I'm always amused when advocates for a certain technology proclaim a dominate player like Microsoft is soon to be replaced. Steven Vaughan-Nichols made such a proclamation about Linux taking over low cost PCs on www.linuxdesktop.com.
First, you should know that I've designed and built many more products on Linux that I have on Microsoft's OS over the past several years. So I'm not biased against Linux and pro-Microsoft. They each have their advantages and disadvantages. But Linux as a desktop OS still has done little to displace Microsoft, despite the efforts of Red Hat, Ubuntu and Novell. Frankly, the most successful non-Windows desktop OS has to be the BSD-based Mac OS X.
I know many a Linux user who moved to Mac OS X as their desktop because of OS X's BSD core. But lets face it, most users move to the Mac because of Apple's ease of use, user interface innovations, and the Apple "cool" factor. That, and the ability to run Windows as a virtual OS allows users full access to Windows and Microsoft applications. The tell tale comment for me was when a very technical user stated that "I love my new Mac Book Pro, but after using if for a while I realize that most of the time on my Mac is spent using Microsoft applications." There is the code the Linux desktop hasn't yet cracked.
The two killer apps Linux must be able to seamlessly replace are; Outlook and the Office Suite. Windows Xp, Vista, etc. could be replaced, especially in a world that is moving to web-based applications (as long as they don't rely on Microsoft proprietary web extensions or plug ins.) But to work productively in an office setting, Linux desktop users must have calendaring that integrates with Exchange seamlessly. I've seen many a Linux desktop user get fouled up when countless Outlook clones mangle or lose appointments, mess up time zone conversions, or are just not able to open Outlook appointments.
Sharing documents is also critical and compatibility between Office apps and Office clones still isn't there yet. I have occasional trouble running Office 2007 in a work group full of Office 2003 users, so imagine the problems Linux Office clones run into. The lesson here is, it's less about the underlying operating system and more about the applications that limits Linux' viability as a Windows replacement.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not a Microsoft bigot. I'm pulling for Linux desktops as a viable alternative or replacement in the Office or at home. Why, because I'm a Linux bigot? No, I strongly believe in healthy competition, market forces and the power of customer choice. A viable Linux desktop will make Microsoft a better company and require they produce better products, faster. And more innovation will happen, by everyone.
But proclaiming there's some kind of nexus happening because PC hardware is cheap and Linux is too isn't enough to proclaim Linux the next desktop OS champ. Linux has a lot of ground to cover before that will happen. And Microsoft will have to lose a lot of ground too.
Mitchell Ashley is principal consultant at Converging Network LLC where he provides product, technology and social media consulting to emerging technology companies. A successful CTO and product innovator, Mitchell has created many successful, award winning products in the networking, security, convergence, Internet and IT industries. In addition to blogging for NetworkWorld, Mitchell regularly blogs at TheConvergingNetwork and co-hosts the widely popular StillSecure After All These Years podcast.
Subscribe to Mitchell Ashley's Converging on Microsoft feed
The opinions expressed in this Weblog are those of the writer and may not represent the opinions of Network World.
|
|
Ability to run Windows?
Being able to run Windows on your hardware sounds like a poor reason to buy an Apple. Your wording makes it sound like this can't be done on a box running Linux - which is misleading and, I am sure, that isn't your intent.
While I don't foresee a "takeover", low-spec PCs are certainly an opportunity to compete where Linux will hold an advantage.
Mac OS Users Running Microsoft Apps
Not trying to mislead, of course -, my point wasn't to exclude Linux from the ability to run Widows as a virtual OS. That of course is was XenSource and VMware (not to exclude KVM) are fantastic at doing.
Many (not all of course) Mac OS X users I've seen in a business setting run Windows and Office applications using virtualization software on the Mac, thanks to Macs now using Intel hardware. This has enabled Mac to much more viable at work for many more users. It's ironic though if a user ends up spending much of their time in Microsoft applications on their Mac. Kind of defeats the point.
Will Linux be on sub-$300 PCs, probably, because that's the only way they can be offerred that cheaply unless Microsoft comes out with a version of Vista that's less expensive that Home Basic.
