tlug: Last attempt at this (was: Linux for the masses)

[tjhaslam <tjhaslam@example.com>]

Stephen Turnbull wrote:

ST> But the unusability of open source Linux[tm] wouldn't matter, 
ST> because you'd have MS Linux, with Word and Excel and fairly 
ST> shortly NetObjects  Fusion. And you'd still have Apache and 
ST> Emacs and Perl and all (if  you wanted them, but despite their
ST> availability for Windows few Windows users I know have them), 
ST> although possibly not Aladdin Ghostscript and I'm pretty sure 
ST> not qmail and xv. It would be expensive, at least more so than 
ST> TurboLinux. Not unreachably so. 

And extrapolated further:

ST> But that's what you really want, isn't it? It would give a hundred 
ST> million users, maybe more, permanent freedom from the Blue 
ST> Screen of  Death. 

No, actually, that`s not what _I_ want.  That particular scenario is rather
nightmarish to me, although I agree in theory that nothing in GPL stops it
from happening.  To begin with, it`s not just or even primarily the BSofD
(i.e., NT`s instability)  that I  and presumably others want freedom from.
Please note: most Linux/Unix people have a tendency to think of MS as an
OpSys company;  or even primarily as an OpSys company.  I don`t.  In fact,
the OSes account for apr 40% of MS`s revenue: roughly the equivalent of MS
Office, but no longer the majority of MS revenue.   As the joke goes--and
it`s not that good of joke--but as it goes:__People used to buy MS apps in
the hope that these would be compatible with the MS opsys; now they buy the
MS opsys in the hopes that it will be compatible with their MS aps__.

But MS didn`t invent or even revolutionize apps for the PC; or the GUI; or
much anything else.  MS used its opsys and OEM argeements to leverage
market share; MS feverently *emulated* their competitors (I well remember
the ads for MS Word explaining how it was more like WordPerfect than
Wordperfect); and MS seems also to have used it`s share of questionable
competitive tactics: i.e.,  _Dos isn`t done unitl Lotus won`t run_.  It is
almost not too much to say that for about a decade, Apple served as the
unofficial R &D for the PC industry: the Desktop enviroment/GUI; Plug and
Play (originally an Apple slogan); built-in networking; the ZIP drive, and
much more.  What of what seems currently condemed as *MS-ware*--and
therefore unworthy of and unfit for Linux--was invented, developed, tested
and established somewhere else, first.  The GUI at Palo Alto, et cetera.
MS became a default standard for a numbers of reasons, but the leveraging
of their OEM argeements added far more than MS`s  presumed superiority to
WordPerfect, Lotus, Borland, et cetera.  Not that these companies didn`t
make mistakes, though.

But here is my initial and rather simple sortie: To want a destktop GUI
enviroment (even X-Windows) is not to want MS Windows.  To want a dedicated
wordprocessing program (as opposed to a simple text- or complex macro-
editor) is not to want MS Word.   To want such a program with links to
other standard programs (like a spreadsheet, and a calender/scheduler, for
example): that is to say, to want an Office Suite is not to want MS Office.
 These are functions that apps can accomplish--they`re nothing MS per se.
I want an Applix (or a WP Corel Suite) that can better deal with MS Office
because MS Office is ubiquitous in both the MS and Mac enviroments, which
are in turn by default much of the business and yes--even the
academic--enviroment.    But I _don`t_ want MS.  I will explain: however,
first:

I will clarify my MS remarks/Linux delusions a little further on two
tracks:  (1) Linux for corporate/enterprise use (Redhat`s direction;
perhaps Turbo as well).  (2) Linux for SOHO.   

In regard to (1), many corporations already have--and accept and benefit
from--a mixed OpSys enviroment.  There`s a decent bit of literature and
tools for working with NT and HP-##X ; NT and IBM-#X; and so forth and so
on.  Additionally, many corporate IT people who do work in Unix enviroments
still have to deal with NT: and hence they adjust/prepare themselves
accordingly.   Much of this knowlegde is readily transferrable in regards
to Corporate/Enterprise Linux; I would guess though that most/(all?) of the
tools/apps will have to be ported to or developed in Linux. This is not to
deny that there are/will be Linux-specific issues.  Hence/nonetheless: _
big _ money to be made here (eg., your earlier reference to Eric Raymond;
or the recent investments in Redhat).  Besides the big money, maybe even
enough downtime for people like JP--or even Chris Seyika, if he would
compromise himself--to work on their own projects.  At this point, Linux is
displacing the other members of the Unix family; as well, to some degree it
is also competing with NT--or at least restricting NT to the lower end of
server tasks, non-mission critical functions, et cetera.  Except for the
places that have made their investment, though--the bulk of the
workstations (really just fancy PC`s for the most part) are still NT.  When
more desktop/enduser apps come on line, or when various corporations
develop their own, this starts to change and we actually have the rows of
endusers GUI-ing /typing/mousing and dictating away at their Lintel boxes.
This will happen, I believe, without your help or hinderance--and certainly
without mine.  The market will see to it--and TLUGgers who position
themselves accordingly will have opportunties for ample reward.  To a
limited but real degree, __ease of use_ is an issue here: but one that
Redhat and Turbo are getting well in hand.  The immediate above I think is
more JB`s project--although it will becoming true soon enough, and
hopefully with him on board.

