think about children!' stuff?

Old RPM tools had problems, sure. But new package manager was developed past last few years. They do mostly what APT do. Yet, you're still confused abut APT/Yum(or whatever) and .deb/.rpm

/. should be filled with people aware of difference between package format and package manager, or am I wrong?

Not necessarily (2, Insightful)

KingSkippus (799657) | about 7 years ago | (#20112443)

This isn't necessarily true.

As an extreme example, look at all the choices in Microsoft's lineup. I've said it before on here, but as "the computer guy" that my friends and family turn to for advice, I wanted to kill them when they had out two versions named Windows 2000 and Windows Millennium Edition. Sure, I know the difference, but I'm paid good money to know these things. I had friends who were actually considering "upgrading" from Windows 2000 to Windows ME until I told them what a hideous idea that was.

I'm all for choices for the educated public and competition to keep the desktop Linux market on their toes, but for typical non-gurus, I'm really hoping that one distribution makes it as the clear desktop distribution leader.

(And personally, I hope and think that it will be Ubuntu. It's a lot more intuitive to use than RedHat, IMHO, and I have a lot of respect for Mark Shuttleworth.)

Re:More choice (2, Interesting)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 7 years ago | (#20112457)

And both ubuntu and red hat desktop linux having no pact with microsoft is good news too.

Re:More choice (2, Insightful)

free space (13714) | about 7 years ago | (#20112475)

[rant]

The last desktop version I used for RedHat was 8.0
It was horrible. While SuSE and Mandrake were becoming more and more desktop friendly, RedHat was still stuck in the late 90's era look and feel.

The problem? RedHat was the defacto Linux standard and every Linux advocate I know recommended it instead of the more friendly options. I believe this drove a lot of potential Linux users away and gave the idea that Linux was ugly and unusable.

[/rant]

I haven't used later versions of RH or Fedora so all this might have changed. But if RH want to get back to the Desktop game, I hope they learn a lesson from all the other user friendly distributions and provide something more than a sever OS disguised as a desktop OS this time.

Full Circle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112397)

Wasn't Red Hat the desktop king, making deals with Dell, in the pre-Fedora days?

They better hurry (4, Interesting)

dybdahl (80720) | about 7 years ago | (#20112413)

It seems Ubuntu is capturing all attention right now:

http://google.com/trends?q=suse%2Cfedora%2Cubuntu% 2Cgentoo%2Credhat&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0 [google.com]

Re:They better hurry (2, Insightful)

TheGreatDonkey (779189) | about 7 years ago | (#20112555)

Of course it doesn't help with the Apple-like secrecy the company seems to be putting around the product (an attempt to try and drum up interest?). I work with their products everyday, and this is the first I have even heard of this. Their own web site only seems to have a single press release from back in May (http://www.redhat.com/about/news/prarchive/2007/g lobal_desktop.html). For an open source company, no alphas, no betas, no hints as to what sets it apart from their new Red Hat 5 Linux Desktop (http://www.redhat.com/rhel/desktop/)? I suspect it includes Mugshot and a few other consumer'ish goodies, but with so little info, who really knows.

Re:They better hurry (1)

nahdude812 (88157) | about 7 years ago | (#20112837)

That's an interesting chart. Here is another interesting chart [google.com] comparing Microsoft vs Ubuntu. I don't want to read too much into it, but there is a decided decline in Microsoft which is inverse to the rise of Ubuntu.

Re:They better hurry (1)

KwKSilver (857599) | about 7 years ago | (#20112979)

Ubuntu doesn't have the hammer-lock now that it did in January. PCLinux O/S and Sabayon have been pushing hard in Distrowatch rankings, for what its worth. Even more interesting is that plain old "boring" Debian is in the top 5 or 10 and has been for the last year. Perhaps stability counts? What a thought.

Mind you I'm not knocking any of them & have tried everything in the top 10 but Mandriva, OpenSuSE, and Fedora. All the ones I've tried have worked reasonably well to very well on my h/w. Somehow, I always end up sticking with or going back to Debian and FreeBSD (or derivatives thereof). Why? It's the range of software available. My 2 cents.

I'm not a business though, & if I were, I'd be looking for solid support.

RedHat Panic (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112415)

This has "OMG Ubunutu is getting so much press, we need some of that action quick or they'll own the market!" panic written all over it.

