Red Hat’s chief executive has said that Linux needs to mature further before home users will get a positive experience from the operating system, saying they should choose Windows instead.
Red Hat: Stick with Windows at Home
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
1) make a linux distro
2) tell people not to use it
3) ????
4) profit !
You forgot number 1.5!
1) make a linux distro
1.5) discontinue linux distro
2) tell people not to use it
3) ????
4) profit !
A lot of Linux zealots get Windows users to try out Linux, telling them how easy, fast, stable, wonderful, magical, etc. it is, and they boot up into Mandrake or something for the first time, discovering how hard to use, slow, and buggy the desktop is.
I think 90% of the problem is distributions shipping with tons of applications, instead of developing end user tools to make finding new software and installing it easier. If we could do away with all the 4 CDS of crap that most distributions bundle, then the end user could start with a fast, stable, easy, wonderful, etc. system and then install the 5-10 applications the end user will really need.
The problem isn’t just the software being immature. In fact, that’s not even the bulk of the problem. The real problem is on the distribution side, in my opinion.
They did not realize that Linux is about learning, and if they want ‘progress’ than it will not happen by waiting for 2 or 3 years. The developers need a system of learning and companies in the Linux business should support that system.
Well not with THAT attitude it won’t!
THIS, coming from a company that sells a workstation version!
dangit, i guess i will just have to wipe Linux off my harddrive and put Windows back on…
NOT!!!
Yes, MS Windows is the BEST operating system for the desktop. The truth will set you free and he wanted to clear himself by doing so.
Windows is still the best.
>>companies in the Linux business should support that system.
Shouldn’t see why, to be honest. They’re in business. If it’s not yielding, and if the return is too low, then it’s not their problem, it’s the community’s. RH are free to harvest the profitable areas and push forward the corporate desktop. They neither could nor should support every fiddly aspect of desktop linux.
Linux is choice. For us, for RH. That’s the double-edged sword.
Redhat should not abandon their support of the open source community by saying things like ‘use Windows instead’, and instead of just waiting for Linux to get better, why not support the current and future developers. With Linux there is an opportunity to learn where on MS Windows that opportunity is not available. Redhat has a good repuation and they should support learning, the whole stategy of MS Windows is to take away control from everyone, that is not ‘progress’. If you want to have real progress than support a system of learning in the open source community.
Linux is truelly not ready for the home pc yet. That means john doe, who doesn’t know much about pcs other than you turn it on and you double click to get something done. Linux, you still need to do command line to get some stuff done. Not all linux distros carry the same programs or in the same format (rpm, deb, src). Then people don’t even know what software is out there for linux. Most people like Joe don’t even know that this is such a thing as Open Office, let alone that its a great suite for linux, or that it can run on windows. Its a great server for companies, and work station for geeks. But that is as far as it will go for now.
Fedora people, that is there new desktop OS, just they don’t have to be the ones to maintain it. They are going for big business with their plans, not free desktop distro that made them nothing.
Is it April fools already? This is like the CEO of Ford telling me to buy a Toyota…
*confused*
Yes, MS Windows is the BEST operating system for the desktop. The truth will set you free and he wanted to clear himself by doing so.
I doubt that was his motivations. Besides, Windows isn’t the BEST operating system for the desktop. It’s the best operating system for the desktop for people that don’t know much about computers who don’t want to buy a Mac. It’s the best operating system for most people’s desktop, but not everyones.
Certainly not mine.
“That means john doe, who doesn’t know much about pcs other than you turn it on and you double click to get something done.”
In linux, I single click. RPM. Or if you are running Lindows, as they say, Click’n’Run. Easier than Windows.
“Not all linux distros carry the same programs or in the same format (rpm, deb, src).”
So? The user will only use 1 distro.
“Then people don’t even know what software is out there for linux.”
Which means they will stick with what their distro provides. In the case of something like Lindows, whatever is in the click’n’run app.
I am not saying that all Linux distro’s beat out Windows. But there are those that do.
Hey, forgot fedora.redhat.com? They still have a more open desktop distro!
(Nothing I’ve tried since I’m happy with Gentoo, but it might be something for new ppl)
“This is like the CEO of Ford telling me to buy a Toyota… ”
Actually, it’s more like the CEO of Peterbilt Trucks telling me to stick with my Toyota as it’s probably more suited to my needs. I agree with him.
well it is a story at ZDNet and ZDNet is a famous M$FT sycophant, so it could be some well placed FUD, lets just wait & see…
not to be rude, but a lot of people have been getting on my nerves with the redhat bashing…
So he said that the general public should stick with windows *for now*. He didn’t say forever. He realizes that there is a ways to go to make a completely friendly version for newbies.
And for those saying redhat is quitting the desktop search… they aren’t! Fedora is the same thing as the downloadable redhat! Same codebase and everything. Redhat is backing it. The only difference is redhat is allowing the linux community to become more involved in the development.
Redhat is a linux company that has actually made a profit. Now, we can’t have that can we? A company making money. There is nothing wrong with that. News flash: If you don’t make money, you go out of business! Redhat has to try to make a profit, they owe it to all the investors.
I’ve stuck with redhat for quite a while, and I will use fedora from now on. Redhat has contributed a lot to the open source community, and I’m not going to bash them because they are changing their focus to the big businesses, where they can make money.
If they were really just in it for the money, they wouldn’t put any effort towards the fedora project, they would just drop it completely. I’d hate to see where the linux world would be without the hard work of Redhat.
If you don’t believe that Linux is ready for the desktop than you must not be supporting the efforts of the open source programmers that are trying to make Linux a reality on the desktop, people like Linux Torvalds.
I have not given up on Redhat even if they have given up on us but I think that they can not find a strategy if they are going to recommend Windows. They don’t realize that Linux is about learning. If they did than they would not give up on all of the people all over the world who would seek the opportunity to learn. One of the business strategies would be through the maintenance of a system and a knowledge base as well as a distribution that encourages individual progress rather than MS Windows slavery. The enterprises out there would benefit not from a server, but from a highly skilled workforce and from their leadership.
Yes, MS Windows is the BEST operating system for the desktop. The truth will set you free and he wanted to clear himself by doing so.
Windows is still the best.
Opinionated? Nah! <sarcasm> Too bad I prefer Mac.
I’m really sick of this “Linux” isn’t ready crap, even if it comes from a CEO.
What are the goals of “Linux?” Who decided that Linux exists to beat Windows? The only distribution that exists to be a Windows replacement for average Windows users is Lindows. No one else is trying to beat Windows in the “easy for newcomers” game.
I don’t use Windows, but I would never ask an average Joe to learn Linux. I would probably suggest a Mac instead of a PC, though.
Why don’t people understand this? You can’t make a statement that “Linux” isn’t “ready” for “prime time,” when most developers are just trying to make their own lives better, not make Linux easier for the unwashed masses.
To all those Linux zealots saying that Linux is just as easy as Windows, it isn’t. But so what? I enjoy using my system, and it’s better for me.
LOL just had to get that out of the way.Anyway yes windows is the eazyest,but the best really depends on who you are.Linux is kinda werid,one the one hand if your new to computers and just want to surf the web and type a word doc it will be as eazy as windows,but if you want to add new apps or config your computer it is harder.The tweakablety of the os far surpasses windows.
