"Many people are looking to Ubuntu to be something that it is not: A mass market ready operating system designed to work with the same level of compatibility as Microsoft Windows. Where people get confused is in believing that if Ubuntu, king of the Linux distros, is not able to take the marketplace by storm, then something must be broken with desktop Linux. In this article, I'll explain what it will take to dethrone the mighty Ubuntu and gain a market share so large that it will eclipse anything seen by Ubuntu to date." More here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-10-12
I think the major thing to consider is administration, and for this Mandriva or PCLinux is far and away better. Never have understood Ubuntu mania. What you want is a simple recipe: if its your personal stuff, go to Gnome Control Center. If its system stuff, go to Mandriva control center. This is very easy to teach, and people can get the distinction at once, its quite intuitive. The problem with Debian or Ubuntu for ordinary users is the lack of a clustered system admin centre.
Yes with Debian you get continuous updates. But for most end users the price is too high.
I don't see any reason in features or functionality why Mandriva or PCL are not as suitable for end users as OSX or Windows. Its just a question of learning. They are not perfect, but they are as good as the alternatives and in some ways a lot more integrated because of the ability to get all the software you need from the repositories.
We keep hearing about integration either in the sense of common look and feel or hardware/software coming from the same source. But in fact, integration between system and applications, as in all software included or available for instant installation in exactly the same fashion, that's probably far more important to the end user.
Its just time. We are in the lower slope area of the S curve. But one day, it will take off, and when it does....
Member since:2006-09-10
Member since:2005-07-06
"1) Too much expectations from Joe The Average,"
No! To little expectation Linux geeks.
Let's use an analogy.
You want to get from home to work and back every day. In a good world, if you want to take a different route all you do is take the different route.
In the Linux world you have to download and configure the different route even though YOU know how to drive there already.
How would you like that? Well that's how the average person feels about configing stuff in Linux.
Member since:2005-07-08
Member since:2006-02-04
Member since:2006-06-21
And, if I may:
3. If there's a throne, do Linux distro's want it?
I say this because the article was mixing different concepts. For one, it was mixing community projects like Fedora with commercial projects like Ubuntu.
Where Ubuntu, via Canonical, has clear commercial interests to pursue, Fedora or other community distro does not. There's no point in talking about "marketplace" where they are concerned. There's no advertising, no customers to win over, no marketshare. There are only people who use Fedora and contribute to it because it scratches their itch best.
Some of those people may be concerned about what the average non-geek user wants, but most of them don't care. I'm not saying there's a complete disregard for usability; after all, the geeks are humans too. But I'm saying that there's no drive to actively push one distro in front of another, unless you're a zealot.
Competition between open community distro's is simple and practical: the people use the one they like best. They don't fight with artificial means of promotion because they're not selling anything.
Therefore I submit that the article is null, because it discusses a non-subject. Not to mention it's downright ignorant in places. For example, what do Nautilus supposed shortcomings have to do with Fedora? Gnome is a different project, and Nautilus is a separate team inside it. The fact that the author chastizes Fedora for it just goes to show that he doesn't get it; Fedora is not a commercial company like Microsoft, where a central entity controls features in every component. A free distro is a combination of thousands of ready-made components made by third parties.
Edited 2007-12-08 05:58
Member since:
2007-04-12
1. Too much expectations from Joe The Average, fueled by Ubuntu zealots ("Everything works for me, I am really impressed and my granny even not noticed when I changed OS in her laptop to Ubuntu")
2. Ubuntu grows bigger each release, release cycle is the same - and we have more and more unfinished parts in the OS - "Screen And Graphics" is proud example of that trend in 7.10