Re:RedHat Panic (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112751)

Agreed. And it's sad in a way.

The diversity and chaos of the Linux scene is a great benefit for people who know how to deal with it, but a major obstacle to adoption for people who don't. With Ubuntu, it seems for the first time, a lot of factors are coming together that makes the choices a lot easier for the wanna be Linux user.
Instead of complicated discussion weighing the pros and cons of all the distros, the community has started to speak with a single voice. Just try Ubuntu. (I say it all the time, though I don't use it myself.)

This is good. It shields to noob from the chaos. When the noob has grown used to linux as such, the diversity will be there waiting to be exploited.

So, if it is as you say, that red hat maybe wants to get in on it before Ubuntu completely captures the noob-distro of choice position, it will hurt adoption rates (if they are successful anyway) because the difficult choices have resurfaced again.

Wake Us Up When... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112417)

Redhat, when you actually sit down and do the real work to bring Linux up to the level of commercial desktops and not just another halfassed repackaging of your existing Linux distro people will actually give a damn.

Here you go Redhat:

http://www.fayerwayer.com/archivo/2005/03/tiger_sc reen.jpg [fayerwayer.com]

* Perfect desktop acceleration right out of the box with the user having to touch NOTHING to get it to work

* Application packages in /Applications or something similar

* Full drag and drop application installation and removal

* OS X level or font rendering support right out of the box

* IB equivalent complete with auto spacing and hints so developers can finally make Linux apps that aren't jarring to the eye

* Complete set of iApp replacements - same visual polish and features sets as Apple has - plug in a digital camera, it just works

* And the thousands of other things that make buying a commercial desktop worth the money

What's that Redhat? That would actually require work and lots of hard choices?

That's what we thought...

Re:Wake Us Up When... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112497)

Just go back to your corner with your precious iMac

Re:Wake Us Up When... (1)

hey (83763) | about 7 years ago | (#20112513)

That would be good stuff to have but the typical office worker doesn't need all that.
Things like maintenance are more important in an office.

Re:Wake Us Up When... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112621)

Application packages in /Applications or something similar
Is irrelevant. No one but complete geeks look around the filesystem.

Full drag and drop application installation and removal
While software installation on OS X is OK, it's not really that good. And there are lots of apps there that have to be installed using a separate install program.

OS X level or font rendering support right out of the box
First, nobody cares. Second, Linux font rendering is easily as good as Mac OS X, provided you have the right fonts. Hell, if you install OS X fonts on a Linux machine, they look pretty much identical.

IB equivalent complete with auto spacing and hints so developers can finally make Linux apps that aren't jarring to the eye

Obviously not a developer. GTK and Qt both lay out widgets automatically. Auto spacing is handled by the toolkit, not by the interface builder.

Besides, Qt Designer beats the crap out of IB, as does Glade to a lesser extent.

Interesting. Usually the "Linux is shit because" trolls use the "It's not exactly like Windows" argument. That's the first time I've heard "It's not exactly like Mac OS X". Still a lousy argument though.

Re:Wake Us Up When... (5, Insightful)

MrHanky (141717) | about 7 years ago | (#20112629)

Application folders and "drag and drop installation" won't work on Linux, as you can't know which libraries are installed on the computer, and in which version. Say you want to install the Kword 2.0 beta. This depends on the kdelibs 4.0 (beta) and the Koffice libs. With an app folder approach, the Kword 2.0 beta would have to package those libraries as well. And so would all the other apps depending on those libraries. Or, of course, they could all be one huge package with lots of stuff you don't need.

There is another approach, of course, which is that of Apple: You know mostly which libraries are installed on the system, since they are all part of the OS, but when there is an application depending on a newer version of the libraries, you have to pay Apple for a newer version of the whole OS as well. This is easy enough if you have a monopoly on that particular platform, but then you also have a proprietary platform. Red Hat doesn't have that privilege.

What you want is obviously a Mac. Then get a Mac.

Re:Wake Us Up When... (2, Insightful)

ciroknight (601098) | about 7 years ago | (#20112825)

"Application folders and "drag and drop installation" won't work on Linux..."

I think what you meant to say was "that won't work across Linux OSes." It'd work perfectly fine for one distro, or one distro-family based on one common repository that is in lock-step for API/ABI compatibility. It'd work perfectly fine in the Ubuntu family of OSes, for example, but take that same package and try to install it on, let's say Red Hat, and it all goes out the window.

