Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 16th Nov 2008 15:02 UTC, submitted by Moulinneuf
One of those traditional "I'm a user of abc, trying out xyz" articles. This time, a Mac user tries Ubuntu 8.10, and concludes: "Linux has come a long way, but it's not totally ready for the mom and pop folks, in my opinion. In the two days of testing, with two occasions it refused to load the graphic drivers and I could not enjoy Compiz. I found a tutorial which taught me how to modify xorg.conf to load XGL (I suspect that messing with the resolution of the second screen might have overwritten the xorg.conf file). Even so, I'd say Ubuntu 8.10 is a fantastic operating system. I guess it may take a while to tweak an Ubuntu installation to perfection, especially for more demanding users. I will recommend Ubuntu to everyone who can't afford a Mac, are not into heavy media content creation or hard-core gaming."
Thread beginning with comment 337415
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Why all this yalk about mainstream adoption?
by Gone fishing on Mon 17th Nov 2008 08:51
in reply to "Why all this yalk about mainstream adoption?"
Member since:2006-02-22
"mainstream adoption" is just a sign that the product is cheap and to simple, really low quality.
Certainly superior technology is no guarantee that a product will win in the market place. My first experience of PCs was Win 3.1 on 386s then a colleague showed me his Acorn which was obviously superior, but Windows is ubiquitous and Acorns are no where.
However, its wrong to suggest MS is dominant because its products are crap. Things are much more complicated than that. It is the case that for a product to survive it must have a viable base (wasn't Acorn dominant in the music industry for a while).
Linux needs a viable mind share which is why the desktop is significant. In Biology there is the competitive exclusion principle, which states that if two organisms compete for the same niche then one will be illiminated from the niche.
I think this is a fair analogy with computers - Linux is undergoing rapid adaptive radiation and occupying new niches in some it will survive in some it wont. How that pans out is hard to predict, taking another Biological analogy.
The technically advanced saber toothed cats have gone, as have the mega herbivores and the dominant mammal on the plant is a gracile, neotenous bipedal ape with out large teeth big muscles but the unlikely adaptation of a large inefficient brain now who could have guessed that?
Ms is dominant because its software successfully occupies niches in the market. The quality of its software is only one variable amongst many, it certainly doesn't occupy those niches because its software is crap.
Edited 2008-11-17 08:55 UTC
RE: Why all this yalk about mainstream adoption?
by Johann Chua on Mon 17th Nov 2008 11:40
in reply to "Why all this yalk about mainstream adoption?"
Member since:2005-07-22
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2008-11-02
Time after time humanity chooses the least good alternative. SACD won over DVD-A, VHS won over betamax, X86 won over Sparc/Mips/PPC and so forth....
"mainstream adoption" is just a sign that the product is cheap and to simple, really low quality.
I want Linux to be a high quality product. Nasa, Pixar, US navy and NSA doesn't use Linux because it is adopted by th large masses. They use it because it is open source, high quality and stable. That is what counts. You want mainstream - buy Vista.