"The news that Dell will begin making the fast-growing Ubuntu flavor of Linux available on some of its machines should be welcomed by consumers everywhere." Read the rest of the review here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-02
I disagree that this is an "excuse." When I tried it, 64-bit worked very well except for two things: proprietary Windows codecs and Flash. These were *not* available at all. You still haven't made the case that you *needed* 64-bit, by the way. It's not as if you can really do stuff in 64-bit that you can't with the 32-bit version.
Anyway, please tell me how it is the Linux community's responsibility if Windows codecs and Flash, both proprietary software, were only available in 32-bit versions?
There are many areas in which Linux already surpasses Windows, however having a better product doesn't automatically mean a higher market share (Betamax vs. VHS is still one of the better examples of this). There are lots of other forces at play: consumer inertia and brand loyalty, ignorance of alternatives, pure marketing muscle, strongarm tactics on the part of the monopolist (Windows wouldn't be so dominant if MS hadn't threatened OEMs to revoke their Windows contracts if they offered any other OSes on their PCs, etc.).
The important thing is that Linux continually improves, and continues to garner new users as it becomes better. Linux may never displace Windows completely, but that's not the point. The point is to achieve a diverse OS ecosystem, where one isn't discriminated against because of the operating system they choose to run. I think that goal is close at hand, and the Dell/Ubuntu announcement is an important step in that direction.
Edited 2007-05-06 17:02
Member since:2005-06-30
I shouldn't *need* to make my case. It is available, I want to use it, I have a 64-bit processor. All I know is that is what I have installed, and some stuff doesn't work. Anything other than acceptance that it doesn't work, and understanding that the system should be made to work, is an excuse.
As for need, ok, fine, need. Everything is moving to 64-bit eventually. Perhaps I don't feel like re-installing my operating system once this happens. I bought a 64-bit processor in anticipation that this is where the industry would be heading. In less than three years, everyone will have a 64-bit OS. I don't feel like re-installing my OS, since I have the technology today for 64-bit.
Member since:
2005-06-30
That's an excuse though. The answer the Linux community should give should not be "Well, do you *really* need to use that anyway, come on." Rather they should say "Yes, we recognize that is a problem. Let's find a way to fix it, or at least make it better."
More importantly, even Windows has trouble with 64-bit support for third-party software (drivers and apps). This could be one area where Linux could not only equal Windows, but actually surpass it, which Linux will need to do if it wants to gain significant ground. The only reason Firefox took off is because it not only worked as well as Internet Explorer, it actually surpassed it in almost every way (security, functionality, etc).