Believe it or not, we've already solved this problem with Package Management. Whether we dress up the package as a nice little icon, or we put its name in a list with hundreds of others, or allow you to install it through the command line just by knowing its name, it really doesn't make any difference at all. Synaptic could have just as easily worked by adding icons for each of the programs it allows to be installed, and letting you drag them over into some "Applications" folder, and have it in the background run all of the necessary steps to install that application. It doesn't really matter how you present it to the user, just as long as it's friendly and very easy to use.

Re:Wake Us Up When... (1)

MrHanky (141717) | about 7 years ago | (#20113061)

You're right re: app folders, of course, but only technically. There's also the social question of how this would be supported by the community. With my Kword 2.0 beta example, it wouldn't be worth it, since none of the libraries it depends on would be supported by the distro. That's also why such programs aren't distributed as app folders in OS X, and why the people who like the unixy side of OS X ported apt-get (fink) to it: it's much more practical for modular and interdependent programs.

That said, there could probably be done several things to make third party package installation more user friendly with Linux. I imagine you could make extensions to firefox and konqueror with a kind of pseudo-protocol that would open links called for instance aptget://something in a standard program that for instance could add the necessary lines to /etc/apt/sources.list (after letting you review a list of the packages the repository provides, with warnings for potential conflicts, and then typing your sudo password) and install the application in question. Since apt supports repository priorities, I believe this could even be done relatively securely. That would probably make things as friendly as could be for the user. Browsing the file system certainly isn't.

Installing the distro's packages in Ubuntu and the like is easy enough as it is.

Re:Wake Us Up When... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112903)

how did this shit get modded informative?

Ever hear of static linkage? you can compile a binary *without* needing the libraries!!

Ever hear of dynamic linker paths?

you can have *different shared libraries* installed that work
together via some kind of start scripting

which is *not* beyond the capability of commercial vendors

because that is *actually* how mac apps work -

the .app is a self contained directory structure
with all the required shared libraries built in, not the dependancy on other system resources
as the author states.. usually mac os upgrades are a result of requiring a newer version of
system interfaces not provided in the previous version, not a result of third party dependancy
problems as you state..

sheesh.. FUD city!

Re:Wake Us Up When... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20113041)

"With an app folder approach, the Kword 2.0 beta would have to package those libraries as well."

Umm... and? It's the same on Windows, which kinda proofes that there is no enduser-problem with it.

Re:Wake Us Up When... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112649)

* Perfect desktop acceleration right out of the box with the user having to touch NOTHING to get it to work
  - Check, already done. (DONT USE HARDWARE THAT NEEDS 3RD PARTY DRIVERS!!!!!)

* Application packages in /Applications or something similar
  - What, a menu isent good enough? Fine, use Rox

* Full drag and drop application installation and removal
  - Check, already done with Rox and Zero Install

* OS X level or font rendering support right out of the box
  - Dono about this, never seen MacOSX in action, so i dont know about its font quality, but i feel satisfied with things now (they arent ugly).

* IB equivalent complete with auto spacing and hints so developers can finally make Linux apps that aren't jarring to the eye
  - IB, as in Interface Builder, you know how long it took to search that (im under load), no user would know what your talking about, besides, GNUStep has its equivalent, and since you seem to either be a Apple fanboy, or Cocoa developer, GNUStep might be worth a look. In any case, ever hear of glade?

* Complete set of iApp replacements - same visual polish and features sets as Apple has - plug in a digital camera, it just works
  - According to google this is some sever for database builing, no idea what it has to do with a camera, and if you want the same visual polish and features, it sounds more like you just want it rather then a replacement, so why even bring it up?

* And the thousands of other things that make buying a commercial desktop worth the money
  - Indeed, i doubt you could list even 100 of these other things, in any case, i doubt any pay-for desktop OS is worth the money.

Re:Wake Us Up When... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20113027)

OS X level or font rendering support right out of the box

Well 1st I did go buy a nice Mac, and it is pretty cool, then I got Ubuntu Feisty Fawn running in a VM (VMware not Parallels). The fonts took a little work, but it is covered via searching the Ubuntu forums. IMHO my Ubuntu desktop and application font rendering looks much better than OSX now. Really! I'm not kidding. It doesn't meet the out of the box requirement, but it can be done.