Red Hat just admitted plainly that supporting home users is no longer profitable, or political.
The corporate market is much more tightly defined. I imagine they don’t expect folks licensing “Red Hat Enterprise Server” to try and plug their digital camera, or MP3 player into it, and will probably tell someone calling that it’s simply not supported.
Red Hat has learned that end user support of commodity hardware is vastly expensive. They created Fedora specifically so they can abandon this segment.
They may come back later with a “Corporate Desktop” that puts the support burden on the corporate IT department with a few select “contacts” that can call Red Hat for help.
But, home user is dead in their eye. By dropping this segment, they discourage vendors from supporting it. Vendors don’t want folks upgrading kernels once a week, they want solid “stable” platforms, release cycles with long enough intervals where they can get a spec from the OS vendor, write to that spec, test against it, test against the final the OS vendor is going to ship and then be comfortable that whenever someone calls and says “We’re using OS Q v99.6”, they can know they’ve actually seen and tested “OS Q v99.6” rather than having to play daily catch and become a forensic technologist to try and debug a users system.
Red Hat tried to provide that, but found that it simply wasn’t profitable for them.
Perhaps the Lindows type crowd can drive this segment of stabilizing the shrink wrap Linux market for users.
If you don’t believe that Linux is ready for the desktop than you must not be supporting the efforts of the open source programmers that are trying to make Linux a reality on the desktop, people like Linux Torvalds.
Windows isn’t juts a desktop operating system. It’s a desktop operating system designed to suit the needs non-computer users. Linux is a great desktop operating system designed to suit the needs of more advanced computer users.
I won’t use a Linux distribution geared towards novices; it doesn’t suit my needs. Likewise, the unwashed masses don’t want to use a Linux system that doesn’t cater to their ignorance of computer systems.
“Yes, MS Windows is the BEST operating system for the desktop. The truth will set you free and he wanted to clear himself by doing so.
Windows is still the best.”
Don’t you mean OS X?
n linux, I single click. RPM. Or if you are running Lindows, as they say, Click’n’Run. Easier than Windows.
Care to show me where in the Lindows Click’n’Run warehouse I can get Cubase? Or Reason? How about Avid? QuarkXPress?
And while I’m on it, can anyone point me to non-Windows software to access Campbell dataloggers? The only applications available to do so are Windows-only: http://www.campbellsci.ca/CampbellScientific/Catalogue/LoggerNet.ht…
The whole point the whole linux community missed is, the average ‘home user’ does not care about changing themes, icons ect. What they want is to sit down, check their email, point and click and be done. As far as changing anything, they do not want to. I have heard it before, if it is not broken then why mess with it.
Redhat has come to the conclusion that ‘linux’ on the desktop is NO where ready for home use. They stated to continue to use Windows on the desktop. The Corporations agree and run Windows 2000 Pro/XP Pro, but this will help MS make their operating systems so far advanced, linux will be long bad memory.
I am glad to see the article, my point has been proven.
it’s more like the CEO of Peterbilt Trucks telling me to stick with my Toyota as it’s probably more suited to my needs
truly great analogy mate
“They did not realize that Linux is about learning, and if they want ‘progress’ than it will not happen by waiting for 2 or 3 years. The developers need a system of learning and companies in the Linux business should support that system.”
Most people don’t want OS that is “about learning.” They just want to get things done. For most that means going online, checking e-mail, and maybe playing with photos from their digital camera. What you are suggesting is a utopian ideal of everyone knowing computers well and wanting to learn more about them. Most people don’t even know what an OS really is. I hear lots of people mixing up Office and Windows and think they are talking about the same product. Additionally there is the question I hear frequently, “Linux…who is the manufacturer of that.” People don’t want OS that is “about learning.” They just want to get things done.
Those aren’t applications that average users will ever install. Those are professional level applications.
Can you show me the software to distribute highly complex 3d rendering across multiple Windows machines? No? Ha! Linux *must* be better.
Don’t you see this is stupid? One of the problems with the name “Linux” is that it implies that there is one group of people deciding where Linux should go. There is no “Manifest Destiny” for Linux to conquer the desktops of average joes.
Windows isn’t a better operating system from a technical standpoint. It is the only choice for people who lack the money for a Mac, the technical skills for Unix, or who need it to run applications.
People that claim Windows is better because of the Applications don’t ever say Windows runs those applications particularly better than any other os could, either.
I am glad to see the article, my point has been proven.
I can’t think of one possible point this article “proves.”
Yes, MS Windows is the BEST operating system for the desktop. The truth will set you free and he wanted to clear himself by doing so.
Windows is still the best.
Just curious, what facts are you using to arrive at that conclusion? All of your posts contain a near erotic infatuation for Windows and endless promulgations of plump praise regarding its superiority, but not once have you entertained a logical or technical reason why it deserves your complete and unwavering devotion.
OSX on the desktop and LINUX/Novell as a server! NICE!
Windows isn’t a better operating system from a technical standpoint. It is the only choice for people who lack the money for a Mac, the technical skills for Unix, or who need it to run applications.
Or to put it another way, Windows is the only choice for people who see their computers as tools rather than toys.
People that claim Windows is better because of the Applications don’t ever say Windows runs those applications particularly better than any other os could, either.
The claim isn’t that Windows is “better”, it’s simply that I need Application X and Application X only runs on Windows, therefore I need Windows. Such an example of this is the LoggerNet software I linked which we use to pull data from our network of Campbell dataloggers, which is unavailable for any platform besides Windows: http://www.campbellsci.ca/CampbellScientific/Catalogue/LoggerNet.ht…
You can now stop replying to flame baiters. By replying, you just make them coming back.
Supporting Linux also means supporting the community because the ideas generate new markets for profit. The open source community would be able to lead if it had support such as better learning resources. There is no future for Linux at any time if it can not lead, so you have to nurture the developers, encourage them to innovate, to drive the sale of new technologies, you can not stand back and say that we’ll leave them alone for a few years than ‘the will be ready’. In order to ever be ready you have to lead.
Redhat does not have any strategy, they made a serious mistake.
Someone without computer experience who learns GNU/Linux or *BSD directly isn’t necessarily learning it in a better or less good way. I think using an OS which adores standards, which MS does not, is a Good Thing. I also think CLI experience is important for _any_ computer user.
How do you think people learned computers when there was DOS, but not much GUI?
We have these computer users who are using GNU/Linux as their OS, with easyness, because it has become very simple in the past few years. A lot of user-friendly distributions have popped up. Live CD’s have popped up. CLI has become an option instead of required. Then RedHat drops by, who just _dropped_ home users with moving to Fedora, and shoot their concurrents in their foot with this ridiculous interview…
I welcome every non-lazy, new computer user to start with a free *NIX. The lazy people can go to OSX or Windows and play the parasite over there. Stay stupid, learn nothing about your computer – and don’t whine when it’s FUBARed.
