AOL Considers Linux? 72
News.com is running a story about
AOL Considering Linux,
although its fairly hazy on the details. Talks about
Netscape turned AOLs investment in Red Hat, Linux in
Consumer devices (seems to say its a bad idea, despite
the mention of the empeg) and other assorted rumors
with little solid claims from anyone beyond 'no comments'.
Sounds interesting (Score:1)
Linux "too muscular"? (Score:1)
"Linux is simply too muscular for that space, and even without the Windows licensing fee, a hardware company would still have to pay the relatively high prices for Intel chips", Jupiter's Card said.
Hello? Anyone heard of AMD or Cyrix?
What we need is a ninety-eight pound OS that runs on hydrogen gas. Oh yeah, and Windows Everywhere.
I'd welcome an AOL client for Linux (Score:1)
--
Linux "too muscular"? (Score:1)
Of course, you'd probably want to use DR-DOS [drdos.com] since the source code to it is available for you to tweak.
Ohh great (Score:1)
The same can be said of the average earthlink user, the average MSN user, the average mindspring user, the average MCI user, the average SprintNet user, and just about any other large national ISP. If we rule out everybody, who exactly is it that is going to be running Linux? Or are you planning on achieving "world domination" as a server OS?
It's not so bad. (Score:1)
As for it being single-user... maybe so. It's being an AOL terminal, not a *nix box. That's fine. Do we bemoan the lack of multiuser capabilities in a linux-based mpeg player? Why do so here?
In my humble opinion.... (Score:1)
AOL's investment in Red Hat is nothing more than an anti-Microsoft stake. If Linux is successful in challenging Microsoft on the consumer/newbie desktop, then AOL can use its muscle to get a quick Linux-AOL package together. But I'm pretty sure that won't happen soon.
As for the embedded markets, AOL definitely wants to get out there, but I think they've committed to Java, at least for the first few products. If someone else manages a solid embedded Linux product, then AOL will jump on the bandwagon. But all of their resources and people are too focused on the Sun-Java thing at the moment.
But hey, I could be completely wrong.
Will people even notice (Score:1)
It's a great announcement and even though I don't use aol, it'll allow those users on aol to experience linux. However, I don't think many people on AOL have even heard of linux, let alone will harness it. I think the upgrade of linux will be more benefitial to AOL itself rather then it's users.
It will be hard to develop a customer segment. (Score:1)
AOL might spread itself to thin, trying to jump on too many bandwagons at the same time. After they successfully managed to appear on almost every M$ desktop and focussing on being a consumer service organization (in contrast to being just an ISP), They were expanding in a new direction, the corporate market place (Sun/Netscape deal, AOL Anywhere campaign). Picking up Linux, introduces yet another direction - still not "professional" enough for many coorporations, and to complicated for the bulk of typical AOL end users.
Why should they try to be "professional" enough? I don't understand, is NBC professional enough? Is WB, UPN professional enough? Does NBC make any professional product per sa? (like a documentary division, or a indy film division, or a something like Industrial Light and Magic?) Does Time, newsweek professional enough. Why? why why why? As far as they can stuff a Gecko rendering engine and a word processor in a sub sub X86, its going to satisfy majority's need.
Some people just can accept the fact that the current PII's already overkilled.
CY
Great idea for a NEW PHONEBOOT (Score:1)
You put a tocken in it, the AOL Anywhere machine will let you surf on line for 3 minute. Doesn't anybody think this is a great idea for new phoneboot/netboot in air port and gradually most of the public area?
Of course, it wouldn't be that cheap initially. Provide that you can plug smart card in it for anonymous online purchase and a plampilot connection to download email.
No?
CY
Sounds like a great piece of vaporware (Score:1)
fine vaporous concept to occupy the time of a
select group of middle managers.
AOL is not going to seriously consider bucking
an operating system that has 90% of the desktop
market by the short and curlys.
My letter to David Card and Stephen Shankland (Score:2)
On http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,35463,00.html?st .ne.fd.gif.d, Mr. Card is quoted as saying:
"Linux is simply too muscular for that space, and even without the Windows licensing fee, a hardware company would still have to pay the relatively high prices for Intel chips."
Mr. Card really shouldn't be allowed to talk to the press, because he just made himself and your company look like complete idiots.
Linux runs very well on many non-Intel chips. For one thing, it runs on chips from AMD, which are much cheaper than Intel's chips. Second, since Linux is so fast, it can run better on low-end chips than other operating systems (like Windows) on higher-end chips. Third, Linux has been ported to other architectures, such as StrongARM and PowerPC.
