Am Fr, den 06.02.2004 schrieb Peter Boy um 10:45: > Am Do, den 05.02.2004 schrieb Tim Kossack um 22:42: > > i don't just mean plug-ins, but also the general effort red hat puts > > into their desktop (as well as server) offering(s) compared to the > > competition trying to make the life of the user and the admin easier. > > you can of course rest on the idealistic standpoint, that > > non-oss/proprietary are per se evil, but let's face it - there are > > certain standards which you have to take into account, and without java, > > flash, mp3, video etc. i consider even an os for the corporate desktop > > not up to the task. > > I think you are comparing "apples and peaches". Fedora is "community > based" and for free, SusE, Sun, and others aren't "community based" nor > for free. You can't include commercial packages into a freely > distributable package. RH's enterprise line of products include most of > the software you are missing. (sorry for the long response) i tried to verify your statement in looking what comes included with rhws, but i couldn't gather any info if it ships with those plugs installed. given red hat's general stance in regards shipping non-oss/free legally questionable whatever software as part of their products, quite frankly i would be very surprised if they do. as far as the "apples to oranges"-comparison is concerned, my critics was and is primarily aimed at their commercial desktop offerings - also, as i already stated above, plugins are just one part of the problem. reg. fedora, yes sure, i don't expect them to provide those plugs for free, although if red hat would finally change their stance and just license/include the stuff like lindows, suse, sun etc. do, i wouldn't complain if they would include them for free in fedora either...;-) it's just that i'm asking myself why they seem not interested at all to tackle the issues (let alone seeing that there's one in the first place), when their competition seems not having to have any problems acknowledging and adressing them... my impression is basically that red hat hasn't at all understood (or needs to show it yet that they have) what makes a really polished desktop distribution. i don't make any difference between a good desktop for home use and a good desktop for businesses. neither does market leader microsoft. neither does lindows etc. getting in danger to sound circular, a good desktop is a good desktop because it's a good overall desktop. all i'm trying to communicate is that many other smaller companies with less ressources are (at least partly) pushing the status quo here, while red hat still seems to sit, basically waiting to for gnome, kde etc. to get the stuff done. i just miss them going the extra-mile which one should and could expect from the market leader. and (not just) imo, if they will continue that way, they will get under increased pressure form smaller, more flexible vendors in the future at least as far as the desktop is concerned, because it's not so much about the big eating the small, but the quicker outperforming the slower. then, besides certain undoubted advantages - i also see a problem with the "community-based" approach, namely because the community around red hat's testbed - fedora - consists mainly of geeks, means people who want all the latest stuff, who know about configuring linux, where to get stuff that's missing etc. therefore, they are mostly satisfied with the ease-of-use, amount of polish/status quo. heck, i even guess many of them would be also satisfied using the command line, text editor, or tex etc. (that's just _a tad_ polemical) so of course, because there's not much demand here to make the stuff easier to use, red hat might have the impression that the amount they are investing in these issues is adequate, while measured by the comp. and _real_ end(windows)users, it's certainly not. > > to sum it up - red hat's current desktop offerings are basically their > > enterprise server putted in a differently labeled box, and i wouldn't > > exactly call that a viable desktop (strategy). > > Rh is the first distro with a usable, structured menu system and desktop > to be meant "for work". Compare it to thw bloaded SuSE, Mandrake, ... > menues and destops. It needed a lot of developement efforts to make it > work. It's not perfect yet, but a huge step into the right direction. > So, contrary to your statement, you might say RH was the first distro > which made some real efforts to bring Linux on the end users's desktop. what are you talking about? you might call suse, mandrake etc. "bloated", but afaik, many suse/mandrake users are appreciating yast or mandrake control center etc. at least suse seems to have been able to make a profit from their normal distribution, which red hat obviously wasn't able to. and that likely has something to do with the effort they put in making stuff easy to use, whether you like it or not. have you done a side-by-side comparison between red hat 9, or fedora, and lindows? it's hard to call this a comparison at all, because chance is good that you can get a complete user-experience with lindows without having to touch the command line once, without knowing anything about linux internals. as far as fedora or likely their commercial desktop products are concerned...:-(! you might nevertheless say that red hat is adressing the corporate market, and that usability-issues aren't that important, because those companies have an it-department. but companies are also interested in minimizing those administration-costs, and in this respect it helps enormously when stuff is complete, works right out of the box, users don't have to call for help how to use the stuff, especially in smaller companies without linux know-how etc. i could go on and on, but i'll stop here. even if it's correct that red hat was the first to bring linux on the enduser's desktop, so what? fact is, nearly every other distro aiming at the desktop has surpassed red hat's offerings regarding usability and completeness by a more or less wide margin - at least they are seeing the issue that needs to get adressed. btw, who is sponsoring the "gnome bounty hunt" which tries to help adressing usability-shortcomings? red hat or novell/ximian? see my point? imo, it's time for red hat to act instead of reacting...