There's lots of things in OSX that piss me off, and lots of things in linux that piss me off, and lots of things in XP that piss me off. None of this tech is perfect. I'm already freaking impressed at what linux and free software has accomplished! I'm thankful that I have a plan-b option, which allows me the ability to for free have a usable system that can do anything I want, browsing, multimedia, etc etc... and Eterm still rules so Apple can go suck the big one. Prettier desktop my ass. Hello enlightenment :-) I expect DR-17 will be at final release on April 1st 2008 eh?

I understand your bitching about linux though. I've had so much stress before learning to get something to work, and then an update breaks it, or another distro has a different way of doing stuff and introduces new problems. Seemed like sometimes i was constantly having to relearn and address basic issues like sound not working. Frustrating. After a while I was screaming "Just Fucking Work!" ... well I got a Mac, and paid dearly for it. and some things are great. But it's not perfect. and considering I paid a premium for "Just Fucking Work!" Maybe I can give Apple my list of complaints and they'll fix it?

If my Ubuntu desktop was a little bbit faster in the VM, I'd be using it as my main desktop again probably. They're both cool. And I spent years with Redhat, CentOS, RHEL, and Fedora. At least if I don't like something on linux, I'm self-empowered to take action and fix it. Apple takes your power away. One funny anecdote on Mail.app. I was sending emails to someone, all was good. Then I tried to send another one to the person and it failed. No idea why, it probably was the ISP or SMTP server having an issue, but mail.app? reveal the actual error message? tell me what's wrong? Oh hell no, not one-mouse-button Apple. It was as useful as "An error occured". WTF, I was pissed.

Anyways, I think Redhat has done a lot, and contributed a lot to linux in general. So it's been good, grateful to them too. I'd love to find a system with the customizability and hackability of linux, some of the easy of use and prettiness out of the box of the Mac, and the application support of Windows.

Ever since ever there have been platform wars and this and that is better and "I r00lz j00"... find what works for you. It's probably good we have diversity and different people value different things. I'm just pissed that I have to find my solution by using a little bit of each. Makes everything more complicated and resource intensive. But I do appreciate them all for what I perceive their strengths to be. Ultimately if I had too I could probably survive on linux only and a OLPC system. And it's sweet that that is even possible. It's a lot cheaper to get a cheap PC and toss free linux on it and have a totally functional system. I'm kinda of pissed that I paid a lot for my Mac and it's not perfect. But what yah gonna do? It will never be perfect and all these systems will always be a work in progress to some extent. For as cheap as a linux option can be. It's arguably superior to OSX in many areas including looks if you work on it. Though it depends on what your doing with your computer. And I still like my Mac. It really is sweet, but if I could do it over again, eh... is it *that* sweet? hmm maybe... but I think a lot of that is because Apple packages a pretty good display, much better than my old cheapo/el crapo LCD I left behind on my PC. That in itself was huge in my life...

Happy computing :)

Re:Wake Us Up When... (1)

level_headed_midwest (888889) | about 7 years ago | (#20113107)

There are self-contained application packages like the DMGs in OS X for Linux, it's called Klik.

CentOS (4, Interesting)

dkleinsc (563838) | about 7 years ago | (#20112421)

And how long before CentOS creates a perfect replica thanks to the GPL?

Re:CentOS (5, Insightful)

lordtoran (1063300) | about 7 years ago | (#20112623)

These "clones" don't threaten Red Hat's business, because they don't come with these all-in-one support options that businesses love. Plus they have to contribute modified code back, so it's even a kind of win-win situation.

Re:CentOS (1)

spikeb (966663) | about 7 years ago | (#20113119)

you know, business has nothing at all to do with the global desktop, right?

All I want in a linux distro is... (2, Interesting)

jonwil (467024) | about 7 years ago | (#20112427)

A linux distro where I can download an ISO and install from that ISO and get a version of ffmpeg and friend that doesn't have 90% of the media formats disabled.

Re:All I want in a linux distro is... (4, Insightful)

siride (974284) | about 7 years ago | (#20112455)

Talk to the patent owners or the legal system, not the distros. They're just doing what they have to do.

Re:All I want in a linux distro is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112651)

So use a distro from a free country, not the US reich and its satellite states.