I suppose the real blunder was made by the author of the article, Stephen Shankland, who should have known better than to quote someone completely unqualified to comment on the subject. It would have been smart if Mr. Shankland had actually verified the statements of the people he was interviewing. Nothing makes a journalist look more stupid than when he quotes someone who is completely wrong without pointing out the error.
--
Timur Tabi
Remove "nospam_" from email address
AOL/Linux Frisbee's (Score:1)
Who needs windows? Just use AOL's MyDesktop(tm) with everything integerated.
Don't think it's not going to happen one of these days.
except for ttf (Score:1)
Bunk (Score:1)
AOL can't even (or don't care to) make version 4.0 of its software run correctly on NT 4.0, and its so god damn similar to windows 9x that it is not even funny. And to think that they would make a linux version?!? I guess not only programmers use drugs...
Anywho, if for some unknown reason they make a version of of their software that can run on linux, bet your last dollar that it is only ever going to run on a specific distro or embeded client. Cause they do not like to fix problems in their software. They have the worst response to software bugs/problems that i have ever seen in the computer industry. There general response is "its not our problem, contact microsoft/dealer" or "install the 16-bit version".
StrongARM & Intel (Score:1)
Slightly more complex than this - Digital and ARM developed the StrongARM as a joint venture, which meant they both had quite a stake in it (don't ask me for figures ;()
Intel bought the semiconductor arm of Digital (including the Alpha and StrongARM)... "do the math", as our American cousins tend to say ;-)
[offtopic] Linux on News.com (Score:1)
Linux "too muscular"? (Score:1)
-Steve
Winelib + Mozilla = Quick porting of AOL (Score:1)
Apart from modem dialing, font-encoding issues and its lack of a web browser (since it can't use IE), the core AOL client stuff is pretty much at beta quality, at least as far as x86 Unixes goes. Chat, IM, Rainman/VPD forms, and TCP/IP connectivity all work fine.
So between the development momentum WINE has and a motivation to build the core browser engine of Mozilla to release, AOL would have a pretty easy time making a solid AOL 4.0 client for x86 Linux.
I suspect AOL's next direction is going to be toward DHTML and a phase-out of their proprietary content format and rendering technologies. During the transition, for an AOL 5.0 product phase, they could move the Rainman/VPD support to Java, basically turning thr AOL client into "Mozilla + pluggable chat (sound familiar?) + a JVM (from partner Sun)".
Such a creature could run in whole or in parts, using the same codebase everywhere, on anything from a PDA to a screenphone to a PC.
You'll see.
Analysts (Score:1)
Analysts have almost the same job as reporters, except they sell their findings to companies rather than print them for the world.
When I started work, the analyst was the person who analysed the requirements, proposed solutions and wrote the specification for the programmers to implement. Obviously the meaning has changed :-)
Ideas (Score:3)
I don't even see why Linux is "not an OS for consumer devices" either. Why not? Is there something glaringly obvious I should be aware of? Hmm let's see here - portability, reliability, performance, low cost. Stripped down to it's core functional enviornment it makes the IDEAL consumer device OS.
AOL could basically make "AOL Appliances". With the current pricing of electronic components, I'm sure you could package a cute little computer capable of running the GUI I mentioned above on bare-bones hardware. Linux has the potential to be a breakthrough in the way we use machines. Companies need to "think outside the box".
Companies overextending themselves (Score:1)
Overextension generally leads to poor software, little-to-no customer service, and enormous profits. Companies that stay small and create great software (Symantec and Corel, for example) create wonderful products and get bulldozed.
Linux "too muscular"? (Score:2)
hahah (Score:1)
NaTaS
http://natas.kfa.cx/~civ --My Civ: CTP webpage! Check it out!
Analysts (Score:1)
-------
Netscape Developers use Linux (Score:2)
Of course, I can't reveal anything that I know, but let me make one thing perfectly clear. Netscape developers who are doing AOL projects run Linux. I'm no where near the HQ, and just a lowly field Systems Engineer, trying to make a buck. It's the developers who have helped us get Linux up and running on our corporate laptops.. and those developers are the ones that are working on AOL projects. Don't underestimate AOL.
I really liked "America On Linux", that I saw in this thread!
In my humble opinion.... (Score:1)
But AOL would lend an air of legitimacy to Linux just because there user base is stupid. If the company that caters to the newbie is accepting Linux, that means everyone above the new people are looking at Linux. I would liken it too a cheap PC provider adding something totally new to their PCs. Well, every other company would have to because they don't want the cheapest one having an advantage over them. Instead of a trickling down effect of a new feature, it would come from the bottom up.