This just shows that RedHat has been forced to realize that they cannot compete on the desktop right now. There are too many limits that are beyond a company like RedHat to fix. Microsoft is luck that they got onto the desktop early and was able to obtain the both hardware and software support for Windows. Without both of these, no other OS will be able to compete on the desktop. Let me expand on this.
Hardware support is vital. An OS is basically software that allows the user and other software to use the hardware. All new commercially available x86 hardware can run on Windows XP. You can not say the same thing about Linux. The support that does exist for Linux is mostly community based. That’s fine, but the average user needs the hardware vendor’s support. They want someone that can be held accountable. Picking hardware based on your OS and not on the merits of the hardware is not acceptable.
When I say software support, I only refer to support from major software developers. They provide a distribution method is better suited for the mainstream user. The average user wants to buy a product, have a tangible representation of it and wants some one to be held responsible if it ends up not suiting the user. OSS can not provide this. For the record, I am not saying that OSS is of less quality. All I say is the distribution channel for OSS does not meet the needs of the average user. OSS can only be gotten (on the most part) through the Internet or from a CD mailed out of someone’s house. Neither are acceptable means. Imagine buying your groceries through the Internet or getting farmers to mail you vegetables. It just does not work for most people.
> I think 90% of the problem is distributions shipping with tons of applications, instead of developing end user tools to make finding new software and installing it easier. If we could do away with all the 4 CDS of crap that most distributions bundle, then the end user could start with a fast, stable, easy, wonderful, etc. system and then install the 5-10 applications the end user will really need.
Agreed. I feel distros should provide 1 or 2 of each type of software and allow the user to install more if wanted. Much like Windows does
> This is like the CEO of Ford telling me to buy a Toyota…
Actually, it is like Ford stops making trucks, and says that Toyota actually has better trucks.
> If you don’t believe that Linux is ready for the desktop than you must not be supporting the efforts of the open source programmers that are trying to make Linux a reality on the desktop, people like Linux Torvalds.
I feel these people do a wonderful job. Unfortunately, what they do is just not suitable for most people.
> I have not given up on Redhat even if they have given up on us but I think that they can not find a strategy if they are going to recommend Windows. They don’t realize that Linux is about learning. If they did than they would not give up on all of the people all over the world who would seek the opportunity to learn.
Learning can only get you so far in a business environment. Learning does not get you the support from others that you need and does not provide you with a quality distribution channel.
> One of the business strategies would be through the maintenance of a system and a knowledge base as well as a distribution that encourages individual progress rather than MS Windows slavery. The enterprises out there would benefit not from a server, but from a highly skilled workforce and from their leadership.
This kind of business strategy would never work on the desktop.
> To all those Linux zealots saying that Linux is just as easy as Windows, it isn’t. But so what? I enjoy using my system, and it’s better for me.
You got it right. Linux is fine for what it. Linux zealots should not get on their high horse and bash everything that Microsoft does and chastise others for not using Linux.
>> THIS, coming from a company that sells a workstation version!
Ah-hem. Workstation != Desktop.
Someone new to computers, using it to send and recieve e-mail, is using a DESKTOP. They already HAVE Windows on their computer, and have NO NEED to switch to another OS, or even know what an OS is!
A Workstation, on the other hand, is more likely to be used by one working with several high-end applications. A workstation user cares a little more about keeping a computer working well, and what OS it runs.
I’m sorry, but Linux is an EXCELLENT workstation, as long as you can run all the apps you want on it.
Windows is by no means perfect, BUT… it works, and really, until more hardware manufacturers (SiS, VIA, are you listening?) start supporting Linux, it won’t have a place on very many desktops, because that 90-year old is not going to re-compile his kernel (as if he knows what any of these words mean) so that he can get faster results out of his video card. (I, on the other hand, do.)
Or to put it another way, Windows is the only choice for people who see their computers as tools rather than toys.
That is simply not true. If I need a computer to check important email, type up documents, use the web for research, etc., then Linux works fine as a tool. Hence, Windows is not *the* only choice for people who see their computers as tools; the reality is that the choices available depend on the needs of the user.
The claim isn’t that Windows is “better”, it’s simply that I need Application X and Application X only runs on Windows, therefore I need Windows.
True, but that fact is not in dispute. I’m saying that no one person or group defines the “goal” of Linux as a whole. Therefore, to assume that Linux exists to replace Windows is a logical fallacy.
Most people who work on desktop Linux are trying to make it a suitable desktop for more advanced computer users anyways. This doesn’t mean it’s for only hobbyists, merely that most Linux developers aren’t catering to complete computer ameteurs. Where do you get Linux not being a good tool as a consequence of that?
You have to be completely clueless to think that recompiling your kernel will give you appreciable performance gains with your video card.
Linux folks make me laugh!
He basically says:
1. for a business desktop, RH is more than ready. There is nothing for which a typical office worker needs a computer that Linux can’t already do well.
2. the “home user” is both
a. more likely to change their hardware, potentially choosing from a vast variety of obscure devices that probably have Windows-only drivers (written by the hardware manufacturer, not by MS)
b. less likely to be able to figure out or understand what went wrong if they can’t get some gadget to work.
VIA? VIA seems opensource friendly.
Support for the VIA CPU with AES in OpenBSD 3.4:
http://www.deadly.org/article.php3?sid=20031014162857
http://fedora.redhat.com
It’s awesome, the first Stable release will be in a couple of weeks.
I like it. It’s some refereshing honesty.
Hopefully the Linux zealot will pay attention. Instead of saying “Linux is ready for the desktop” and then having a tantrum when someone tells them it isn’t ready for the desktop, they need to accept the fact that Linux really isn’t ready for the desktop. And then they need to say “What can we do to make it ready for the desktop?”
Linux could be a valid desktop OS. There are many who argue that an OS with a UNIX base can never be made simple enough for the average desktop user. Apple proved that idea to be wrong. So Linux can be a valid desktop OS for the masses. But it isn’t there yet. And Linux zealots need to focus on what needs to be done to get it there.
Actually, it DOES, if you have a SiS630 video card which is compiled wrongly in almost every Linux kernel made available in Linux distributions. There are very specific options which need to be selected and de-selected for optimum performance. (I should know, I’ve done correct re-compiles and done the correct changes to XF86Config file, and voila, better X performance. Try out a different kernel, or a distro default kernel, w/ the same system setup, and much slower X performance.)
> You have to be completely clueless to think that recompiling your kernel will give you appreciable performance gains with your video card.
That would be true if the video card were the only thing on the computer. Other things:
– Efficiency of system scheduler
– Efficiency of io scheduler
– Efficiency of network stack
For some reason at work we find that compiling our own kernels minus all the default redhat kernel kruft leads to better performing, snapier systems in general. Not to mention that even though redhat does test their kernels, they’re still far more unstable than most of the release kernels.
Yes, MS Windows is the BEST operating system for the desktop.
That’s not quite what he said, right? He was talking about the Home desktop. In the next sentence, he said that RedHat Linux was more than ready for the corporate desktop.
