OSNews

That won't work. Imagine a discussion between gradma and the salesman:

"Well mam now you need to choose your operating system"
"What was that son?"
"Oh never mind, Windows will be fine for you."

My bet would be on education. Get them while they're young. Push Linux teaching in school and then when they grow up they'll probably want to use it on their own.

Maybe by then Adobe will release Photoshop for Linux so people can pirate it on Linux too.

what really should be educated, is understanding how to do something is a ui neutral way.

most complaints these days are not about how a replacement app miss some feature or other, but that the ui is different from what apps the user have been using to perform some task until now.

it seems a lot of people would love to use gimp as a photoshop replacement, if the gimp gui was more like photoshop for windows.

Doesn't Photoshop run under wine? I would think that running photoshop would be a requirement before making any release of Wine.

Its a real shame that Wine works so well...maybe that is the reason they don't release a native version of it.

sadly, a os alone does next to nothing. what people really care about is "can this machine do X?" where X some task or other...

and preferably that it can do task X by using app Y, that they got on a CD/DVD-R from a friend, neighbor, relative or similar...

hell, one could say that its the rampant copying of windows that have kept it in use more then any bundling on new machines.

That little strategy was not overlooked by MS when they where still growing. They happily turned a blind eye to home users since they wanted the enterprise and home users ask for the tools the know and use at home (and vis-versa).

Now that they have dominant share, it's all about the anti-piracy BS. No, you can't seel computers without an OS because they'll pirate our products.

My gripe isn't with a company trying to protect its property but MS goes about it the wrong way and changes it's stance depending on what is more applicable for that discussion.

There should be a law that prevents such bundling.

Taking away choice could be considered fascism. Granted bundling limits choice in a way. It makes it simpler for non-technical people.

You go to the store, buy the computer and then choose the operating system. It's extremely simple.

I would argue that it is not that simple at all. Take a look at systems theory in wikipedia. OS use follows complex ecosystemic interactions between business use, what you learned on, govt. support, what is supported in stores, what your use in your family, etc. Not that simple at all. Rather complex. Also changing behavior, human that is, is even more complex. We tend to stick with what we know even if there are better options out there. Not everyone has the motivation to change. One could argue that the majority of Windows users don't care about the OS but really want to run certain games, programs like Office, that they are used to.

Edited 2008-07-07 18:51 UTC

I couldn't disagree more. It doesn't have anything to do with bundling, or availability. Linux is free, that pricing is far more competitive that Microsoft's pricing. There's no public demand for Linux because it is an inferior product for the majority of the home user market. Linux is great in a server room, and on an enterprise level, but for someone who essentially wants something to "just work" Linux fails. There have been many improvements in this area over the years but they have not surpassed Microsoft in general usability for the average consumer.

The big shift in computers in the past year has been from Windows to the Mac due in large part to usability and quality being superior to Windows. Also, positive experiences consumers have had with Apple's consumer devices and the availability of some of their software on the Windows platform has advanced their mindshare with the public. Complaints of Microsoft bundling their OS to a HP machine at Best Buy is a cop-out.

in other words, the ipod halo effect

oh, and lets not forget the amount of help microsoft gets in the "just works" department from the third party suppliers. as microsoft os's are the big dog of the industry, not making sure that ones product work on it can be a economic suicide...

Edited 2008-07-07 19:08 UTC

I couldn't disagree more. It doesn't have anything to do with bundling, or availability. Linux is free, that pricing is far more competitive that Microsoft's pricing. There's no public demand for Linux because it is an inferior product for the majority of the home user market. Linux is great in a server room, and on an enterprise level, but for someone who essentially wants something to "just work" Linux fails. There have been many improvements in this area over the years but they have not surpassed Microsoft in general usability for the average consumer.

The big shift in computers in the past year has been from Windows to the Mac due in large part to usability and quality being superior to Windows. Also, positive experiences consumers have had with Apple's consumer devices and the availability of some of their software on the Windows platform has advanced their mindshare with the public. Complaints of Microsoft bundling their OS to a HP machine at Best Buy is a cop-out. "

Although Linux is free, Windows bundled PC is cheaper than Linux bundled PC. So you can see that actually Windows is more competitive than Linux.

I couldn't disagree more. After the third time I spent a few days rescuing my sister-in-law's Windows computer from its latest breakdown (due mostly to accumulated malware) I suggested to her to let me put the Windows back on the machine as a "Virtual" machine where it could be protected a bit from the internet, and where I could re-instate it simply by replacing one file. She agreed.

So I installed Kubuntu for her, then Virtualbox, and then her copy of Windows under Virtualbox. It ran pretty well and I showed her how it all worked.

A few weeks later I asked her how it was going ... she told me she didn't use the Windows bit any more because the Kubuntu part was far easier to use and it didn't get malware ...

No, it's NOT that "simple". Generally speaking, people want integrated solutions. They don't want to install an operating system -- hell, most people have no idea what an operating system IS or DOES -- and they certainly don't want to think about how it should be configured. They treat their computer as they would any other prepackaged component. They open the box, plug it in, and it's ready for use. Done. They don't want to hunt for drivers, read FAQs, or tweak config files. This issue of CHOICE, that seems so important to many of you, doesn't even register on their collective radar. As far as they're concerned, they made the CHOICE when they purchased the computer. If you want to change anything, you have to change the market relationship where the operating system is pre-installed; namely, at the PC OEM. Which means getting Dell and HP and Toshiba and others to choose Linux. But, seriously, how are you going to convince them to go Linux when they perceive the desktop Linux market to be less than 1% of users? It's a chicken-and-egg problem.

in other words, a netbook with a integrated package of os, office suite and browser would be perfect for most out there?

sounds like apple really is on a winning streak then if they made a imac with iwork and iphone with mobileme as a package deal.

now if the linux community could get together and bang out a similar package around the eeepc and neo freerunner...

but i guess that the recent uproar over switching from GTK to QT on the neo shows that people in that area are more about politics then products...

You are bang on about choice. If you are chasing the mainstream market (god only knows why you would want to do this, but a lot of people do seem quite intent on it), choice is the last thing you want.

Every time someone has to make a choice, you are forcing them to think about something that they don't want to think about. They don't want to have to choose between Distros, DMs, WMs, Text Editors, File Managers, Browsers, etc. This is considered work.

Long as we make the same provision for Macs... you can't buy a machine bundled with OSX. You gotta choose either OSX or Linux when you purchase it.

I wish it were that simple. I've moved back to Mac after putting up with *NIX on my Lenovo laptop. I can tell you, in all due respects, the Linux world (distributions) need a good hard look at their product line up before spitting and cursing at Windows/Microsoft and OEMs.

There is a demand for an alternative, and Mac's are filling that spot - and not all Mac OS X users are clueless drones. Many of us are *NIX people tired of waiting for the blessed silver bullet to arrive and bring the *NIX world kicking and screaming into 2008.

I suggest that every Linux advocate who knows how to programme - purchase a Mac, and study every single inch of the operating system; concentrate on the 'small things' that make using it a nice experience. Live, breath and eat the Mac experience, then go back to using a Linux machine - then tell me that Linux is ready for the masse.

Don't get my wrong, I'm all for bashing a greedy bully such as Microsoft, but to ignore Linux's short comings in a fit of Microsoft-hating rage accomplishes nothing.