Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 22nd Jul 2006 21:15 UTC
Linux Toby Richards wrote an opinion article for NewsForge, claiming that for him, Linux won't get mainstream until Evolution - or another capable Outlook-like client - gets optimized and offers 100% compatibility with Exchange. In the comments section of Newsforge readers offered more reasons as to why Linux is not mainstream, offering a view on their needs. My take: While for my personal, home usage of Linux my needs are different, I agree with Toby that companies won't switch their desktops if full Exchange compatibility isn't reached and if Evolution stops being the memory beast it currently is.
Thread beginning with comment 145673
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: more reasons...
by pandronic on Mon 24th Jul 2006 07:31 UTC in reply to "RE: more reasons..."
pandronic
Member since:
2006-05-18

10) That's an issue for Adobe.

Let me just say this: "ha ha". Maybe it's an issue for Adobe to support all the Linux desktop distros out there. I really don't understand why there are so many. To most users they all look the same, except for the wallpaper and the theme.

And while I'm at it ... why is there such a complicated and cryptic directory structure: can't there be dirs like linux/ (for the OS), software/ (installed programs), users/ (documents and settings) instead of usr, bin, etc, var, local, root, lib, mnt, tmp and so on? Why is there a need to use the command line on a daily basis to get anything done? I don't want to compile anything ever, I don't want to use package managers - I just want to click the installer and click away through the wizard, I want my OS easy so it doesn't get into my way and I can get work done.

I like very much the way PC-BSD is going. The PBI installers are so darn easy to use. It's something that linux should learn.

Maybe Linux's problem is that it's a server OS that also aspires to be a desktop OS. It would be so easy to make it user friendly if only the developers could think from Average Joe's perspective and not only from theirs.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: more reasons...
by kaiwai on Mon 24th Jul 2006 08:01 in reply to "RE[2]: more reasons..."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Maybe Linux's problem is that it's a server OS that also aspires to be a desktop OS. It would be so easy to make it user friendly if only the developers could think from Average Joe's perspective and not only from theirs.

Truth be told, it was original designed as a desktop operating system, and linus still aspires for that to be the case; as he said, "Servers have fixed requirements, desktops are alot more interesting".

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: more reasons...
by SpasmaticSeacow on Mon 24th Jul 2006 15:26 in reply to "RE[2]: more reasons..."
SpasmaticSeacow Member since:
2006-02-17

The Linux directory structure is kind of a funny thing to complain about since users rarely deal with anything save for their home directory and it's very similar to Windows in most respects.

Mac OSX actually beat Linux and Windows hands down in this department. Linux tends to beat Windows in consistency (that is to say, Windows and Windows apps tend to distribute different types of files in across more directories than Linux, which is typically more consistent).

Reply Parent Score: 1