Re:All I want in a linux distro is... (3, Informative)

BlueParrot (965239) | about 7 years ago | (#20112817)

A linux distro where I can download an ISO and install from that ISO and get a version of ffmpeg and friend that doesn't have 90% of the media formats disabled.
Ubuntu Feisty Fawn gets pretty much as close as is possible within legal limits. From the documentation:

Click Applications Add/Remove. In the top right, change the setting to All available applications. Then select Other in the left panel and then select the Ubuntu restricted extras package. Click OK.
This will install a whole lot of crap that is restricted by software patents (mp3 support etc ), or stuff that isn't completely free ( like Flash and Sun Java ). Unfortunately it isn't possible for the distros to have this installed by default because the US patent and copyright system is completely broken.

Re:All I want in a linux distro is... (4, Interesting)

jez9999 (618189) | about 7 years ago | (#20112977)

Unfortunately it isn't possible for the distros to have this installed by default because the US patent and copyright system is completely broken.

Couldn't they install it by default for non-US regional releases?

If you want support... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112847)

it gets hard. Why? Because of codec licensing. If you want to
provide support, you need to get paid for it. If you sell a
codec, you need to pay the MPegLA patent pool.

Re:All I want in a linux distro is... (1)

Remusti (1131423) | about 7 years ago | (#20113189)

Freespire [freespire.org] is the closest you're likely to find I think.

I've never used it because I've read reviews that mention it being stripped to become user-friendly, removing functionality in the process. Now they have signed a patent deal with M$ also, and I'm not sure if I like that. However, it legally contains a lot of proprietary codecs and drivers [freespire.org] , and is working with the other patent-deal distros and Microsoft to create an open source odf-ooxml converter. [sourceforge.net]

Oh, so NOW they're going to be entering the market (2, Funny)

Bandman (86149) | about 7 years ago | (#20112437)

I wonder what the last 8 years have been?

The irony (2, Interesting)

sarathmenon (751376) | about 7 years ago | (#20112449)

Alan Cox and the other big shots at Redhat have in the past repeatedly said that they will not add support for mp3, or any other patended technology into Redhat. It all started with 8.0, and RH's policy has been AFAIK to tell the user that so-and-so will never be supported until the patent expires. Its sad to see such a good ideaology been tossed aside because of market pressure.

Whatever, I am not one to complain, but given the way Bluecurve was thrust upon users, and the way that they crippled kde so that gnome looks better (I dont want to start a holy flame war, but this *was* the state of things 5-6 years ago), I doubt whether they will make any serious dent in the market. But this is free software, the more people focussing on an area usually only brings the better - atleast its going to be code that others can use too.

Re:The irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112705)

the way that they crippled kde so that gnome looks better (I dont want to start a holy flame war, but this *was* the state of things 5-6 years ago),

No it wasn't. It was a complaint made by many who never used it.

It's not true, and never was true.

And I've been using KDE with Redhat (and now Fedora) since '99

Re:The irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112813)

Red Hat Enterprise Linux absolutely sucks balls for use as a workstation. We tried an experiment with a user and they were begging us to find a better distribution after a couple of weeks. Simple things like he couldn't play his MP3s he used to bring in on CDs simply didn't work. In addition, I don't know what kind of "tweaks" Red Hat mangles the vanilla kernel with, but it was constantly causing his system to freeze up nearly every day requiring a hard reboot. We switched him over to Ubuntu and in addition to the freezes going completely away, he was able to listen to his MP3s and is happier now. This is just one example of course, but there are tons of other little things related to multimedia (remember, this is a desktop not a server) that just didn't work or weren't included in Red Hat so he would have to download and fiddle around to get them to work. With Ubuntu, all the stuff came out of the box or was easily installed from vendor-supported repositories... with Red Hat you'd have to hope there was a third-party repository that packaged it up and then download the RPMs manually.

Beyond the average user (3, Insightful)

HangingChad (677530) | about 7 years ago | (#20112451)

The release is being delayed in order to provide greater media compatibility

As much as I like Ubuntu, getting some of the media types working was a royal pain. The average user would have difficulty and they certainly don't understand the legal reasons for the exclusion.

Proprietary file formats are from the devil.

