Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:07 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 297573
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-08-23
Yes, and I think these reasons are valid because they naturally map to reality.
I think this mostly works if you don't yet have computer experience because otherwise you do a "switch" which costs time and effort. Even if many computers come pre-installed with Linux it might not become very successful because it doesn't really improve the user experience compared to Windows. It's just cheaper and I'm not sure if being less than $100 cheaper is enough compensation for having to get used to a new environment and possibly risking interoperability problems. Most people keep their computer for many years, so over the years it might not even be seen as a lot of money (price isn't everything; many people buy expensive iPods instead of cheaper and more feature-loaded alternatives). OTOH, if there were really compelling advantages in switching (e.g., much easier to use; a joy to work with) then the cheaper price is a real bonus and marketing hype would be so much easier.