Since you seem to agree with him, I guess that means that you also agree that Linux is a better choice for the corporate desktop than Windows is? (No need to answer, I know you’re just trolling…)
Personally, I don’t agree with him. I think Linux is ready for some Home desktops. It depends on what you need, exactly.
was i the only one who broke into a scream of terror when i looked at this month’s copy of pc world magazine? there, staring out from a free cd on the cover was the program from hell, and all you needed to do to let it take over your pc was double click a couple of times and kiss goodbye to your sanity
this nasty piece of digital scurf in question is known as linux and there are plenty of sad types who will tell you it is the future of personal computing. do not fall for this bizarre line in geek thinking.
even pc world magazine, after making it so easy to enter the twilight zone without a return ticket, saw fit to enter a few caveats in the fine print. linux, it said, came with a serious health warning. don’t even think about it, the magazine said, unless you are technically proficient and have backed up all your pc files beforehand.
yes, but we know what the average pc user is like. he never reads the words, he just slings in the cd, clicks the install icon, and hopes for the best. and if you are now looking at a blank screen with a few impenetrable commands where you once had a working pc, then all i can say is “you have only yourself to blame”
linux, for the unitiated, is a version of that old computer donkey known as unix. if you need to run big computer unix tasks then it is, i am told, not a bad solution at all. equally, if you believe there is no point in doing easily something you can achieve the long way round, it is doubtless the way to go.
imagine a tougher version of ms-dos where the commands are even harder to memorize and less forgiving of errors and you are starting to get there. and if you want to cheat a little, you can put on a pseudo-graphical front end and bingo you might just manage to turn a modern windows capable pc into a passable imitation of windows 3.1 circa 1992.
however, to read some publications, you might think that microsoft’s bill gates is quivering in his boots at the idea that linux will do what ibm and apple never managed to achive: kick windows off the everyday desktop. really? well, no. linux is flavor of the month with the geek community for two reasons: it’s free, and it’s not from microsoft.
for a certain breed of bug-eyed computer user, that really is all you need. trivial details such as usability, the lack of decent everyday software, and the plain fact that, when things go wrong, you are on your own are not setbacks to linux addicts. these are the very reasons why they like the wretched thing: because it sets them apart from the mainstream of tedious, ordinary users who just use pcs to get on with the job.
personal computers seem to have attracted some strange and obsessive people along the way to becoming common or garden information tools. if linux hadn’t been invented by a finnish student a few years back, something equally strange and esoteric would have appeared to take its place.
computer geeks despise simple, common standards. gates is the object of their hate simply because he won the operating system war. if apple or ibm had come out on top, the people no buzzing so excitedly around linux would have treated them to the hate mail they reserve for gates today.
fads like linux are diversionary characters in a digital freak show on the sidelines of modern information technology. finding them on the cover disks of mainstream magazines says more about the novelty value of computer journalism than the real issues facing those trying to make tommorrow’s pcs a sight better than the ones we use today.
the idea that great developments in personal computing will be invented in some dismal student bedroom in helsinki might make nice bedtime reading for people dwho dream in hexadecimal, but if all you want is a computer that you can aspire to understand, chuck that blasted redhat cd in the trash right now.
> Windows isn’t juts a desktop operating system. It’s a desktop operating system designed to suit the needs non-computer users. Linux is a great desktop operating system designed to suit the needs of more advanced computer users.
Windows is designed for the average desktop user (as you said). I still contend that Linux is still not well designed for the advanced user, but only because of the lacking hardware support.
> Those aren’t applications that average users will ever install. Those are professional level applications.
But a user should be able to install them if they want.
> Can you show me the software to distribute highly complex 3d rendering across multiple Windows machines? No? Ha! Linux *must* be better.
Actually, yes I can: http://www.platform.com/services/support/services/platforms5.1.asp
They are grid software that works on Windows along with Linux and Unix, etc.
> Don’t you see this is stupid? One of the problems with the name “Linux” is that it implies that there is one group of people deciding where Linux should go. There is no “Manifest Destiny” for Linux to conquer the desktops of average joes.
And this is a huge reason why it may never conquer the desktop.
> Windows isn’t a better operating system from a technical standpoint. It is the only choice for people who lack the money for a Mac, the technical skills for Unix, or who need it to run applications.
Or just want to use their computer. This means, get and use any hardware they want or run any software they want.
> People that claim Windows is better because of the Applications don’t ever say Windows runs those applications particularly better than any other os could, either.
But people do say there is some high quality software that is only available on Windows.
“Personally, I don’t agree with him. I think Linux is ready for some Home desktops. It depends on what you need, exactly.”
You may not agree with him, but you also have to admit he made some valid points. Such as the lack of out of the box support for printers and such that I might buy. If I walk into Best Buy and buy a printer, it’s not going to come with drivers for Linux.
I think he is right. Linux needs a couple more years to mature before it is a viable alternative to Windows for the average desktop users.
The whole point the whole linux community missed is, the average ‘home user’ does not care about changing themes, icons ect.
Uh, yes they do. Most home users like to customize the appearance of their desktop. That’s why Windows software such as WindowBlinds is so popular. Real people (not MS fanboys like you) like to customize (or “personalize”, which is the marketing term) their environments.
What they want is to sit down, check their email, point and click and be done.
Well, then, Linux is perfect for them since it can do all that flawlessly. All they have to do is buy a Lindows computer and they’ll be able to do this and more, as well as install tons of free software with a single click!
Stop feeding the TROLLS!!!!
Do you not have better things to do
with your time? Childishness is
getting us nowhere.
Every OS has +/- .
“Redhat does not have any strategy, they made a serious mistake.”
Really? Seems like they just tightened their strategy by focusing their efforts on what they were really making money on: the enterprise. They were wasting resources on consumer versions of RedHat. Why should they continue to dump lots of resources into a product that isn’t selling? They have the Fedora project which they are hosting and that they contribute to, but it not nearly the drain on resources that it was. Meanwhile they can let the Linux community continue development while the concept of desktop Linux comes to maturity. Essentially RedHat is waiting for a time down the road to start pushing desktop Linux…but now isn’t the time and it is likely that preaching to the masses to switch to Linux will result in a lot of people trying it, getting pissed that it isn’t what they expected, switch back to Windows, and never give Linux another thought except to bad mouth it to anybody who might be considering giving it a try.
“Consumers want USB drivers and digital camera support; but for the enterprise desktop, that is a little bit different–that area is ripe,”
Where has he been living ? – Is he trying to pretend that Linux does not now support these ? Ever heard of gPhoto ?
Care to show me where in the Lindows Click’n’Run warehouse I can get Cubase? Or Reason? How about Avid? QuarkXPress?
None of these are “Home Desktop” applications. (Gee, I should have figured out that such an article would draw the anti-Linux zealots like flies to a honeypot.)
“even pc world magazine, after making it so easy to enter the twilight zone without a return ticket, saw fit to enter a few caveats in the fine print. linux, it said, came with a serious health warning. don’t even think about it, the magazine said, unless you are technically proficient and have backed up all your pc files beforehand.”
Then PC World Magazine have not found out what a Live CD actually is.
“Really? Seems like they just tightened their strategy by focusing their efforts on what they were really making money on: the enterprise. They were wasting resources on consumer versions of RedHat.”
Maybe. But this kind of thinking is what killed OS/2. IBM basically told home users “We don’t care about you”, which ultimately meant that more and more desktops went to Windows, both at home and in the workplace, and eventually servers followed.