This brings us to (2), my pet project SOHO Linux, which I will also extend
to non-profit orgs of a certain size.  (For the larger NGO`s and what not,
see the above: Corporate/Enterprise Linux).  For this, many of the features
in the current distribution are essential--and as you earlier remarked
*GoodEnough[TM}*.  I do mean in particular the server capacity(ies): mail,
ftp, news, DNS and web.   For the Mac/Win migrate, these require a decent
time/skill investment--one that I am personally more than willing to make,
and am doing so now.  Some _ease of use_ tools here would be highly
desirable, though; and some will fall out from the developments in
Corporate/Enterprise Linux.  The need for a strong Office Suite (Applix;
Corel; Star) is essential; the ability to deal with common MS documents,
likewise.  This is still most likely a multi-OS enviroment, but the
dominant OS is Linux.  MS exists__for the most part__ in a frozen state: MS
is_frozen_ because it is simply too expensive and continually troublesome
to upgrade and maintain; and because the OS upgrades--with the new required
hardware to match--in fact offer no real gains in functionality/performance
(particularly since many of these tasks are already being done better by
Linux).  MS stills exists in the office because some highly
desirable/essential apps are still not Linux native/ported: Quickbooks, for
example; or Adobe Framemaker.  But these MS-based apps, for the most part,
do not need to be upgraded every 9 to 12 months; and when the these apps do
eventually come on line, 3 to 5 years from now, the SOHO Office goes (or
might well go) Linux native/M$ free.   Savings, depending on number of
machines, nature of business, et cetera $1000s to $10000s  per year. 

Now as to why I don`t want MS Linux/MS Office.  The production/upgrade
cycle will be brutual (i.e, M$ business as usual); the benefits will not be
there (M$ as usual); and the lack of competition--the lack of an
established yet alternative Intel based OS--will be very bad for everyone,
especially the SOHO and small business consumers.  The scenario I`ve
envisaged breaks this MS cycle--or at least puts much of it on hold,
allowing the SOHO and small business users much more flexbility, efficency,
 freedom, effectiveness, et cetera.

MS Linux/MS Office for L in my judgement would NOT be a _GoodThang_[TM].
My jest about MS Linux was meant as a reminder to Chris, yourself, and
others about the future of Linux.  The current Linux community, finally,
will greatly influence Linux`s future(s): but not _control_ it.  The
question of moral ownership I will set aside.

Time scale: JB`s corporate/enterprise Linux.  Happening now to the next 18
months (for the apps he talked about).  TJH`s SOHO linux.  Spartan set-up
now, MS dominant over Linux in enduser tasks.  In 2 to 3 years, Linux
dominant SOHO--perhaps MS free.  JDH`s comfortable family Linux
(__not__necessarily his business or personal prefs):  3 to 5 years.

To anyone who actually read this:  I don`t know why, but thank you!  I did
put a lot of time and thought into it, though.  To the majority of you who
did not: Trust me, I do understand.

Best to all with all,
TJH




Appendixes: Linux in academia, again; reply to Turnbull on GNU propaganda.
#####
Back to Linux in academia.  What is the average student using the
institutional Wintel machine for?  Wordprocessing, e-mail, and
web-browsing.  The occasional spreadsheet;  the occasional presentation
using graphics; and increasingly, the web-page (Alas, poor Pico!  They
should have known it well!).   Gawdaful number of machines out there in the
installed academic base--a frightening number of which will NOT meet the
hardware specs for NT 5  & MS Office whatever.   Not upgradeable/barely
upgradeable.  But many of these gomi boxes, Pents I and II btw, would run
Linux and Applix  and Netscape and my imaginary X-Pine just fine, thank
you.  Reduce recycle reuse and all that.  ST :You`re worried about what the
MS industry spews all over the Internet; hah!  Spend less time in the
virtual world, dude. (Sorry, could not control myself.)  If replacing these
machines every two years or so made good ecomonic, computing, or functional
sense--and if all these damn boxes had some place to go other than?  The
CPU might be silicon, but the rest of it will find it`s way back into your
drinking water soon enough.  BTW, I am generally pro-development--and a
capitialist.   But what`s on the NT year 2000 horizon for academia (16
months away) makes me sick.  Just sick.  And the students--well, in many
but not in all cases, their parents--will be subsidizing this stupidity,
paying the MS monopoly tax that`s a pox upon us all.  If converting some of
those boxes to __enduser Linux__ will ensure a savings of several hundred
dollars per box and extend the usable life of the machine by 9 months to 2
years, then some people in the Linux academic community should be making
the attempt.

Okay. Fine.  Insanity, I know.  But the immediate above _really_is my only
conspiracy/obession.  (Although I do want to know if the infamous Clinton
cigar was a Cuban cigar: if so, it`s treason.  Get him out of there and in
front of f-------  squad  [the missing word is friendly].  Otherwise, I
don`t much care what happens with Monica-gape).   

#####
On GNU/RMS.

Stephen Turnbull wrote:
ST> And RMS does not care one bit what anybody else wants, and especially 
ST> not non-programmer users. His community _is_ the developers, --- 

In practice, yes.   In theory and propaganda (as well as for the purposes
of some funding and other non-tech support), GNU trades off a number of
concerns:  protecting the public domain, protecting privacy, supporting
free speech, et cetera.  The claim for a broader social purpose is very
much present at <www.gnu.org>.   Stallman`s hippie antics and cutesy
wordplay aside, the GNU ethos seems to lean more towards the Civil
Libretarian right than any sort of Marxisant Left.  [And consider your own
remarks regarding this `community of self-selected individuals,` for
example.]  By GNU I  do mean the central organization blah blah blah--and
not necessarily the greater community of Open Source people that may have
GNU affiliations/sympathies.  
---------------------------------------------------------------
Next Meeting: 10 October, 12:30 Tokyo Station Yaesu central gate
Featuring the IMASY Eng. Team on "IPv6 - The Next Generation IP"
Next Nomikai: 20 November, 19:30  Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp