Linked by David Adams on Mon 24th Aug 2009 09:21 UTC
Linux A reader asks: Why is Linux still not as user friendly as the two other main OSes with all the people developing for Linux? Is it because it is mainly developed by geeks? My initial feeling when reading this question was that it was kind of a throwaway, kind of a slam in disguise as a genuine question. But the more I thought about it, the more intrigued I felt. There truly are a large amount of resources being dedicated to the development of Linux and its operating system halo (DEs, drivers, apps, etc). Some of these resources are from large companies (IBM, Red Hat, Novell). Why isn't Linux more user-friendly? Is this an inherent limitation with open source software?
Permalink for comment 380278
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Uh, take a look around!
by coeli on Mon 24th Aug 2009 14:52 UTC
Member since:

This is a pretty windoze-centric article. Easy to use? Easy to maintain? There are thousands of corporate and independent troubleshooters out there making a living from the fact that Microsoft's operating system is code-heavy and cumbersome. 'Nuff said on that!
Otherwise, although NOT so elitist as to write a book about how "in the beginning there was the line command" it's pretty lowest-common-denominator to refuse to learn ANYthing about the inner workings of software. Most people don't know anything about how their car's differential works either! But to assume that people need to rate the operability of any operating system on its "user-friendliness" is pretty damn insulting to anyone's intelligence!
Lastly, there are lots of Linux distros that aim for use by the more casual user: Mepis is quite nice (if hooked on KDE!) and Puppy is good for beginners, while gOS is targeted from get-go at the user new to any sort of computer. Articles like this one are sort of a waste of bandwidth!

Reply Score: 2