Can virtual PCs save desktop Linux?

Ok, I haven't read it, but from the teaser:

Quoting: Desktop Linux has floundered for three main reasons: too few applications, limited desktop hardware compatibility, and too few tools (not to mention skilled people) to manage a boatload of Linux desktop systems.

1. hahahahahahaha. Have you looked at a software repository lately? Oh I'm sorry, he must mean "too few expensive proprietary applications"

2. hahahahahahaha. The only "limited compatibility" is typically with the absolute newest hardware where the manufacturers have changed the workings so much that new drivers have to be built to support it (typically without any help from said manufacturers). Just try installing the latest Windows on some hardware MS has deemed no longer important. Prime Example from personal experience: Vista removed all 3COM drivers. You know, for things like the old 3Com 905b/c network cards that just about every IT person has at least one of still around because just about everything used them and they worked under pretty much any OS known to man?

3. I can only assume the author means "too few gui tools so easy a monkey could use them", because from what I understand there are many "tools" out there to manage local and remote systems...

Maybe I'm just being harsh, but...that's how I read it. :P

I'll assume the author makes some good points in the rest of the article related to virtualization, and maybe I'll read it later to find out.

I second that motion, sir.

Hey tech.,

You were not being too harsh, the summary alone exhibits enough ignorance that it even surpasses the skip code key combination found in "Ken Hess && Daniweb" in the article description. Indeed, Ken is superior in that he writes an enticing summary such that I am sorely tempted to read it. It is only after saying my AAA mantra that allows me to rush past to safety.

So don't rot your mind with nonsense. You have more productive outlets awaiting your attention. So skip it with a clear conscience.

YBT

Someone contemplating and telling us 'bout it, and in the same time he could have tested KVM. But anyway, the good news:

Quoting:"Well, in addition to vastly lower cost than a Microsoft-based solution, if you use thin clients, then very obviously all potential Linux compatibility problems with desktop hardware evaporate. "

He's worried about locked-in Windows employees not being able to make the switch. However, one can also run Windows inside KVM.

Say, you have 100 people in a company, and you rely on certain Microsoft software. But the maximum number of people needing those Windows-only software is about 20. Then logic tells me, they still could ditch 80 Windows-licenses - share the 20 Windows VM's and save bucks.

I'm not sure about the Windows licensing scheme though, I'd have to look it up.

Linux has "floundered" on the desktop for one and only one reason.

Sam and Suzy computer user do not know it exists.

Period.

h