I question how many users will by cheap PCs if it's not running Microsoft Office software. The OS isn't as important as the applications users want, use, may already know how to use, and need compatibility with their software to exchange documents and file. Linux Office-clones still aren't their yet, so I question how effective these very low cost PCs will be received without Microsoft's productivity applications.
Mitchell Ashley
Converging Network, LLC
Personal blog: http://theconvergingnetwork.com
Personal podcast: http://www.clickcaster.com/ss
Low end PCs don't use Microsoft Office
Low end PCs are prone to shipping with Microsoft Works.
The compatibility between OpenOffice.org and Microsoft Office is orders of magnitude better than the compatibility between Microsoft Works and Microsoft Office.
If you compare the software that comes on low end Windows PC's versus almost any current Linux distribution you would come to the conclusion of the Linux distribution is usable although not your favorite, and that the Windows PC needs to have all the pre-installed software removed and something usable put on.
I have installed OpenOffice.org on several emachines as a replacement for Microsoft Works. OpenOffice.org as you say has some occasional formating issues but it works. Microsoft Works is unable to open word docs, excel spreadsheets, and ppt files, making it useless.
OpenOffice.org may not be your chosen office suite, but it does get the job done. Something that cannot be said with most of the software that comes with current low end PCs.
Ubuntu and GOS are not Windows, and have their quirks, but at least they work.
Microsoft may make a huge upgrade to Works to make it a competitor to Openoffice.org 1.0 and this may halt some of the slide, but the sub $200 PC is a real problem for Microsoft if the software is the historical 10% of the price of the hardware. OS plus office suite plus random software toys for $20.
Microsoft could even choose to abandon the sub $300 stand alone PC as not capable of generating the revenue to make it a viable market.
Please see my comment
in Greg Laden's blog:
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2007/12/prediction_linux_will_eat_micr.php
In essence, I think that we won't see a significant fraction of Linux based desktops in corporate America any time soon. However, I do expect we'll see millions of new Linux PCs installed at homes in 2008. Asus is certainly betting on that. :)
P.S. If you would discount Asus' ability to read a market or deliver what they want to, please keep in mind two things: Ausus has annual revenues of $11 billion /and/ they build the Apple Macbooks. I'd say that they've got the chops. ;)
I think you need to be
I think you need to be corrected on one of your comments which goes to the fundamental point you make
"The compatibility between OpenOffice.org and Microsoft Office is orders of magnitude better than the compatibility between Microsoft Works and Microsoft Office."
"Microsoft Works is unable to open word docs, excel spreadsheets, and ppt files, making it useless."
These documents CAN be opened by MS Works. All that you need to do is perform a one off step. of associating the file type with the relevant MS Works product.
From that point onwards the MS works suite will open open word docs, excel spreadsheets, and ppt files natively.
Open Office
I understand Mitchell Ashley is implying here that Open Office is not up to standard yet to replace Microsoft Office. Unfortunately he did not specify why he came to this conclusion.
Actually I would agree with this view on two counts : file inter-operability between Open Office and Microsoft Office is poor, and the individual components of Open Office has yet to achieve the standards delivered by Microsoft Office.
Personally I prefer AbiWord and Gnumeric to the word-processing and spreadsheet applications offered by Open Office, because both their file inter-operability with Microsoft Office and their own standards are much better than Open Office 2.0 eventhough rooms for improvement exist of course. Unfortunately AbiWord and Gnumeric are mostly unknown to the Joe Public.
Interoperability with MS
Interoperability with MS Works and standard MS office documents seems to suffer from a common misconception (see my reply above).
I don't deny however that this misconception is not helped by MS who does not make it apparent that MS office documents can be natively opened by MS Works.
Nnot associating the MS Office file types to MS Works (if installed) is just plain dumb as that is all that it takes to provide interoperability
Aren't you addressing the wrong subject?
Your arguments are valid regarding Linux in the workplace, but they don't apply to the issue you claimed to be addressing.
You said you were addressing Steven Vaughan-Nichols' proclamation about Linux taking over low cost PCs, not office/work PCs. The people buying low cost PCs that he is referring to are home users; very few of them would be buying or using Office or Outlook (they would cost more than the hardware did). These low cost PCs are not able to (or can just barely) run Vista Home Basic, but they can run Linux well (and XP, but that's not going to be available much longer).
