I agree with you completely. I work for a non-profit that would love to use OpenSource apps were ever they can but so many specialized applications require Windows that it is more cost effective to pay for Windows upfront. Neither a business nor a non-profit is going to sacrifice on the cost of the “best tool for the job” if doing so makes it harder to accomplish their core objectives. And, most non-technical people see the “best tool for the job” as the native OS that their Windows programs run on.

I think the best thing that can happen for Linux in general is the porting of Linux apps to Windows and the porting of Windows apps to Linux. This allows people to get used to Linux apps in the environment that they are used to. Most non-technical people do not care what OS they are running as long as the applications that they consider to be the best start-up and run correctly on it.

Look at Vista for example, people are holding of on moving to it because it doesn’t run all their apps correctly yet. They don’t care about the OS just the apps and their apps are running on XP just fine.

Novell’s business ideas are the best chance Linux has of ever making it into the mainstream. What I would like to see is a change in attitude in the OpenSource community. Instead of “we have a free substitute for a Windows app that you already use and like” it needs to be “we have better tools”.

People use Apple computers because they see Apples products as offering superior applications for the end user not because it is a substitute or because it is based on standards.

People use Firefox on Windows because it is faster, more customizable or more secure; not because it is a substitute for Internet Explorer. In fact, no one except techies cared about Mozilla until Firefox because Mozilla’s focus was on being a Linux substitute not a superior product. I know I’m going to get some back lash for saying that last part because I cannot back it up with fact, but you have to know what I mean. Firefox is a superior product to IE 7 and Mozilla markets it that way. “Reclaim the web” or “reclaim your browser” was the marketing they used if I remember correctly.

Anyway, as long that the applications that people want to use and integrate with are Windows only and as long as businesses want and need those applications Windows will be there operating system no matter what alternative applications are developed. As long as Linux cannot run these apps businesses will continue to use the OS that runs the apps they need. That would be Microsoft Windows.

OpenSuse is more polished and doesn’t automatically lumber you with GNOME, although you certainly can opt for it if that is your preference.

The only things I can’t do in OpenSuse directly as some rather specialized apps that mainly run on Windows, like my glucometer reading program.

I’ve switched 5 desktops to OpenSuse at my house and business at this point.

Here’s the second paragraph again…

For one thing, it’s great to say things like “You don’t need (insert commercial Windows only app here) because you can use (insert Linux F/OSS or commercial substitute here) ” but the harsh reality is that there a LOT of highly specialized, commercial, Windows only applications that customers will not, and cannot do without.

For one thing, it’s great to say things like “You don’t need because you can use ” but the harsh reality is that there a LOT of highly specialized, commercial, Windows only applications that customers will not, and cannot do without.

Novell has been working on overcoming this on several fronts. One being WINE integration for older apps, and the other being Mono for new generation .Net based app compatibility.

The “no closed source, commercial apps ever” mantra of a lot in the Linux and F/OSS community just doesn’t fly for business es that are already locked in to existing Windows only applications. As an IT Manager myself, I’d love to have a Linux F/OSS based company, the reality is that even if we had an unlimited budget to find or have custom coded all the apps we wanted on Linux, we still wouldn’t be able to use it (at least not everywhere). The reality is that many of the vendors or suppliers we deal with _require_ you to use certain applications on certain platforms (WIntel) to do business with them. End of story, no negotiation. I’ve even toyed with the idea of Linux workstations and a virtual server for serving up Windows sessions for such apps, but the effort and cost are prohibitive for us.

Here’s an example of what I mean. Suppose you wanted to start a car dealership. The brand doesn’t really matter, but lets say it was Ford. You will have contracts with them that will determine some of your I.T. Choices for you. For example, to access their parts and service systems, you have to run their applications, and they only run on Windows, and they have a hardware license dongle. What do you do about this?

I think that Novell’s approach is a good idea. Lose the battle to win the war. Do I like .Net, or Mono? No, I don’t. However, by working with Microsoft to make applications able to run on the Linux platform, they can slowly make the platform irrelevant. Once Linux can make enough headway on the desktop, even by running Windows/.Net(Mono) apps, it can then become prevalent enough to make developers notice. If enough people are running Linux (to run Win apps) then we can pull a Microsoft and say “Hey, people are using Linux anyway, why not use the advanced features specific to Linux and make your apps even better with native Linux applications?”

Of course this isn’t the way I’d like things to happen, but I think it’s one of the only workable, long term strategies. Look at how afraid Microsoft is of platform independent applications. They know it’s the key to killing them in the market place. After all, if applications ran anywhere, who would choose to use Windows if they didn’t have to?

Anyway, Novell has chosen to live in the real world, and the Debian types persist in trying to wish, scream, and nag utopia into existence.

Novell’s path may never lead to Utopia, but it might take us to the really nice town down the road from Utopia. The other road leads to nowhere.

Tachyon

Not quite- the way Novell has positioned a SLED license with every workgroup license many organizations are going to install this desktop on existing equipment- especially when faced with the hardware upgrade/replacement costs w/ Vista.

We have seen a significant increase in the acceptance of SLED as an option- especially in locations that are already a Citrix/Terminal server environment.