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 380379
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Our Church took the Plunge
by raronson on Mon 24th Aug 2009 19:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Our Church took the Plunge"
raronson
Member since:
2009-08-15

While your comments are a little pointed, it's hard to argue against them.

Linux needs to be more userfriendly how? The current GUI paradigm is 30+ years old, and some people will just never get it. Short of interfacing via voice activation which incorporates strong A.I., computing will just be one of those activities meant for smart or otherwise interested people.

A modern distro like Ubuntu would not be any more or less userfriendly than commercial offerings if they enjoyed the same OEM share.

Let's get something straight: most people are forced to user Windows, and a large portion of them don't even know the interface well enough to get around. Windows isn't necessarily userfriendly, it's just familiar due to marketshare, and it still takes a Windows geek to fix co-workers' and grandmas' computers. And these dolts are hailed as geniuses for the effort. Just goes to show what perceptions are worth coming from the average user.

Edited 2009-08-24 19:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2