I would be interested in hearing your arguments as to why he is wrong about Linux taking over low cost PCs, if you have any.
Just look at the newspaper ads
First, we have to start by asking the question; Which Linux will be the OS for sub-$300 machines? Ubuntu? Red Hat? SuSE? One, two, multiple Linux OSs? I can tell you that as a Macintosh user in the 90's and 80's, it was very lonely seeing the choice everyone else had among a wide variety of software applications, while I evangelized to everyone that even though it didn't have as much software, the Mac was still better and easier to use. When even that arguement stopped being true, I switched to Windows.
Second, when a user wants to start using other applications and they pop into their local Best Buy, Circuit City, Staples, Office Depot, etc., what do they buy? What multimedia applications, children's software, games, personal finance, tax programs, etc., are they going to buy? Sure, new software companies or existing ones could spring up to serve a Linux desktop market, but if low cost PCs are used by your average home user, it's got to be "Apple easy-to-use", not the typical Linux experience once you get outside of the software that ships with Linux desktop packages.
Third, think Microsoft will stand by and watch the home market go the way of Linux? Vista Home Basic will become extremely cheap before Microsoft lets Linux significant erode into the home market.
Fourth, home users aren't always just home users. Many, probably like you and I, use their home computers on occasion to do work from the office.
Fifth, hardware's cheap and it's getting cheaper. Check you local Chirstmas season ads.
My local Micro Center is selling an Intel Pentium D, 1GB RAM, 160GB hard disk, DVD/CR-ROM drive and Vista Home Basic for $299. You could bump that up to 2GB RAM for $49. Next in line is an Intel Core Duo 2GB RAM, 320GB hard disk, dual layer DVD+RW drive and Vista Home Premium for $549. Staples is now selling Dell Inspiron 530's for under $600. I wouldn't believe Vista Home Basic isn't costing more than $99 in these machines, and Vista Home Premium is a little bit more.
The prices speak for themselves and they are only going to drop further, frankly, thanks to the cost pressure from Linux and the fact that the Vista OS can't be a large percentage of a desktop's cost.
With a difference of $99 Vista (my estimate, and I think it's lower and will drop) and $0 Linux, it isn't that signficant. Not enough for Linux to displace Microsoft in the home, home/office, or at work. The economics won't be the factor that makes Linux the winner of the desktop.
Mitchell Ashley
Converging Network, LLC
Personal blog: http://theconvergingnetwork.com
Personal podcast: http://www.clickcaster.com/ss
Microsoft is just boring.
I have been using OpenOffice for almost 5 years with a copy of Microsoft on my home and office pc. I seldom if ever use it. Also I have often used OpenOffice to convert Appllications from other formats to Word formats because you need to download a converter for MS Office to perform this task. I also support the open document format and I believe that soon eveyone will. So unless Microsoft is going to buy countries like China we need to be onboard. No matter how long Microsoft holds on here they are losing the rest of the world.
I would rather use wordpad than get nagged about every detail. It used to be a decent product when it was in version 2.0 but probably not worth the expensive price tag. Even if you install vista for 99 bucks by the time you run out and buy every windows app you need it will still be over 1K even if you give away the OS free.
Most home users buy Vista for the same reason I did and its a very bad one. So the kids can play video games and watch utube videos.
In summary I actually love Micrsoft Software but I think it outrageously priced and the license requirements (althought I understand the requirement) are awful. Other vendors protect their propery without going to such extremes and the open source versions are so good that there is not need to try and steal MS license.
Active Directory, NET etc....... has become more complicated than UNIX at least on a Linux box almost everything is the same and there is always a way to make something work although not always easy once its up its up for a long time.
As far as the desktop yes Microsoft wins but not from the business aspect. If a linux vendor could tackle that sucessfully it would be great but the play gound is stacked right now as more and more companies move to active x net and whatever else Microsoft throws out there eventually they will be locked into an expensive Network that will suck the IT budget dry.
Microsoft is now what IBM used to be. Who knows what will happen. Meanwhile I have to use windows to do my work but I have linux boxes doing my work for me so go figure.
Post new comment