Re:Beyond the average user (4, Informative)

Constantine XVI (880691) | about 7 years ago | (#20112515)

Don't know if you've used 7.04 (Feisty) yet, but they've made codec installation as simple as:
1) Attempt to play file
2) codec-buddy pops up and tells you what you need to install
3) Press OK, read applicable legal crap
4) Type in your password to install the software
5) Go!

Re:Beyond the average user (1)

jez9999 (618189) | about 7 years ago | (#20112999)

Old "switch to Linux" line: Stability, malware, open source
New "switch to Linux" line: "Ooh, spinning cube!"


Old "upgrade Windows" line: Best, most reliable Windows yet.
New "upgrade Windows" line: Translucent windows!!!

Too Little Too Late (1)

SpzToid (869795) | about 7 years ago | (#20112473)

Red Hat wants money for everything. This is fundamentally different than Ubuntu, which truly gives you the software to use.

I wonder how long it takes until Red Hat earns a support tier to match stuff like Automatix [getautomatix.com] , which does a nice job of installing commercial software easily, such as Hamachi, Eclipse, DVD & MP3 codecs, etc.

Re:Too Little Too Late (1)

wild_berry (448019) | about 7 years ago | (#20112767)

Automatix may look nice on the surface but it is not integrated at all well with the .deb policy or the apt package management framework. Ubuntu's Matthew Garrett [livejournal.com] has recently completed an analysis of Automatix [livejournal.com] and has severe criticisms of its methods and end results. It seems to me to be a good way to ensure you need a reinstall.

Re:Too Little Too Late (1)

nahdude812 (88157) | about 7 years ago | (#20112961)

Automatix is a good attempt, and I'm sure for some users it's a real godsend, but for me it royally screwed some things up. I'll admit I'm not your average user, I have been known to go download newer .deb's of files from the web and the like (a few very active projects the distro just can't keep up with, and I love active projects). For example, I couldn't figure out for the longest time why one of my drivers would just never load unless I manually loaded it. It turns out that it had been blacklisted. Not in /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist, but in some other /etc file (whose name I now forget, but doesn't contain the word "blacklist"). Each time I rebooted, the driver file was physically missing from the disk, and I had to uninstall and reinstall linux-restricted-modules-`uname -r` in order to get the file back (even an apt-get install --reinstall wasn't sufficient, had to be apt-get remove, apt-get install).

After MUCH unsuccessful googling, I decided to see if there was some script which was doing this to me, and I "grep -R drivername /", causing me to discover that file in /etc which said something like:
# drivername automatically blacklisted by automatix
blacklist=drivername

There were a couple of other weird things, and that box just never quite got right again until I reinstalled from scratch (which is why you want to have /home on its own partition! Makes it very easy to do a fresh install and keep everything important!)

It's the unfortunate consequence of programs that try to do too much thinking for you, but which are attached on after the fact.

I think it'd be great if a distribution could present all of the standard legal disclaimers as a list during the install process so that you can one-click OK them all and the system could just start at a standard state. It would be fantastic if you could just have a fully functional system after the install is complete so that you can pass it off to your grandmother ready to go. Those scary legal disclaimers after the fact are confusing and look like errors to people who don't know much about technology.

Uh oh (5, Insightful)

DogDude (805747) | about 7 years ago | (#20112481)

This isn't a good sign. They just got finished dumping their desktop version, and now they're making another one? Sounds like their management is starting to flounder. Either they're a desktop software company, or they're not. They've already left the market, and only a few years later, they're re-inventing the wheel to get back in? That's crazy. It reminds me of Sun "The network is the computer. No it's not." Microsystems.

Re:Uh oh (1)

swillden (191260) | about 7 years ago | (#20112975)

They've already left the market, and only a few years later, they're re-inventing the wheel to get back in? That's crazy

I disagree. The market for desktop Linux has changed dramatically in those few years, in several ways. First, the desktop tools have continued to improve, both in terms of the desktop environments and in the quality and selection of desktop applications available. Second, hardware compatibility is much better, and with Dell beginning to push hardware vendors to provide good drivers promises to continue improving even faster. Third, Ubuntu has proven that there is money to be made in desktop Linux now (not that Canonical is profitable, but it does have significant revenues).

I suspect there's probably a fourth reason as well -- I'll bet some of Red Hat's corporate customers have started asking for a Red Hat desktop, because they want to deploy Linux on the desktop, but only want to have to manage one Linux platform. Red Hat decided a few years ago that there was no market for desktop Linux, and now there is.

