Re: Linux on the desktop

Thus quoth Alex Butcher on Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 01:16:42PM +0000:
> On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Daniel C. von Asmuth wrote:
> 
> > Why is Linux so slow to conquer the desktop?
> 
> I would dispute that if you're talking about corporate desktops - I think
> real movement is happening in that space these days.

I see few Open Source desktop in small companies. 
 
> As far as the _consumer_ desktop goes, the users of such machines are not
> really ready to accept the changes that FOSS brings. They're used to buying
> individual shrinkwrapped software from supermarkets and high street stores

Consumers are aware of the drawbacks of Windows and even the advantages Linux
brings. If they can't install a recent distro, a friend or relative may be
able to. I believe consumers will be willing to put up with having a penguin
in the home. 

> > The major obstacle seems to be the lack of applications.
> 
> Which in turn has a significant cause that is the paucity of preloaded Linux
> machines for sale. Which in turn has a significant cause of "lack of
> consumer demand", no doubt.

I expect that demand only to grow if Linux can meet their needs. I should
have added a lack of device drivers is also slowing that growth. 

> > When you consider the failure of Linux desktop software like WordPerfect,
> > ApplixWare and Kylix, an important reason would be the Gift Culture of the
> > Linux crowd. They will go for anything that comes free of charge if they
> > can. There is no Photoshop for Linux, because Gimp is good enough. There
> > is an Oracle, but MySql is good enough for most users. TextMaker is a nice
> > word processor, but the majority favours OpenOffice. (giving Sun a hard
> > time to sell StarOffice). 
> 
> Commoditisation. It happens to everything eventually. For 80-90% of users,
> the non-commercial alternatives you highlight will suffice. Only a small
> proportion of users need (and, more pertinently, /are willing to pay for/)
> the advanced features provided by "best of breed" products. When
> conveniently presented with a viable alternative, they'll generally go for
> it if it's cheaper or free.

Commoditisation? Microsoft is the king of that game, with Borland, Adobe and
Corel contesting. There may be little to gain by producing the next word 
processor, but I was thinking about functionality unmet by current OSS 
products. 

> > A viable commercial Linux application will need some unique feature. There
> > are examples, like Mathematica, SPSS, and BitKeeper, but these are outside
> > Joe Sixpack's budget.
> 
> Joe Sixpack probably couldn't find a need for those kind of applications
> anyway. Only a small proportion of Linux users (who in turn presently
> represent only a small proportion of the total software market) have a need
> for that sort of thing.

A Microsoftish argument: 'Joe Sixpack is sufficiently served by Windows XP
Home Edition and Microsoft Works'. When advanced functionality becomes cheap
enough for professionals and small companies and not prohibitively hard to
use, it will be downloaded or bought.

> I foresee a future where the masses are mostly provided for with FOSS,
> leaving proprietary software vendors to cater for the high-end and
> specialist users who have wallets to match their requirements. Such vendors
> may even choose to extensively use FOSS (whenever possible) in creating
> their products so as to reduce the cost of development and the
> time-to-market.

My point is what forces are driving towards such a future and what circum-
stances are blocking it.

Kind regards,



Daniel von Asmuth

-- 
			MONOPOLIE
	een vergissing van Windows in uw nadeel 
	alle programma's zijn gestopt en niet opgeslagen gegevens verloren
	gooi Mijn Computer direkt in de Prullenbak
	ga niet langs Start; u ontvangt geen Eur 20.000