“AOL sucks. There are many better, lower-cost ISPs. And Lindows sucks. There are many better, lower-cost Linux distributions available. These are articles of faith among sophisticated Internet and Linux users. But the Internet as a whole owes a lot to AOL and Steve Case, and Lindows is doing as much for Linux as AOL has done for the Internet, whether you like it or not.” Roblimo editorializes.
Michael Robertson: the Steve Case of Linux
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
AOL sucks and Linux sucks.
What has AOL done for the internet?
Serious question btw.
Did you read the article? Go read it, and you’ll see that the point was just that without AOL the internet may not have grown as fast as it did. They made it more accessible to the average Joe in the early days….
What has AOL done for the internet?
Since I am not american (either) I can’t tell the real impact that AOL has had over there, but as far as I know and have read in the article AO Hell has done one mayor thing: The have brought internet to the masses, more than any other internet provider. A striking difference is that in the early years of internet most emrican providers targeted AOL costumers, while AOL got Joe Sixpack in contact with internet. Of course that is where the slashdot trolls come from too, but as a very wise man has said: Elk nadeel heb zijn voordeel (Every disadvantage has it’s advantage, Johan Cruijff) 🙂
What is the reason to a “joe” user to change from a proprietary, insecure, expensive O.S. like MS Windows (but it has many software) to another non-free and proprietary O.S like Lindows ? There is no rational reason… This is the reason why ALL others proprietary operating systems died or are dying nowadays. Proprietary Unices will be substituted by linux, OS/2 & BeOS died and MacOS X is only a niche o.s.
People dosn’t like to pay if there are free alternatives. M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy.
Linux distributions with restricted licenses will die also. This is Red Hat (and derivated) success.
People don’t like big changes too,
if “Lindows” reach their goal,
taking the next step to a more “beautiful” distribution (whatever that may be
) is simple,
but switching directly to such a distribution is usually hard.
Xandros is doing the same actually but they are not promising the top of the world 😉
I disagree. I don’t think most users care one whit about their OS being proprietary. In fact, I’d venture a guess to say that the fact that their OS is proprietary enters into only .05 percent of computer users who might be interested in switching to Linux.
People just want cheap + fast + reliable. In the real world, generally you get to pick two. If you add the added dimension of “having lots of free time to build your own OS”, then you can have cheap + fast + reliable. Unfortunately, Gentoo ain’t right for the average user.
I think what we are going to find is that the desktop linuxes will split into business desktops and home desktops. The business desktops will be similar to Redhat, where everything + kitchen sink is included with a default installation. The home desktops will be stripped down, with more consumer features. Xandros, Lindows, Lycoris, and now Suse are all going after the home market hard right now.
Lindows has managed to get themselves more name recognition than most distro’s already because of their incessant marketing moves. This is not a bad thing. Every linux person in the world who got into computers in the Windows era started with windows and then went looking for something better. Same with AOL.
Good article, Roblimo, and props to Eugenia for pointing it out.
First off, I’d like to say that without Walmart and Microtel selling computers that work for $200 Lindows would not be where it is today (wherever that is). Second off I don’t think it’s fair to say that “Lindows is doing as much for Linux as AOL has done for the Internet”
How much has Linuxs’ market share gone up directly because of Lindows? About .2%? (Apple only holds a total of under 3%). What about what Red Hat, Mandrake, and IBM have done for Linux?
Like half (I don’t know the exact #) of the people in the US who ordered the internet for the first time did so through AOL.
Probably 95% of the code and software Lindows provides was written by the OSS community (deb packages anyone?) and here he is claiming credit for everything. What an asshole.
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
You reckon? I know there is a disgusting amount of Windows piracy but I honestly think that it doesn’t occur to the “great unwashed” that there’s even an OS on the PC. It’s all part of the computer they switch on.
Hi, I’m from Argentina and I must say it 3 times:
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
in Latin America at least
Have a nice day
Mega
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
I couldn’t possibly agree more. I’ve was born in Russian and lived there for the first 13 years of my life. From 13 to now (I am 19), I’ve lived in Finland. The ugly truth is: in Russia, I haven’t seen ONE legal piece of software. NOONE buys them, because only maybe 5% of the total population can afford them. In Finland, I haven’t seen any legal software outside of schools and businesses (which do run legal software) except maybe for OEM versions of Windows, Office and Photoshop.
I am really glad Microsoft is trying harder and harder to make it impossible to pirate Windows. I actually hope that one day they will suceed. That very same day, a lot of people will start looking at free alternatives.
“What an asshole”
It appears to me many folks from the OSS community would say that about many suits. There’s also a whole lot of suits calling the OSS community a bunch of “long-haired bomb planters”, referring to the often hippy-like appearance. Suits and geeks dislike each other, traditionally. (Although this relationship has arguably improved over the years.) So they’re all assholes? I don’t think so. Micheal Robertson probably has many good friends, as much as Richard Stallman has them. Someone who has friends can’t possibly be a complete asshole, now can he? The reason I think is to search in how both groups view the world, although elaborating on this would exceed the time I would like to spend on writing comments in online forums. Anyway, I honestly think Micheal Robertson is as much an idealist as Richard Stallman is. One is a monetary idealist, the other a “softwary” idealist. What gives, what takes? Instead of bitching at each other (not Micheal and Richard personally, but suits and geeks in general) they could team up. Discover and use each other’s strengths and weaknesses to improving their worlds.
Jago,
I agree 100% with what you said. I came from Romania and the situation is the same. After 50 years of “glorious” communism rule, people CANNOT AFORD to pay $100 for Windows, except bussineses. It’s not Lindows, Xandros etc etc etc that will bring eventually linux to the masses but MS priceing policy. Again, MS effort to stop piracy will be the greatest push for linux.
Lindows has one redeeming quality: it is based on Debian, which means that it could be used as a “back door” to a full-blown Debian install, especially for “problem machines” that simply refuse to cooperate with the Debian installer.
M. Robertson also has one (only one) redeeming quality: Gates hates him.
I AGREED WITH CLAIM.
Here, most of workers (maybe more than 90%) learn their Windows and Office application from pirated copies. When they start to work, they use the original copies since most company use original because if not our government enforcement will make sure they got prosecuted.
Most of us here can’t afford to own a Mac. Most of Apple customer normally those who involve with graphic things. Yeaaaah, long ago there are Mac for school (during my younger day) but it already change. (maybe it during the time when Steve Job leave Apple).
For unix, I myself got introduced during my university day. It wasn’t possible to personally own a unix system during pre-Linux era here. Thank GOD, we are now have the access to unix like OS which make it easier to switch to other Unix when our jobs need it. And by the way Linux is not bad except most enterprise still love other expensive OS and application (even the bosses himself didn’t know what it is, and just use the low end function of it – what a waste)
It’s not Lindows, Xandros etc etc etc that will bring eventually linux to the masses but MS priceing policy. Again, MS effort to stop piracy will be the greatest push for linux.
Oh, I don’t know. You can say alot about Microsoft, but they are not stupid when it comes to sales and marketing. In those countries they will probably just dramatically lower their prices.
As a student I can get legal copies of WindowsXP upgrade, OfficeXP, Visio, Visual Studio, and some other stuff, for 50 euros a year. (50? = +/- 50$). This is in Belgium, a fairly rich country.
If people can’t afford their software in certain countries, Microsoft will definetly drop their prices, till they can afford it.
“I disagree. I don’t think most users care one whit about their OS being proprietary. In fact, I’d venture a guess to say that the fact that their OS is proprietary enters into only .05 percent of computer users who might be interested in switching to Linux. ”
To take the point further, from personal experience, most non-computer savvy people actually *want* their OS to be proprietary – it’s what they have at work, it’s what they see in the adverts, the ads in computer magazines, etc. I remember trying to persuade my mother to buy a Mac laptop rather than a Windows one – given that she had no experience of computers at all, I thought that the Mac had a more newbie-friendly feel to it. It didn’t matter that all she wanted to do was write a thesis and send/receive emails, she was adamant that she had to have Windows. She didn’t know what Windows was, but she sure as hell know that she needed it! Office played a part, and though I explained that Office was available on the Mac and that she could share files with her colleagues, this was met with incredulity. Office is very much the lead factor in the minds of those people who have asked me to help them buy a computer. Office is MS, Windows is MS, that’s something that they grab hold of and won’t let go of no matter what!
Well, I can venture a bet that most consumers knows the difference between open source and propreitary and if they did, most of them probably couldn’t care less, or if they did, they probably wouldn’t be using Windows anyway. They may be cautious of the price, but in the case of Windows, the OEM cost is so cheap, they already paid for it….
If he hadn’t written this article, I would have had to
.
I can’t stand Michael Robertson with his loudmouth attitudes and his inflated ego (at least that’s how he comes across in the media and on the lindows webpage) either. But you just have to admire the fervor with which he is trying to bring Linux to the masses.
> Probably 95% of the code and software Lindows provides was
> written by the OSS community (deb packages anyone?) and
> here he is claiming credit for everything. What an
> asshole.
This is called branding and it’s just what businesses do. Businesses have no morality, they only care for money. If you don’t like that, you’ll have to say goodbye to capitalism.
Robertson tries to put the Lindows sticker on Linux just as Case tried to put the AOL sticker on the internet or Intel tries to put the Centrino sticker on Wi-Fi (just an arbitrary example that I read about today, see http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/29734.html ). Capitalism is that way, it rewards assholes. Live with it or join an anti-capitalist party.
I wouldn’t exactly call Robertson a “capitalist”. This and his previous project is about sucking out what others have done. MP3.com did it by illegally having downloads of music. Lindows.com does it via copying an establish brand (generic or otherwise…. nah, I don’t feel like debating that again). So in other words, I would call him an oppurtunitic. He can make money even in communist North Korea if he wanted to.
It’s one thing I hate about the Linux community and that’s OS bigotry. It’s a “geeks only” club and they don’t want the possiblity of newbie users forcing code monkeys to “stupify” a Linux distro with a Windows-like GUI. Yet in the same breath of the bashing these people want Linux to take over the world, nay, the universe.
How can an OS go and conquer or even HOPE to get a good step in the Windows dominant world when the masses (who have more money as a collective than Joseph Linuxboy) don’t even know it exists? The masses usually don’t read PC World or PC Magazine. They don’t watch a lot of Tech TV, if any. Most of the time, from personal retail experience, they don’t ask for “Windows” thay ask for “a computer”. They really don’t care about “choice” unless it affects their pocket book and what they get out of the deal.
This is where Lindows steps in. They’ve got the marketing power and now the exposure thanks to Wal-Mart and other stores that the masses go to every day. They see the name (okay, it’s a rip of “Windows” but how many other similar products have names similar to what they are cloning? Lots. ) and makes them think. They see the price of a Lindows computer and get a bit happy. As the article stated, the software you get with Lindows compared to Windows software price wise seems like a give away. Sure they may not use the 1,700+ programs on Click n Run, but the same people probably pay $40 a month for cable and only watch a handful of channels on a regular basis so with that in mind $99 a year for all the software they can use is pretty dang cheap. The more people who use Lindows, the more software developers and hardware makers will see that people will spend money on Linux and will probably start actually making software and hardware drivers for the platform(s).
The only snag is education. Will the store clerks be savvy enough to tell the buyer what Lindows can and can’t use? A good sales clerk will identify the buyer’s uses and then recommend from there. If it’s Bobby Gamer who wants to play Doom 3 and any other game he can blast his friends in, Lindows is not the answer but neither is any other Linux distro. If it’s Joe Sixpack who wants to surf the web, write letters, and play some simple games (solitare, Bejeweled, Bookworm, etc.) and other simple things then Lindows is probably a good choice.
Bottom line: whether you like it or not, Lindows is bringing Linux to the masses and making it known which can ultimately bring good things to the Linux world. If you want to help the Linux cause, be a part of the commUNITY and not just some ticked off distro cult member. If Linux dies, you’ve only yourselves to blame.
MP3.com did it by illegally having downloads of music.
Huh ? At no time was MP3.com offering illegal MP3s. All they were and are offering are perfectly legal MP3s. Those do exist, you know.
>>>At no time was MP3.com offering illegal MP3s. All they were and are offering are perfectly legal MP3s. Those do exist, you know.
Net music site MP3.com has settled a copyright infringement lawsuit with Sony Music Entertainment, sparking a rally in its stock price.
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-244751.html?legacy=cnet
Sometimes I wish it still was like back before there was AOL and Lindows and companies like that. Before the whole commercial thing. But then again, computers were only for geeks…
Want to know which direction Linux is heading? Just look at Lindows. It IS the future of Linux. The more momentum Linux gains, the more commercial/proprietary it becomes – that’s just the nature of the Corporate beast.
It is odd that people put all this code out there with minimal restrictions on how it is used, and then get all upset when it is used in a product! Actually, its not odd, because the people putting it out are not the same people as the ones getting upset.
The way some people are reacting, you would think that the success of Lindows spells the doom of all the other linux flavors. I personally would be fine if Lindows took the place of Windows on 90% of the desktops. Why? Because all of the software that I want to use would be written for Linux.
I am a video editing hobbiest and I use Pinnacle Studio to edit my home movies. Now, say what you want about Linux video editing software, but nothing I’ve found even approaches the ease of use and functionality of Pinnacle Studio (correct me if I’m wrong because I hate Windows and I’d love to switch).
Now then, if Lindows won the OS war, all that would mean to me is that I could get my video editing software for Linux. The real beauty of Linux (for me anyway) is the choice. I can use whatever distribution I want. Let 90% of the world use Lindows, I can still get Mandrake or Red Hat or SuSE or whatever and my programs run just fine. That’s what I believe the future of operating systems should be. Just like I can get AMD, Intel, Cyrix, or even TransMeta CPUs for hardware, I should be able to choose my OS based on personal preference instead of asking “What software do I need to run?” and “Will it run on that OS?”.
Maybe Linux isn’t there yet. I don’t even know if it’s even headed there, but that’s where I think it should be going. That will make it a truly universal operating system and if Lindows gets it there then I think Lindows is the best operating system in the world (even though I don’t ever plan on using it).
I’m in Canada. I don’t know any one person outside of my work that actually buys windows products or licenses.
I’m guessing this is a _really_ big trend amoung home users, expecially with new windows releases getting leaked and cracked weeks before they hit the shelves.
Are there any studies to back this up?
Anonymous, forget about it. They have been putting higher prices outside the US in countries that have a lower income per capita for too long to change. I come from Argentina too and the only businesses that could afford to pay M$ prices were large institutions. It’s called economics, it’s better to sell two @ 5 than five @ 2. Yup, same money for less than half the (paid) user base to support. And you still get people trained “for free” with piracy. Heck, I wouldn’t know how to use Word if it weren’t for piracy. Sometimes living all your life here in the US can certainly impair your vision of how things work in the real world (the _whole_ real world). I’m not trying to offend, just pointing out that M$ is a world player, as well as Linux.
OK here is the history. By the late 1980s BBSing was a very popular entertainment medium for people interested in computers. BBSes worked by having a phone number you dialed into to get a collection of services (downloads, content….). There were lots of home BBSes, in addition their were commercial BBSes with different focuses:
Prodigy (sears and IBM) focused on families),
Genie (GE) focused on typical BBS crowd who was value conscious
Compuserve (H&R block) focused on business
Many of these commercial BBSes were selling excess capacity on corporate mainframes and excess phone line connections during off hours. They didn’t see the service as the core business but rather a revenue addition to the main business. To growt the BBS beyond the corporate mainframe would change the entire pricing model.
AOL was born in this environment (in other words the article was wrong they were a BBS not an ISP). They had a very easy setup and ended up getting a very “middle america” crowd. They found a nice middle ground with respect to sex offering pretty good parental controls while at the same time allowing adults to engage in a sort of phone sex in chat rooms. Phone sex + good family content was a very popular format and they found that a small percentage of their users became AOL addicts. Given the high charges (remember AOL was at like $6 / hour) AOL was able to build to afford to recruit in ways that on one ever had.
Other companies like Prodigy which could have been competitive were too nervous about the “chat rooms” to let them be really free since they had other business that they didn’t want associated with this content.
At the same time remember academia and defense companies had access to the internet. This was wildly diverse academic content but nothing really commercial. BBSes often had discussions that went across multiple newsgroups. The internet in terms of Usenet had a much better version of this and so Some of the small BBSes begain offering a few of the Usenet newsgroups. This attracted very early adobpter to the idea of getting on the net. Combine with people who used the internet “at work” and the ISP was born. AOL was not at this point an ISP!
AOL decided to add some internet access around the same time that gopher replaced by HTTP. But it was a very small part of their offerings. The internet being international though offered better porn than what was available on most of the non sex related BBSes in particular AOL (for example alt.sex.stories). The non sex BBSes had always been too nervous too offer passive porn and the phone sex “chat rooms” were a pretty poor substitute. The ability to act as common carriers allowed them to get much more risky.
With the AOL crowd and the compuserve crowd on the internet business began going on the internet en mass as just another medium for communicating with customers. Business ISP sprung up, which also ran a consummer ISP service (since the margins were much higher)….
The prodigy, Genie, AOLs got rid of the expense of having to maintain their own content and they became little more than ISPs. AOL however retained an ease of setup from the BBS days which the business oriented ISPs and the academic connections didn’t have (i.e. in a world before DHCP, and where modem setup strings were important setting up internet had too high a barrier of entry for many people). They were no easier than the other large commercial services but their mass advertising and their middle america appeal made them #1.
People are often shocked and draw the wrong lesson from AOL thinking of their success as an advertising success. They forget that AOL built the business on unique content (phone sex chatrooms) long before they were an ISP.
Hi, I’m from Argentina and I must say it 3 times:
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
in Latin America at least
Have a nice day
Mega
Exactly, that and the fact it ships with every PC possible.
MS rather have you use a pirated copy of Windows than to use no Windows at all. Because once you’ve used it and become accustomed with it, it’s hard to switch to another OS.
And yes, piracy in Asia and South America is almost a standard. Remember when you could and probably still buy a pirated Windows XP CD in Asia for 1$?
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0303.1/1296.html
The above post by Andrew Morton talking about his latest version of development (2.5) kernel 2.5.64-mm6 is rather interesting.
“This means that large cache-cold executables start significantly faster. Launching X11+KDE+mozilla goes from 23 seconds to 16. Starting OpenOffice seems to be 2x to 3x faster, and starting Konqueror maybe 3x faster too. Interesting.”
I am author of Linux On Desktop at [shameless plug]RatedPC.com[/shameless plug] and I’ve been itching to write a new article, but it’s either that or not sleeping for a few nights as I’m already busy enough.
Anyway, I think this is a pretty relevant article, so here goes my opinion in compact form…
I love Linux. I love everything about Linux. From installing it to writing code, playing games (Half-life TFC, CS, DOD via WineX), browsing the web and finally, watching movies and listening to my favourite online radio. I love the freedom, power and control it gives me. Yes, I am a Linux nerd and I love being one too. In fact, I enjoy my Linux experience so much that I want others to enjoy it as well. I think a lot of other Linux users feel the same. I personally have nothing against Microsoft, Apple, Sun or any other OS manufacturer. I promote Linux at home, at work, at parties and club (chicks really love hearing you talk about Linux at parties…NOT).
However, I am against the approaches many Linux vendors are taking to bring this lovely OS to the masses. Admitedly, Linux (again, Linux is just a kernel, by Linux I am talking about a standard Linux distro) is complex and the complexity comes from the many choices it gives to users. I agree that at some instances it is just not polished. Those things really need to be taken care of. However, I am totally against “dumbing down” Linux so Joe Sixpak or my grandma can use it. If they can’t use Linux, that’s fine, there are many other operating systems they can use. If you want to create an Operating System based on Linux that has lots of bubbly colours, doesn’t give control to users, it’s unstable and etc etc etc, fine by me, but don’t call it Linux.
Now, from marketing point of view. Yes, I agree, without money, there would be no food at the table and hence no Linux. Open Souce and Linux are all about being “nice”. Yes, I believe in sharing. I believe in educating the masses. I think there should be laws that prevent corporations taking advantage of uninformed customers (my career, job and life reflect what I believe in). While I haven’t used Lindows (shouldn’t be THAT bad as it’s based on Debian), but I am not impressed at all by Michael Robertson’s approaches in promoting Linux. If I want somebody like that promoting my OS, I’ll just stick to Microsoft or buy an Apple. Lindows may contribute much to Linux, but the damages it does outweight the benefits.
In short, first, make Linux easy to use. But easy to use doesn’t always mean “stupid” and “limited”. As for UI, Linux has to be practical, even if it may not be easy at first or forces users to learn (for an excellent example, install blender, then try to use it, its UI is crazy and super hard. Now buy a book and learn how to use it, you’ll see how cleverly it has been designed. In my personal experience, the blender UI is so much more powerful than the industry standard $10,000 CDN Maya). Second, cut the marketing crap. Linux is nice, belongs to nice people and should be marketed nicely. We don’t need some sleazy salesperson selling our Penguin.
Reza Pakdel
[more shameless self promotion]
http://www.ratedpc.com
[email protected]
> I wouldn’t exactly call Robertson a “capitalist”.
> This and his previous project is about sucking out what
> others have done.
…which makes him the perfect example of a clever and successful capitalist. Sorry if I have to spoil your illusions, but most success stories in real-world capitalism (as opposed to schoolbook capitalism) work that way.
I am from Canada (Toronto) also, and piracy is extremely commonplace amongst my friends and co-workers. I don’t think the average income of a person is a factor here, instead it is the availability of pirated materials.
If you can get WindowsXP pro and OfficeXP from a friend at work, who himself has an illegal copy, why would you go out and buy it? Furthermore, if you can get your OS for free with no strings (ie. the investment of time and effort of Linux), why try/use anything else?
Nevermind Linux for the masses – I think it would be interesting to do a study about *piracy* for the masses. Just look at how prevalent the cracking/copying of software is, with services like Kazaa and cheap CD writers providing a gateway to these things. Better yet, look at MP3s. I don’t know one person who hasn’t downloaded songs and made their own mix CDs. All of these activities are ILLEGAL and yet everyone does it. Very interesting.
Steve Case was nothing like Robertson, Case didnt lie, he didnt offend and he didnt break the rules and he did make a product that was actually quite decent. Robertson sparks controversy and breaks rules, my thing is that he knew when he downloaded the first kernel source, that he agreed to the GPL, yet he continues to violate it. But I have said it many times, Lindows itself is not a bad product. The idea behind Lindows is a good one. But when you couple it with the attention starved Michael Robertson its a recipe for disaster, Lindows has its flaws but when you take a look at the whole package. Robertson is the biggest flaw.He needs to chill out, play fair and give proper recognition to the people that brought him this far, Quit announcing phantom deals with software companies and who knows maybe share some of the wealth with the developers of Open Source. If it wasnt for the developers he’d still be on his couch at home, eating Cheetos and listening to his Rio.
Piracy? Do you people even realize that virtually every new PC comes with Windows? Do you realize that the percentage of people who build their own is STAGGERING small? Do you realize that even though you downloaded the Devil’s Own XP iso and installed it with the FCKGW-RHQQ2 key that you barely constitute a group of statistical significance?
MS knows that there are pirated copies of their OS everywhere. Thanks to messenger, they probably know who you are too. If you believe you’re making a dent, think again.
Don’t believe the hype. Piracy is publicity and nothing more.
>Roberto J Dohnert
>Robertson sparks controversy and breaks rules, my thing is that he knew when he downloaded the first kernel source, that he agreed to the GPL, yet he continues to violate it
Please back that up with some facts because I don’t believe it for a second. How is Lindows violating the GPL?
>>>>Piracy? Do you people even realize that virtually every new PC comes with Windows? Do you realize that the percentage of people who build their own is STAGGERING small?
Most of the piracy is done by corporations, not individuals. Your company buys 10 copies of software but installs it on 20 computers.
Steve Case was nothing like Robertson, Case didnt lie, he didnt offend and he didnt break the rules and he did make a product that was actually quite decent.
Not true. When AOL opened the flood gates to the Internet, they spelled disaster. They let idiots out (who cares if idiots use Lindows, they can’t disturb your peace by using any particular OS) on the net without ever bothering to tell them that they were no longer in AOL land. That’s an offence.
And he broke the rules. AOL software has since the start and until this day been absolutely substandard in the Internet environment. If you’ve ever seen an AOL user quote properly, he’s been doing it by hand, after being shouted at for about a year to do it, since his software is incapable.
Thank you, but I’d love to see a net without AOL. Not that it matters nowadays, the barbarians are coming from everywhere, but before AOL got their Internet gateway, the net was actually quite a nice place.
“By Mega
Hi, I’m from Argentina and I must say it 3 times:
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
“M$ Windows is dominant because of the piracy”
in Latin America at least
Have a nice day
Mega”
Well at least Mega, unlike Marcelo, has a grasp the just because the location she lives in has no problems with IP theft doesn’t mean everywhere else in the world is the same.
Summary of reasons:
-Windows is popular because it comes with almost every PC.
-Windows is popular because everyone uses it (due to #1 not piracy).
-Windows is popular becasue people already know how to use it.
-Windows is popular because it runs the software people already own.
-Windows is popular because people already know how to use their software.
-Windows is popular because 9 time out of 10 windows software “does” more.
-Linux is getting popular because its free (as in beer).
-Linux is getting popular because its stable in some cases.
-Linux is getting popular because its fast in some cases.
-Linux is getting popular because of the “underwear” zealots.
-Linux is getting popular because its free (as in freedom).
Little more detail:
-One can’t escape windows. Buy a computer – it probably has windows. Go to a college computer lab – windows. Enter a public library – windows. Grandma’s computer isn’t working – windows. A neighbor bought a gaming computer – windows.
-People know how to use Windows. People do not know how to use linux, and no people don’t _WANT_ to learn. They don’t itch to feel the joy of dropping into Xterm to edit config files. They don’t want the joy of discovering why their Xserver suddenly crashed. They don’t want to spend for ever figuring out how to install software. They didn’t like that in win3.1/95/98/Me so why would they some how now love it in linux? They want windows because at least with windows they already learned how to do deal with most of its strange quirks.
-Who here thats older than say 12, hasn’t had a windows machine as their personal computer? Who here doesn’t have windows software they own or at least use? Who here doesn’t know how to use windows or ms software to get work done? Who here, when they go to find a newer version of their software, still doesn’t see a magical linux version for sale? When we do see a comparable linux program why don’t we all go ditch our MS programs for linux versions? They have file compatability now for office… so why aren’t all of the home users going to open office or star office? MS isn’t forcing office on you – it doesn’t come with a PC. Heck you can even run Open Office in windows. The reason is that familiarity thing again. Why do I want to learn open office if only does everything the program I already know how to use does? Sure open office is cheaper, but if I already own Office 2k… how does OO.o’s cheapness help me?
-Windows software does more. Ever used gaim? how about AOL’s aim for linux? Maybe you used jabber? Tried AIM for windows? See a big “features” difference? Most people at this point use the “you don’t need those features they are useless – ‘I never use them’.” Unfortunately other people use them. Other people like them. So again why do I want to use linux software if it doesn’t do everything the stuff I already own does?
Things linux has:
-Its cheap. Something most people don’t understand is TCO doesn’t mean crap if you already own all the software you use. So thats not a good motivate for someone who’s had windows for a few years. He just invalidated his whole software collection. What about emulating windows a la VMware? Well great now your running windows – what was the point of installing linux?
-Its stable. Good, its more stable than windows me. OpenBSD is too, but that alone isnt going to get people to ditch the desktop. Again, why do I want to learn something new if it crashes less but doesn’t do what I want it to do?
-Its faster. Prove it. Benchmarks of complie times, boot times, or VMM timeings don’t matter to a windows user. They do things with their computers – ie, they are end users. They don’t compile things – only linux end-users do that.
-Its free as in freedom. Thats been around since the linux kernel started. Still havn’t seen that one cause everyone and their mom to jump the MS ship yet.
I enjoyed the article and there were some good responses to it. But why is everytime someone writes an intelligent article for OSNews, there are a slew of lame responses from morons who obviously either didn’t read the entire article or are too brain-dead to understand what’s really being said?
Eugenia, you should make a requirement that anyone posting on the site be at least 13 years old.
> Eugenia, you should make a requirement that anyone posting on the site be at least 13 years old.
How about a requirement that anyone posting on the site must have a COMPUTER at least 13 years old :-))
” Eugenia, you should make a requirement that anyone posting on the site be at least 13 years old. ”
You dont want her to do that Phil, Because that will mean YOU wont be able to post here anymore.
I have shown Linux many times with some success. People see the Lindows machine at $199 !?! and are eager to try.
The questions go from “can I install it” to “will it do X for me?”
This is big stuff! No amount of tweaking by the various distros today have achieved what Lindows does.
Who cares if they end up being the AOL of Linux. If there are enough of them, the apps will come. Eventually the smarter ones will want to build their own systems or choose from the better offerings out there. When they do, their applications will come with them.
What is good for them is good for me.
I don’t know about the situation in other countries but PC clones are the rule in Australia. I would say estimate the home market is around 90% clones. An XP licence costs AU$200 with a PC purchase. Many simply buy the clone and add a pirated copy of Windows. Outside business few people ever purchase software.
The problem for Microsoft is that as hardware becomes cheaper the cost of software is perceived as more onerous. When the OS cost, perhaps, 5% of your computer package you probably didn’t mind. A retail copy of XP Pro is now as expensive as a cheap PC. In a couple of years the PC will be considerably cheaper than a Windows licence. Microsoft will be forced to continually reduce prices. The MS model relies on high margins but is massively expensive to produce due to high numbers of employees etc. MS can’t reduce prices by 90% and remain profitable.
Lindows and other distros have an advantage because a handful of people can produe a OSS distro. MS with 50 000 high wage employees may be forced to compete with a company in India with a dozen employees.