There is validity to the argument that people want a standardized platform at home, at work, etc. Especially if they work out of their home.
I agree with what he is saying though, you have to consider that the people on the site including me are not considered the norm. We are a very small group of people. In terms of linux, yes it may be a better thing for us becuase of the mere fact that we like to ticker and customize and it, but for the “general public” Windows is still the way to go. It may not be the best but it works. Here at my company since they have upgraded to XP we have rarely had any problems or nearly the amount of problem we had before. It just works. People come in type their stuff do some office work do there emails and come home, for that purpose Windows still works. XP is stable enough and the compatiblity is there.
I use linux at home, and I love it, the fact that Windows does what the general population needs the desktop is not where they can compete and the enterprise is where they need to make some more ground for there bottom line.
People like my dad, my grandma, etc Windows XP works and I think that the statments made by Red Hat is targeted towards those people. No doubt linux is a great OS when it comes to enterprise computing, but it still has a long way to go before it can even match the ease of use of Windows, and not to mention MACOSX. If they came out with another Windows ME instead of XP, that would have been a nail in the Windows empire, but XP was a worthy upgrade and did improve on alot of things.
I read somewhere that Sony with the release of XP has reduced there tech support calls down by 45 percent. If they replaced it with Linux I can bet you the calls will triple.
Now if every famliy had someone like one of us to do the setup and trouble shooting that’s a different story, but teh reality is most people don’t and in the end Windows just works, and thats the thing linux has to overcome, the out of box experience before it can become a viable remember the the “general public” not the people on OSnews or Slashdot.
The average user wants to buy a product, have a tangible representation of it and wants some one to be held responsible if it ends up not suiting the user. OSS can not provide this.
Wrong. You can buy support as well as hard media copies for almost any piece of free software. I can think of no greater honor to a free software developer than to be contracted for support for his product.
All new commercially available x86 hardware can run on Windows XP. You can not say the same thing about Linux
True, but that fact is not in dispute. Enough hardware is supported that Linux is a viable alternative for those who decide to use it, however.
OSS can only be gotten (on the most part) through the Internet or from a CD mailed out of someone’s house. Neither are acceptable means.[i]
I actually agree that while users might not want the home-brewn CD, many open source projects such as Mozilla offer their own CDS as a way users can contribute to the project, and get something in return. Plus users really don’t mind getting software from the internet. At all.
[i]Agreed. I feel distros should provide 1 or 2 of each type of software and allow the user to install more if wanted. Much like Windows does
I believe distributions should install the bare essentials, and provide end user tools that connect to large software repositories and thereby faculitate finding and installing software to the point where anyone can do it on their own. Such a solution also doesn’t sacrifice anything for the more advanced users as well.
I feel these people do a wonderful job. Unfortunately, what they do is just not suitable for most people.
Agreed. But it doesn’t have to be. Again, no one person or group of people has decided that Linux as a whole needs to work to take over Windows. We’re just trying to suit our needs
So, I disagree with the idea that Linux is “ready” for end users, but I also dislike comments that say Linux “isn’t.” If I wanted to use Windows, I’d use Windows
Actually, it is like Ford stops making trucks, and says that Toyota actually has better trucks.
No it’s not. Red Hat on more than one occasion (before last week) made public statemnts to the effect that they were trying to build a managed, corporate desktop, and not a home desktop. In essence, Ford wasn’t competing with Toyota in the first place, but a bunch of Ford zealots, and a bunch of Toyota zealots, thought they were, so that they could have pointless arguments. I am definately not innocent here, either
I feel these people do a wonderful job. Unfortunately, what they do is just not suitable for most people.
True, but they aren’t developing for non-computer literate types, are they? It is the responsibility of distributions that want to be as easy to use as windows to be suitable for most people.
This kind of business strategy would never work on the desktop.
I couldn’t even figure out what the business strategy of the original poster was.
You got it right. Linux is fine for what it. Linux zealots should not get on their high horse and bash everything that Microsoft does and chastise others for not using Linux.
Very true. But this comment section is saturated with people saying “See! Linux ain’t ready yet!” Some people on your end need to get off of their high horses and realize that perhaps we don’t even want to fit your definition of “ready.” I know I sure as hell don’t.
“Care to show me where in the Lindows Click’n’Run warehouse I can get Cubase? Or Reason? How about Avid? QuarkXPress?
None of these are “Home Desktop” applications. (Gee, I should have figured out that such an article would draw the anti-Linux zealots like flies to a honeypot.)”
Hehe, true. This is more ”advanced” stuff and Lindows != Linux nor GNU/Linux. But, free software (GNU/Linux, *BSD) can do this, too. There’s an opensource demoscene, so regarding Cubase and Reason i see little problem. Check out /usr/ports/media* on a Gentoo box, the archive is biiiig. The advantage is that these are free software programs; the source is open. New free software OSes (say, OpenBeOS) can easily adopt portable programs. There’s also multiple free software CAD packets. Some proprietary stuff for GNU/Linux, too. The other programs, i never heard of.
Example of free software programs which got ported to various other OSes: Bochs, GIMP, Mozilla.
[i]If I walk into Best Buy and buy a printer, it’s not going to come with drivers for Linux. [i]
Yes but if for example you have a recent copy of Mandrake you will find it will have all the drivers you need on the system. You just install it with automatic hardware detection from the the graphical Control Centre with a couple of clicks and it just works. Thats what happened when I bought my last printer (I remember spending days trying to get my printer working with RH 6.0 times have changed Red Hat).
OK you may have to avoid some Cannon printers and be a bit leary of the Lexmark injets that come with Linux binary drivers. But virtually any HP or Epson printer just works.
Subj.
Most home users of Linux use it because they are sick of using all that Windows expletive deleted stuff at work.
Nuff said.
Linux will never be ready for the desktop if the developers are not supported because in order to be successful you have to be the leader. New technology results from ideas that are developed and nurtured, than a company comes along and sells that idea. Microsoft offering are successful because they are in a position to lead, not because they are the best quality or else the only true solution.
It is all about learning when you use Linux, and that is the most important thing of all because it is through understanding that, that you will make progress as a leader not as the one playing catch up.
> Windows is designed for the average desktop user (as you said). I still contend that Linux is still not well designed for the advanced user, but only because of the lacking hardware support.
Advanced users want to be able to tailor their system to their needs. Linux wins at this at the software level. Plus advanced users are going to be able to pick hardware that works in Linux, so Linux doesn’t exactly “lose” at the hardware level, at least not to the extent that Windows loses at the software level (from the standpoint of configurability, not available software).
> But a user should be able to install them if they want.
Many linux-bashers make the claim that most computer users just want to browse the web, check mail, etc. Then if you tell them that most modern Linux distributions do all of that fine out of the box, then the argument tends to change into “well Linux can’t run app x, so Linux sucks.”
> Actually, yes I can: http://www.platform.com/services/support/services/platforms5.1.asp
They are grid software that works on Windows along with Linux and Unix, etc.
Cool. But I really was only pretending to make a point with that..I was mocking the silly logic behind “this software can do x, but it only exists on platform y. Hence, platform y is better than platform z.” There still exists software in Linux for which functionality is absent on Windows. It’s slim pickings, but the existence of such software doesn’t “prove” that Linux is better.
For example, can I tunnel Remote Assistance through ssh like I can X? Remote Assistance is good example of Windows using large applications to emulate features present in Unix equivalents simply by better design. The saving user preferences program in Windows XP is another such example of requiring a whole end user application to do what comes naturally to Unix, thanks to more robust design philosophy.
Man, I hope that doesn’t start a fight
> And this is a huge reason why it may never conquer the desktop.
It will conquer some desktops, but certainly not all, or even most. But whatever. I and most Linux users don’t really care, because there are enough talented people developing for this platform that we can be productive, and do things the way we want.
> Or just want to use their computer. This means, get and use any hardware they want or run any software they want.
Again, what do you thnk my response to that would be?
> But people do say there is some high quality software that is only available on Windows.
And they are right. There is no piece of software that is used by 95% of the Windows user base that doesn’t exist in Linux, however.
1) Claim Microsoft and their product Windows is no good. Short way: say they’re nazi’s. Hard way: quote Halloween documents, quote patent problems, quote stability issues in 9x, quote the fact e-mail virusses exist because of Outlook, quote there are 30 vulnerabilities in MSIE. Say you want to help them with learning a new OS. Don’t forget to whine about Freedom. Eventually show the power of a Free LiveCD.
2) Help them backup their personal cruft to floppies, cd’s. Help them to convert .doc and .html files to Free standards, can be done on Windows and on the GNU/Linux distribution.
3) Install a Free (speech) OS. First DIY, then let them do it and watch over their shoulders.
4) Help them learning how to install new software and keeping their box up2date. This is easy. Eventually help some with some basic CLI commands like ”startx” and ”ls”.
5) Demonstrate the power of easy killer-apps like Mozilla, GIMP, Konqueror, KDE, GNOME, Webmin, Evolution.
* Time needed: An afternoon fits well.
* Material needed: Floppy, a computer with non-flakey hardware, live CD or Linux distro CD
* Material recommended: an internet connection, a cd burner.
This worked with various friends and with my parents (:
This is more ”advanced” stuff and Lindows != Linux nor GNU/Linux. But, free software (GNU/Linux, *BSD) can do this, too. There’s an opensource demoscene, so regarding Cubase and Reason i see little problem. Check out /usr/ports/media* on a Gentoo box, the archive is biiiig.
This goes along the same lines as Linux lovers going, “Oh, Dreamweaver? Yeah, we have HTML editors no problem.” Some people will never understand that there is a huge difference between equivalents and functional equivalents.
“Yes but if for example you have a recent copy of Mandrake you will find it will have all the drivers you need on the system.”
Sure. But those drivers are usually generic drivers that support a wide range of similar printers, and thus do not support all of the features of most printers.
Example: I can install the Linux driver for my Epson inkjet. But that Linux driver won’t tell me how much ink I have left like the Windows Epson software will. It also makes it much more difficult to switch between color and grayscale, and switch quality levels (300, 600, 1200 dpi, etc.)
The community should recongnize it’s people better, and create insentive to learn. I like the idea of a ranking system. Anyway, Red hat has to support the developer community, one way to do that is to provide them with learning resources. It is from those ideas, the ideas that should not be controlled but instead nurtured, that innovation will result along with business opportunity. Think of business as taking advantage of these new ideas that nobody else offers yet, don’t let a Monopoly have leadership over the desktop or else you can not innovate and you can not profit. Innovation is just leadership, it is nothing else, it is making an idea the accepted idea. So don’t give away your leadership or else you do not have a future that you are in control of.
I welcome every non-lazy, new computer user to start with a free *NIX. The lazy people can go to OSX or Windows and play the parasite over there. Stay stupid, learn nothing about your computer – and don’t whine when it’s FUBARed.
Okay… next time you need to light a BBQ go fetch some sticks. Those new-fangled, easy-to-use lighters make it WAY too easy for people to FUBAR their steak!
“And they are right. There is no piece of software that is used by 95% of the Windows user base that doesn’t exist in Linux, however.”
WINE. I’m wondering which softeare is referred to as ”high quality apps”.
http://www.winehq.com/site/supported_applications
http://appdb.winehq.com
I’m wondering how come i can do everything i want with my GNU/Linux computer as a desktop…
There’s an opensource demoscene, so regarding Cubase and Reason i see little problem.
Neither Cubase or Reason are products of or closely related to demoscene. Also the opensource demoscene musicians often seem to be using non-free (non-Linux) programs for creating music.
Check out /usr/ports/media* on a Gentoo box, the archive is biiiig.
Sure it is. But I still haven’t found anything close to a complete softsynth+sequencer-package a’la Reason for Linux nor separate, nicely interoperating programs for doing the job. There are a lot of supposedly good MIDI sequencers for Linux, but as I’ve gone 100% software a long time ago, I would also need a couple of MIDI-controlled softsynths to mach with them.
Does anyone know good Linux solutions for this kind of stuff, by the way? I’m really interested in completely getting rid of Windows, but this has been an annoying issue for me. And please, no links to http://www.linux-sound.org/ , I have been there a little too many times without actually finding anything too instantly interesting.
This article isn’t nearly as negative as some of you are making it out to be. I wonder how many responders actually read it.
Some get stuck in the thing at the bottom called “moderated down” but some are gone completely?
Someone just posted some links about developer tools from Microsoft that are free, why are they gone?
I think that most of what you said is valid, but there’s something I think ought to be remembered when talking about Windows as a desktop OS: although it is currently better for joe user than any desktop Linux, that doesn’t mean it is adequate or that joe user likes to use it.
Windows has many problems on the desktop. The only reason it is ‘good enough’ is because it is the default non-choice that everyone has _some_ idea of how to use, and comes pre-installed on the machines most people buy for home use. The Windows zealots who post on forums like these seem to love Windows on the desktop, but they are the exception, not the rule. Many who use it, particluarly non-technical people/non power users, don’t like it, and don’t like using computers because of it — because of crashes, restarts, data loss, security holes, etc.
Those of us with the time and interest to learn Linux make a trade off. We get more stability, more uptime, less data loss, less worry about viruses, more software for less money (or without breaking laws), among other things. We give up other things — sometimes we have to spend more time making a particular thing work, and there is software we just can’t get (although this has been and continues to get better).
None of this means that Linux is a viable replacement for Windows in the current home consumer market. But we ought to remember that Windows doesn’t hold its current position because it is excellent, trouble-free software. This is what gives Linux a chance for the home market in the long run — assuming certain problems are worked on and fixed. And there are companies trying to do just that, and they have made a great deal of progress. It’ll either come together or it won’t — but it certainly isn’t hopeless.
-Business is about control
(R&D is the factor of prodction in the IT industry).
-Linux is about learning.
-Innovation is leadership.
If you plan on running a business around Linux (or other open source work) than you have to suport learning because you want the developers to develop new ideas which enables you to be the leader and to innovate. You can take those ideas from the pool and create a market as other businesses also take up the idea. So Redhat must support the open source community as a priority so that it has a future.
“This goes along the same lines as Linux lovers going, “Oh, Dreamweaver? Yeah, we have HTML editors no problem.” Some people will never understand that there is a huge difference between equivalents and functional equivalents.”
Whatever. There are indeed a lot (good) HTML editors.
WINE supports your DreamWeaver.
http://appdb.winehq.com/appview.php?appId=183
So does CodeWeavers iirc.
“Neither Cubase or Reason are products of or closely related to demoscene.”
Uhm, what are they related to, then?
“Also the opensource demoscene musicians often seem to be using non-free (non-Linux) programs for creating music.”
What makes you think so?
“Sure it is. But I still haven’t found anything close to a complete softsynth+sequencer-package a’la Reason for Linux nor separate, nicely interoperating programs for doing the job. There are a lot of supposedly good MIDI sequencers for Linux, but as I’ve gone 100% software a long time ago, I would also need a couple of MIDI-controlled softsynths to mach with them.”
Hmm i’m not really into this stuff yet
. I just know there are a lot programs to do MIDI and SoftSynth. And SkaleTracker will support VST.
I think what you’d need would be ALSA, because JACK makes life easy between various apps.
“Does anyone know good Linux solutions for this kind of stuff, by the way? I’m really interested in completely getting rid of Windows, but this has been an annoying issue for me. And please, no links to http://www.linux-sound.org/ , I have been there a little too many times without actually finding anything too instantly interesting.
”
DyneBolic perhaps: http://www.dynebolic.org it’s aimed for creativity and media activism. It runs as LiveCD, so you have nothing to lose!
Also, you could use WINE together with Windows apps. You do not need a copy of Windows nor a Windows license then.
…as a leader, not a follower.
Szulik is absolutely right. Outside the corporate environment, there’s little in Linux that will compel a Windows user to migrate.
Does Linux allow the typical home user to do something Windows doesn’t? No. If you’re already browsing the web, handling email, scanning and sending photos, IM’ing friends and family, or even posting to a blog or writing a novel, why spend good money to buy a strange piece of software just to keep on doing the same things?
Like he said, Linux is almost there, but quite.
Face it, if RedHat can’t figure out how to sell Linux to your Mother, maybe someone ought to pay attention.
Deak is a poor imitation of the former great troll artist known as Mike Cox on Zdnet’s message boards.
Claim Microsoft and their product Windows is no good. Short way: say they’re nazi’s.
Can I invoke Godwin’s Law on you yet? I think you’ve lost this argument…
“Neither Cubase or Reason are products of or closely related to demoscene.”
Uhm, what are they related to, then?
Cubase and Reason are both music production software. Reason is a software synthesizer that can emulate an arbitrarily sized rack of virtual equipment, from samplers and drum machines to mono/polysynths, reverb/distortion units, etc. Cubase is one of the most highly regarded sequencers in the world.
People think Windows is easy to use until they find out their File shares were open to the internet and that there are 50GB of porn smuggled unto their computer. The firewall is not even enabled by default and the default file permissions suck sh*t. Not to mention all users are administrator. (If you make them limited users, a lot of applications break.) I will bet the average Windows user will spend more time fixing their broken Windows partition than the average Linux user spends to learn how to use their Linux partition. Everyone must realize it’s not all point and clicky in Windows land. Safe boot, re-install, waste of time, waste of life, waste of energy, waste of electricity, what a waste. Windows is not ready for the home user. It needs to mature quite a bit.
OSS can only be gotten (on the most part) through the Internet or from a CD mailed out of someone’s house.
I agree with most of what you say. The problem with the above sentence however is you left out CompUSA, Fry’s, Circuit City, etc. This is the way I get my Linux distribution, by buying it from a retailer. The problem is that associated applications are rarely found at the retailer anymore, although the OS is there. The one application I do see is Star Office on occasion. For OSS in general however, I do agree.
It does seem strange to have someone say something like this while I run Linux at home for my computing needs. It’s not ready…gosh, I feel so stupid…
I agree it needs to improve, though. Possibly a better statement would have been that Linux isn’t ready for the beginning computer user.
Does anyone know good Linux solutions for this kind of stuff, by the way? I’m really interested in completely getting rid of Windows, but this has been an annoying issue for me. And please, no links to http://www.linux-sound.org/ , I have been there a little too many times without actually finding anything too instantly interesting.
See, there is a distinction between Linux and Windows users. Linux users talk mainly about security, stability (a non-issue, but beside the point), customization, file systems, Window managers, open source, etc.
A typical response from a Windows users is usually like “Yeah, well … can I run app xyz with it?” My point is that the Windows crowd tend to be a little more ‘application-centric’. Like “Yeah, give me an app like I have in Windows that’ll cook me breakfast and I will switch tomorrow.” And the typical response from the Linux crowd is “Well, we DO have an app that will make you breakfast once a week, so that’s good enough! And besides, don’t you value your freedom when it comes to using your computer? Look at all the security holes in Windows!”
This is why the two sides can’t come to an agreement, because they look at the experience of using computers in completely different ways. Linux users are more concerned with the OS and the concept of freedom. Just like this comment demonstrates:
Those of us with the time and interest to learn Linux make a trade off. We get more stability, more uptime, less data loss, less worry about viruses, more software for less money (or without breaking laws), among other things. We give up other things — sometimes we have to spend more time making a particular thing work, and there is software we just can’t get (although this has been and continues to get better).
Windows users don’t give a rat’s ass about the OS or freedom, so long as they have that one app that will let them measure the distance between their ass cheeks. Many Linux users don’t/can’t understand this. They will point out a simliar Linux program taht will let you measure only in milimeters, and go “See? This is all you need!” Basically ignorant of the fact that the Windows version has 10x the features.
And to the guy who brought Wine into the conversation – if you can successfully demonstrate getting Cubase up and running in Wine along with the various soft synths, I will gladly mail you a check for $1,000 (I’m serious).
Linux’s best chance of success in gaining more users is as a server platform or as a targeted desktop environment for business users where only a limited number of applications are required. In many cases, email, an office suite, access to the web, and usually a custom database of some sort is all that many employees need for their work.
Windows offers far more “leisure” software for home users than what is available for Linux. Not just games, but multimedia encyclopaedias, reference works, and a massive range of educational software. This type of software is practically non-existent on Linux.
> Wrong. You can buy support as well as hard media copies for almost any piece of free software. I can think of no greater honor to a free software developer than to be contracted for support for his product.
But only through the computer. Most people want to deal with an actual person. Not an email address. This is why many people still wont buy anything over the Internet.
> True, but that fact is not in dispute. Enough hardware is supported that Linux is a viable alternative for those who decide to use it, however.
They must make an effort to get the correct hardware. Windows users can look only at the merits of the hardware.
> I actually agree that while users might not want the home-brewn CD, many open source projects such as Mozilla offer their own CDS as a way users can contribute to the project, and get something in return. Plus users really don’t mind getting software from the internet. At all.
Again, most people will want to deal with a person.
> Agreed. But it doesn’t have to be. Again, no one person or group of people has decided that Linux as a whole needs to work to take over Windows. We’re just trying to suit our needs
And this is why it may never reach the average users desktop.