I hope that makes sense.
Linux "too muscular"? (Score:1)
except for ttf (Score:1)
"Software is like sex- the best is for free"
has anyone noticed.... (Score:1)
Analysts - "it's kind of hard to completely hide L (Score:1)
-- Colbat Cube --
Jim
Email and "analysts" (Score:1)
Anyway, where do these freeking analysts get their information. "Linux is simply too muscular for that space, and even without the Windows licensing fee, a hardware company would still have to pay the relatively high prices for Intel chips, Jupiter's Card said."
Unlike some operating systems (Win3.1/9x), Linux actually runs on more than one type of processor. I believe The Netwinder uses a StrongARM, LinuxPPC runs on PowerPC, there is a port of Linux to the Palm Pilot, and other non-INTEL platforms, so, although most of the larger distributions, include an intel version, that isn't the only processor supported.
It's EMBEDDED. (Score:1)
My letter to David Card and Stephen Shankland (Score:1)
"That's a really dumb idea" -David Card
David Card at Jupiter Communications (Score:1)
1. "That is a really dumb idea"
- Great.. thanks for telling me. Try something like "Given factor A and factor B it does not appear to be in AOLs best interest to implement this plan" and NOT "Oh.. that's a stupid idea."
2. The whole intel chip thing.
- Excuse me.. doesn't Linux run on ARM's and PPCs and Alphas and m68ks and a bunch of other thins??
Methinks this guy is very good at spreading FUD (and I hate to mudsling him, but Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt all seem to be prevelant in his comments).
I love this quote (Score:1)
How "technically difficult" is it to generate a busy signal?
/* If that's a lawyer on the phone, I'm not here. */
Companies overextending themselves (Score:1)
100% Pure HotJava (Score:1)
Linux is simply to muscular! (Score:1)
..."and even without the Windows licensing fee, a hardware company would still have to pay the relatively high prices for Intel chips, Jupiter's Card said."
What?! They previously link the Empeg [empeg.com] for a Linux based computer that runs on StrongARM chips and now it (Linux) only runs on Intel chips?!
Come on people!
Not only that, but the kernel is now running on the Motorolla Dragonball processor (used in the Palm Pilot lineup).
People need to start checking their facts!
Nothing else is easier than Linux (Score:1)
to install and configure all the software and
device drives. If AOL provides a black box with
everything preinstalled and configured, the only
thing they have to show the user is Netscape.
That interface on Linux has exactly the same look
and feel as the Netscape interface on any other
operating system.
Analysts/letter to D. Card & S. Shankland (Score:2)
So it's more profitable for someone like Card to say something brash like "It's a really dumb idea," a very quotable comment, than to really consider the question.
From the writer's point of view: Shankland needs a source, in a hurry, with a title suggesting industry knowledge. Jupiter and its ilk (Forrester, Gartner, IDG, Meta, etc.) are supposed to be specialists in tech. From experience, I can say they're better informed and more accessible than the Wall Street equity analysts.
Card should know better, and maybe Shankland could have dug a little more under Card's hasty assertion, but that's how the press/analyst machine works.
It will be hard to develop a customer segment. (Score:1)
But then again, the whole thing is very vague, and honestly, bringing the latest buzz words in the news always impresses shareholders.
Analysts (Score:1)
Or, if you're a Wall Street investment firm, you hire someone to watch an industry segment for you -- these people also count as analysts.
Analysts come in good and bad flavors, like anyone else, so you have to put their words in context, like anyone else. Usually they know their stuff, because a lot of them come from the industry. But they're less successful talking about things they're unfamiliar with. In the case of guys like Card, they just might not know much about Linux yet, so they make guesses based on what they've heard, usually kicking around lots of buzzwords in the process.
The best ones, when confronted with unfamiliar areas, will tell the reporter "I don't know - call someone else."
So yeah, the analysts don't sound too sharp in this article, but don't discount them as a group. They're often quite knowledgeable, and they sometimes have advance/inside info from the companies they cover.
- cm
Analysts (Score:1)
inform managers and stock brokers
about what they should do.
Can you ever afford not to check any well
informed source before acting in your role?
Of course, if your source of opinion was
bad then you have made a step in the false direction.
Linux In-House at AOL (Score:2)
PalmOS / PicoBSD? (Score:1)
I am not sure if PicoBSD is operational at this point. Is there a linux parallel?
*twitch* (Score:1)
Not So Great (Score:1)
Re:*twitch* (Score:1)
(thank god for posix rkill
---
MSCE = Marketing Stupid Credit for Everyone