[TriLUG] Switching distros based on marketing, rumor, FUD -- or based on technical merit?

[Brent Fox]

On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 01:45, al johnson wrote:
> There is something that everyone is missing here.  The owner of the Linux 
> name  (Linus Torvalds) in a recent article in Wired magazine said that while 
> he was happy with the progress Linux has made in the "Server Market", that he 
> is not giving up on making the Linux desktop one of the finest as well, 
> afterall he said, that was the very first reason he started Linux in the 
> first place, he was interested in having a better desktop than the ones that 
> were available to him at the time.  
> 
>    So it really doesn't matter what Red Hat says or decides to do, they are 
> merely doing what they think is best for themselves.
> If they don't think they can perfect the desktop for use by everyone, who 
> cares, someone else will!!  

Please look past the sensationalistic headline of that article
(http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-5101690.html) to what is actually being
said.  

Here's a quote:  "However, Szulik expects Linux to be ready in a couple
of years after it has had time to mature."  

It doesn't sound like he's writing off the home desktop forever to me. 
Just look at the rapid progress we've made from RHL 7.3 -> 8.0 -> 9 ->
Fedora Core 1.  We're not just waiting around for it to mature...we're
trying to drive it as hard as we can.  All Matthew was saying is that
Linux isn't quite there yet for the mass market.  

Think about it from a business sense.  Why would you go head to head 
against a monopoly with $50 Billion in the bank if you didn't feel like
you were ready?  You wouldn't.  You would keep working and waiting until
you felt like you had the right product and the resources to really push
it.  

Cheers,
   Brent

> (incidentally, in response to the criticism of 
> others that some folks don't support the desktop because they are using a 
> "downloaded verstion", I'm happy to say that I have purchased several Red Hat 
> and Mandrake boxes at Best Buy, Compusa and other local stores, and I will 
> probably do so again.) 
> 
>     So I agree with the creator, if Red Hat doesn't want to improve desktop 
> software so that it's good enough for the masses, who should care. There's 
> always Suse and Mandrake and Debian  and Lindows and lots of other 
> distributions which do!!  One of them is going to make Linus very happy once 
> they figure out how to make a Linux desktop easier to use for the masses.  
> 
>     So my point is simply this: why are we listening to a Corporate executive 
> from Red Hat on this subject and not listening to the one person that started 
> it all, the owner of  the Linux name, Linus Torvalds??
>     Linus in case you haven't heard is now working in a Linux laboratory.  
> And if you believe his comments in Wired magazine, he won't be satisfied 
> until Linux not only conquers the Server market but the Desktop market as 
> well.---Al Johnson.
> 
> 
> On Wednesday 05 November 2003 10:24 am, you wrote:
> > > 	----------
> > > 	From: 	Jeremy Portzer[SMTP:jeremyp at pobox.com]
> > > 	Reply To: 	Triangle Linux Users Group discussion list
> > > 	Sent: 	Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:07 AM
> > > 	To: 	trilug at trilug.org
> > > 	Subject: 	[TriLUG] Switching distros based on marketing,
> > > rumor, FUD -- or based on technical merit?
> >
> > 		Over the past few days, I've seen a lot of people mention
> > that they will
> > 		be moving away from Red Hat because they don't like its "new
> > 		direction."  While I am fully supportive of choice in the
> > distro wars, I
> > 		don't quite understand the need to switch based on marketing
> > information
> > 		(or rumors of such), or FUD from various sources.  Wouldn't
> > it be more
> > 		appropriate to use a distribution for its technical merits
> > intead?
> >
> > This is the ultimate decision maker for my corporate use, but I'm also
> > thinking about the longevity of what I've already got...and what I've got
> > at home.
> >
> > 		For example, I've seen a certain other distro hyped as
> > easier for new
> > 		users, or better for the desktop.  I tried to install it
> > once, and the
> > 		network installer crashed, reproducibly, so I went back to
> > Red Hat.
> > 		This is an anecdotal case, and not meant to be a criticism
> > of this
> > 		distro, but the point is it didn't live up to the hype for
> > me.  I chose
> > 		not to use it because it didn't work, NOT because I thought
> > Red Hat was
> > 		"serving the consumer" better.
> >
> > My feeling on this was that I was ticked off at Red Hat because I felt that
> > ultimately, they won't be "serving the consumer" at all.  This only matters
> > because I user RH at home.  Within the data center and the corporate
> > environment, I am well aware that that concept goes out the window.  After
> > all, I deal with IBM here.
> >
> > 		Sure, the position and comments of a company are important
> > to the
> > 		general goal of Linux advocacy.  I too am dissapointed in
> > the Red Hat
> > 		CEO's comments about the status of Linux on the desktop.
> > But these
> > 		types of things will NOT make me stop using Red Hat /
> > Fedora, as I use
> > 		them based on their technical merits.  Fedora Core 1 hasn't
> > even been
> > 		released yet, and still everyone is griping that it's not
> > for them.  Why
> > 		don't you TRY it first ?
> >
> > That's exactly what I am going to do.  I will try Fedore Core on a test box
> > fairly soon, but that doesn't mean much until a stable release is available
> > since I am not sure what will change inside FC between now and then.
> > Incidentally, is there an accepted (yet) abbreviation for Fedora Core.  FC
> > already has meaning.
> >
> > 	--Jeremy
-- 
Brent Fox <bfox at linuxheadquarters.com>