> So, I disagree with the idea that Linux is “ready” for end users, but I also dislike comments that say Linux “isn’t.” If I wanted to use Windows, I’d use Windows
So you don’t think Linux is ‘ready’ buy you don’t think it is ready… hmmm///
> No it’s not. Red Hat on more than one occasion (before last week) made public statemnts to the effect that they were trying to build a managed, corporate desktop, and not a home desktop. In essence, Ford wasn’t competing with Toyota in the first place, but a bunch of Ford zealots, and a bunch of Toyota zealots, thought they were, so that they could have pointless arguments. I am definately not innocent here, either
I just wanted to get in the fact that the trucks where no longer made.
> True, but they aren’t developing for non-computer literate types, are they? It is the responsibility of distributions that want to be as easy to use as windows to be suitable for most people.
And the distro’s can not do it for the reasons I originally gave.
> I couldn’t even figure out what the business strategy of the original poster was.
I thought it was give the software away and charge for support.
> Very true. But this comment section is saturated with people saying “See! Linux ain’t ready yet!” Some people on your end need to get off of their high horses and realize that perhaps we don’t even want to fit your definition of “ready.” I know I sure as hell don’t.
Since NO distro can compete for the reasons given, it is fair to say that Linux ain’t ready for the average users desktop.
> Advanced users want to be able to tailor their system to their needs. Linux wins at this at the software level. Plus advanced users are going to be able to pick hardware that works in Linux, so Linux doesn’t exactly “lose” at the hardware level, at least not to the extent that Windows loses at the software level (from the standpoint of configurability, not available software).
How is software less configurable on the software level on windows? OSS exists for windows plus lots of proprietary stuff. Lets remember that OSS does not ONLY exist for Linux.
> Many linux-bashers make the claim that most computer users just want to browse the web, check mail, etc. Then if you tell them that most modern Linux distributions do all of that fine out of the box, then the argument tends to change into “well Linux can’t run app x, so Linux sucks.”
I don’t say that.
> Again, what do you thnk my response to that would be?
Your response is that Linux is good enough for you
Yes , I remember seeing them too. Seems like they are gone.
Was really interested in those links.
Can someone repost it?
Thanks
“Oh, Dreamweaver? Yeah, we have HTML editors no problem.” Some people will never understand that there is a huge difference between equivalents and functional equivalents.
Well, if you absolutely can’t live without Dreamweaver, it’s now supported by Crossover Office. Personally, I like Quanta+ fine, but I understand that it lacks some of the functionality of Dreamweaver – although I wouldn’t say that it’s not “functional”…
Jason, everything you mentioned applies only to someone already using Linux.
Beyond all the other Linux issues, whatdoes Linux currently offer a home user that Windows doesn’t? Why would someone deliberately spend money, install Linux, and, at best, not lose any capabilities?
To make inroads into the home market, Linux needs to resolve the device driver issues, the ease-of-use issues, the packaging incompatability issues, etc., but, most of all, it needs to let people do something they really want to do, but can’t, in Windows.
“Can I invoke Godwin’s Law on you yet? I think you’ve lost this argument…”
If i’d have written communists, you couldn’t have invoked Godwin’s law. You use it to ignore the other points made.
Godwin’s law is sometimes used totally out of it’s purpose. We’re not discussing nazi’s here. It’s only a minor side aspect in my post. The fact people bait on such a word, which is actually honesty because that’s really what i say as short form, is NOT my problem.
“Cubase and Reason are both music production software. Reason is a software synthesizer that can emulate an arbitrarily sized rack of virtual equipment, from samplers and drum machines to mono/polysynths, reverb/distortion units, etc. Cubase is one of the most highly regarded sequencers in the world.”
Is Reason something like ReBirth?
Have you ever tried nvu?
QUOTE: Szulik is absolutely right. Outside the corporate environment, there’s little in Linux that will compel a Windows user to migrate.
Another QUOTE: Claim Microsoft and their product Windows is no good. Short way: say they’re nazi’s.
I agree that both of these statements have a kernel (get it?!?!?!) of truth, but the main reason I did search out Linux and install it on my home machine was the fact that I felt that Microsoft was not good for the world. I feel more confident in my choice everyday. They want to restrict freedom and information whenever it threatens their stranglehold on the world market. I refuse to participate (well, at least as much as I used to participate).
And it doesn’t hurt that Linux does everything I did with my Windows machine, and is more stable, more customized to my needs and…sexier.
“Windows is not as easy as you think. […]” Thanks for pointing this out! Therefore it’s not necessarily easier to start with Windows as new user or to start not with GNU/Linux.
Also i work voluntary in an inet cafe sometimes, which runs on 100% free software and 100% donated hardware. Unstability on Debian GNU/Linux is due to the flakey hardware, but users are getting very well ahead with the tools they’d like to use. Basic tools, such as Mozilla, Squirrelmail, Mozilla Mail, AMSN, and such. We also provide Free (speech, beer) workshops every now and then.
Darius:
“And to the guy who brought Wine into the conversation – if you can successfully demonstrate getting Cubase up and running in Wine along with the various soft synths, I will gladly mail you a check for $1,000 (I’m serious).”
Please mail this to the WINE or Codeweavers mailinglist. They deserve such money, and when it works, you can send the check.
I can only test Cubase by warezing it. Which i don’t want to.
OTOH i can give you a piece of advise which gives you an emulator and ~10% overhead. You’ll need a copy of Windows and a Windows license. The emulator is called Xen:
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/
Is Reason something like ReBirth?
Reaon is like ReBirth on steroids and then some
Truth is, if you value this app, there’s nothing like it on Linux. Hell, there’s nothing (AFAIK) like it on Windows either, sans Fruity Loops.
Please mail this to the WINE or Codeweavers mailinglist. They deserve such money, and when it works, you can send the check.
Yeah … when it works
OTOH i can give you a piece of advise which gives you an emulator and ~10% overhead. You’ll need a copy of Windows and a Windows license. The emulator is called Xen:
If I have to have a copy of Windows, then what’s the point? And these are audio apps – they take a LOT of horsepower to run natively, much less in an emulator.
I think that’s an interesting viewpoint, and probably has a lot to it, but I’m not sure that my comment demonstrates what you think it does. Don’t get me wrong — I’m all about freedom and the ethical issues surrounding free software — but the point of that particular comment is that using Linux frees me from some of the headaches I would have if I were using Windows. That’s a technical issue and a monetary issue, not a freedom/ethics issue. It’s also an issue that average Windows users can relate to — and by average, I mean people who know next to nothing about computers and software, because that _is_ joe average.
As for your statement that stability isn’t an issue — this is contrary to my experience. A lot of people I know who use Windows 2000, XP, and 2003 do not have stability and data loss issues. Others most definitely do. I’ve spent more time doing maintainance and data recovery on friends’ and family members’ Windows machines this year than I have doing my homework. (OK, maybe that’s a bit of an exaggeration.) I’m not saying that a knowledgeable and experienced Windows administrator can’t keep a machine running without problems — but that’s _very_ different than saying there are no stability issues, particularly in the home market.