Feeds

OSDL cautiously optimistic on desktop Linux

Meeting of minds?

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

The Open Source Development Labs (OSDL) has voiced cautious optimism that its latest initiative could finally herald a mass-market for Linux on the desktop.

OSDL is pushing ahead with Project Portland, to develop a common set of core technical requirements for Linux and open source software on the desktop, following a meeting of 47 companies and organizations it hosted earlier this month.

Portland has identified a core set of areas, spanning the interface, plug-and-play, drivers and the kernel, that OSDL members will flesh out.

The goal is to create a common framework for greater interoperability between different Linux and open source software components on the PC. A framework is expected to reduce usability issues for the end user and remove technology hurdles for ISVs who want to be able to not only port desktop applications from closed to open source but to also ensure their software works on different Linux desktops after just a single port.

In case any of this sounds familiar, it should. The Free Standards Group (FSG) in October announced the Linux Standard Base Desktop Project, which will standardize common libraries and application behavior in Linux for the desktop. Portland, which will be incorporated into the Linux Standard Base (LSB) 4.0 next year, will produce a common interface framework.

FSG's LSB was last month ratified as an ISO standard after five years' work, but only after it saw limited success in the early days thanks - in part - to a lack of support from distribution market leader Red Hat.

OSDL believes the level of support already expressed for Portland demonstrates the project's potential to be more successful than LSB at an earlier stage. Among the first meeting's attendees were representatives from Adobe Systems, AMD, Eclipse, FSG, Gnome, IBM, Intel, KDE, Mozilla, Nokia, OpenOffice and - yes - Red Hat. Many of these are also participating in the FSG's work.

"It was an eye-popping experience that these guys got together," OSDL principal analyst Dave Rosenburg told The Register. "Once those base line [standards] are established, a large majority of those guys will go with them."

He also feels the fact this work is being conducted at the OSDL brings with it the kind of clout that will establish the standard and ensure industry uptake. A critical failing in Linux and open source on the desktop has been the very noticeable reluctance of leading OEM Dell to ship a PC running Linux and a full suite of open source desktop productivity software. OSDL hopes it can overcome this by maintaining a vendor-neutral forum and regular contacts with OEMs like Dell.

Open source and Linux desktops have enjoyed varying degrees of success, despite frequent predictions in recent years this would be year of the Linux desktop. WStarOffice, OpenOffice, KDE and Ximian are played-up as alternatives to applications in Microsoft's Office, but Rosenburg says these open source suites have failed to achieve broad adoption because they lack good email or productivity alternatives to Office.

A recent OSDL poll of 3,000 users found that lack of application support was the biggest factor preventing customers from switching to an open source desktop.

According to Rosenburg, Portland could encourage a Red Hat or Novell to deliver a full open source desktop stack, which meets users' requirements on application support and addresses usability issues, such as consistency of buttons and menus between a word processing and a spread sheet application.

He resists falling in to the trap of predicting Portland means 2006 will be "the year of Linux desktop," but is confident it can capitalize on the buzz that Mozilla's Firefox has created around open source software on the desktop. Firefox has gained 11.51 per cent of the browser market in the year since its release.

"Linux on desktop has been coming for years. The last three years has been 'the year of the Linux desktop.' Firefox has made a big difference in getting open source on top of everyone's desktop - that's made it more feasible," Roseburg said.

"I won't say it [2006 is the year of the Linux desktop], but we are going to get closer. If we had a true competitor to Microsoft Office, then I'd say that will be the year of desktop Linux." ®

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
Microsoft on the Threshold of a new name for Windows next week
Rebranded OS reportedly set to be flung open by Redmond
Apple: SO sorry for the iOS 8.0.1 UPDATE BUNGLE HORROR
Apple kills 'upgrade'. Hey, Microsoft. You sure you want to be like these guys?
SMASH the Bash bug! Apple and Red Hat scramble for patch batches
'Applying multiple security updates is extremely difficult'
Business is back, baby! Hasta la VISTA, Win 8... Oh, yeah, Windows 9
Forget touchscreen millennials, Microsoft goes for mouse crowd
ARM gives Internet of Things a piece of its mind – the Cortex-M7
32-bit core packs some DSP for VIP IoT CPU LOL
Lotus Notes inventor Ozzie invents app to talk to people on your phone
Imagine that. Startup floats with voice collab app for Win iPhone
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
Intelligent flash storage arrays
Tegile Intelligent Storage Arrays with IntelliFlash helps IT boost storage utilization and effciency while delivering unmatched storage savings and performance.
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops
Balancing user privacy and privileged access, in accordance with compliance frameworks and legislation. Evaluating any potential remote control choice.