Sure, I think it would have been nice if Red Hat had shown a little more dedication, staying in the desktop market while it matured into viability. But from a pure, hardheaded business perspective, they probably made the right moves. They stopped spending money on it when there wasn't a market, and now they're jumping back in just before Ubuntu gets too much traction on the corporate desktop.

Excellent News (2, Insightful)

ratboy666 (104074) | about 7 years ago | (#20112495)

This will be accepted as a "tier 1" supported platform by ATI, nVidia, and other "binary only" vendors immediately.

Basing on Redhat/Fedora/RHEL means a lot of stabilty. Having "legal" video support in a different branch means that Fedora can pursue the free software goal without being distracted by critics calling for non-free features. "Fedora sucks - it doesn't do MP3 and DVD out of the box" goes away (hopefully). The answer becomes "If you want non-free, go Global".

I hate the name, though. Indeed, Global will be a competitor to Ubuntu, but I would much rather have a "hat" name. From the summary, I would recommend Tilley.

Re:Excellent News (2, Funny)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 7 years ago | (#20112659)

Well, here are some possible alternates:

Bonnet Linux
Hood Linux
Cap Linux
Balmoral Linux
Nightcap Linux
Yamulke Linux
Beaver Linux (Slashdot favorite)
Deerstalker Linux
Porkpie Linux
Tophat Linux
Beret Linux
Bowler Linux
Derby Linux
Headgear Linux
Cummerbund Linux
Beanie Linux
Homburg Linux
Pointy Linux
Slouchhat Linux
Trilby Linux
Bandana Linux
Visor Linux
Skullcap Linux
Space Helmet Linux
Gas Mask Linux
Beehive Linux
Newport Linux
Helmet Linux
Tricorne Linux
Hardhat Linux

Page 2 of the article is so lame (2)

tiananmen tank man (979067) | about 7 years ago | (#20112525)

It contains 1 sentence from the story and a big page of other stuff.

Aunt Tilley is not the target audience (1)

ryder (111) | about 7 years ago | (#20112559)

FTFA:
"Red Hat Global Desktop Linux is targeted for sale in developing countries where government agencies and small businesses cannot afford to pay for Microsoft's Windows operating system."

For companies? (1)

seemer (1133661) | about 7 years ago | (#20112569)

I think many companies would buy it from Red Hat rather than going with some free one, like ubuntu, unfortunately. Companies thinks stuff is better if you pay for it. Too bad, when Ubuntu is such a nice distro...

http://www.maceater.com/ [maceater.com]

Re:For companies? (1)

lordtoran (1063300) | about 7 years ago | (#20112697)

Companies don't pay for the distro, they pay for guaranteed technical support. Management does not have the time and capacity to resort to newsgroups and forums or tinker around when something is borked. So they shell out some money and use Red Hat's support infrastructure.

Deja Vu (2, Insightful)

spiritraveller (641174) | about 7 years ago | (#20112603)

I seem to recall Red Hat already being in the desktop market at one point.

Didn't they basically throw it away already?

Isn't the reason why Ubuntu was able to take the lead was because Red Hat left a huge gaping hole in the category of "Most Popular Desktop Linux Distro?"

Re:Deja Vu (1)

BCW2 (168187) | about 7 years ago | (#20112985)

Threw it away after RH9 and put most of it in Fedora. It always seemed that Fedora was lacking some things to me. Maybe this is a step back in a way but it should be a good thing.

YALD (4, Insightful)

wwmedia (950346) | about 7 years ago | (#20112671)

we dont need Yet Another Linux Distro, there are plenty already! we need them developers join a bigger project like Ubuntu and Suse and not reinvent the wheel over and over

Re:YALD (1)

IBBoard (1128019) | about 7 years ago | (#20112941)

I don't know if this is YALD as much as ALDR (Another Linux Distro Returns). Guess it depends whether you see Fedora/Fedora Core as the continuation of the old Redhat and this as a new distro, or whether RHEL was the end of Redhat desktop and this is a 'reinvention' of the original Redhat that has just been hibernating.

Re:YALD (1)

kjart (941720) | about 7 years ago | (#20113009)

Something tells me that Red Hat isn't going to suddenly start working on Ubuntu and/or Suse.

Re:YALD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20113177)

Red Hat is arguably bigger than SuSE and Ubuntu combined (distrowatch numbers aside). Most of the real kernel and GCC developers work for Red Hat.

If anything, Ubuntu and SuSE devs should close up shop and start working on Fedora.

Note, I am a Debian user. As far as I'm concerned Ubuntu's fork of Debian isn't exactly inspiring. And yes, I did use Ubuntu as my primary desktop for more than a year (5.04, 5.10 and 6.06). It was good to see MEPIS switch back to Debian from Ubuntu [mepis.org] .

Er.. Red Hat Enterprise Desktop with multimedia? (2, Informative)

Iloinen Lohikrme (880747) | about 7 years ago | (#20112681)

What is the news here? Red Hat is in the desktop market already, thought their offering is more geared or at least branded for the enterprise use: Red Hat Enteprise Linux 5 Desktop [redhat.com] . It seems that they are just going to brand their Enterprise Desktop, add some multimedia and maybe a new colorful GNOME theme and call it Global Desktop Linux. Whoah!

The real news in here I would say is that Red Hat is gearing towards other than corporate customers. The question is, is this a defensive maneuver against Canonical or does Red Hat see that the consumer desktop linux market could be opening up? Or is it both? Could be both.

The second question, if they are not doing this purely for playing defense, is how serious they are? Are they so serious that they will maybe make a new multimedia player for Linux, or will they bundle in example iTunes or Real with it, or are they just going to hack up the usual suspects. I really would hope that they have something new to offer, as basically the situation is that multimedia support works but is not plea sent. Peasent here means the same as user experience with iTunes and in less extend Windows Media is.

RedHat crapped out before ... (1)

noshellswill (598066) | about 7 years ago | (#20112765)

Gents: Let's **REM** RedHat crapped out before, with RH_8 & $60/yr service contract. In 2003(?). Good release and good automagic support. 'Bout six months later they VOIDED the original contract, replacing it with a $200/yr model. I refused, and after lots of hoohaa got back half my money. Small beans? Sure it was, but who wants to get fooled twice ?

Sorry, please try again. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20112785)

"to permit users to view a wide range of video formats on their computers."

What, from Redhat? The company that has the "no mp3, no mpeg, no WMV, no DVD" policy?. I figure they must be waiting for yet another obscure Ogg Borifica free-flash-video codec that nobody will use or something similar to reach spec 0.01 before releasing this distro.

Only 1 year of security updates? (1)

davidwr (791652) | about 7 years ago | (#20112809)

But Microsoft gives you 5!!!! 10 or more for business versions.

Seriously, if you are going to compete in the desktop market, you need to provide security updates at no cost for the "normal" useful life of the product, and then some. Without security updates, your product can easily become a hazard to the entire Internet. If it weren't for lack of security updates, many people would still be running Windows 2000 or Windows NT. In fact, many people are running them in isolation.

Non-security updates are another matter. There's nothing wrong with charging for those.

pfft (1)

spikeb (966663) | about 7 years ago | (#20113145)

Red Hat doesn't have the balls or brains to make much of a difference on the desktop. They don't have the balls to do it in developed countries, and they don't have the brains to get it right (they haven't come close to getting the desktop right yet, and the same people are in charge).

the bottom line? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20113237)

linux users still like sucking them dicks. and what's up with this fucking goof in the redgate ads? he looks like he's sucked a few dicks in his day.

keywords (1)

Danzigism (881294) | about 7 years ago | (#20113267)

"Red Hat Global Desktop would be sold"

welp you've already lost one customer ;-D

More expensive for Aunt Tillie (1)

phoebe (196531) | about 7 years ago | (#20113275)

Dell's Ubuntu laptop deal showed that Microsoft Vista at $50 (according to engadget [engadget.com] ), but Red Hat's Enterprise desktop varies from $80 to $339 [redhat.com] which isn't exactly cheaper for Aunt Tillie. Note that Canonical support [canonical.com] is cheaper for 9x5 ($250) but they also offer 24x7 support ($900).

But is Red Hat trying to follow in Microsoft's steps confusing users with 4 desktop package options? Although Canonical is catching up with Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Edubuntu, Gobuntu, Ubuntu Studio, and Ubuntu Media Center.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>