Some companies surveyed recently said they have examined the prospect of moving to desktop Linux to assist in their contract negotiations with Microsoft Corp. Others are trying Linux in kiosks or for limited-function desktop systems.
Some companies surveyed recently said they have examined the prospect of moving to desktop Linux to assist in their contract negotiations with Microsoft Corp. Others are trying Linux in kiosks or for limited-function desktop systems.
Hahahaha, he must love linux; he doesn’t collect so much spyware with all his porn!
Are you willing to contact some mates and enter to sourceforge and post that you need help to develop an CAD program? You offer documentation,testing and knowledge of your area, and they make the coding part. This is how OSS works, by leadership, not money (money only makes you to look bigger).
A teacher told me: linux it’s not free, it costs work, not money.
Hahahaha, he must love linux; he doesn’t collect so much spyware with all his porn!
Well, it was a factor. He had “my computer guy” come in every 4-6 months to “fix” his computer. Now, he doesn’t, though I am on the hook for helping him when he asks…so, I make sure that Linux doesn’t cause him any problems.
Exactly. What is the point of replacing one with another? Just because?
A well tuned Windows is very easy to run. A well tuned Linux is very easy to run.
Both require time to get used to- both require a properly trained user to run it.
These are two OSes for the same hardware and for the same group of users.
Neither one of them can offer anything conceptually different to users.
To users, I said- not to developers.
Conceptually, I said: meaning they both share same concepts of a file system, keyboard, monitor, GUI, modem, LAN, hardware upgrade, applications, software installation, priviledged vs. unpriviledged user and process, and so on.
It is that easy.
I agree with “no name…” I think Autopackage could well be the solution to Linux application install problems. Now if we could only get popular distros, developers and packagers to start supporting the format.
“Exactly. What is the point of replacing one with another? Just because?
A well tuned Windows is very easy to run. A well tuned Linux is very easy to run.
Both require time to get used to- both require a properly trained user to run it. ”
The point is
>>> open source [cliche but still you asked for it
]
>>> free vs. $$$$/piracy
but if you just read the majority of comments from linux users they want world domination.
I disagree, but if you can prove to me that your assertion is true, then I might reconsider. Good luck!
anyways, I’m a linux user.. so dont flame me..
I don’t really care what you run, and it’s quite useless to specify it. I run both Windows and Linux – does that give me more credibility?
I downloaded both the Windows and Linux version of OpenOffice (2.0 beta). The Win version was a single exe file which easily installed the software.
That’s because it’s the beta version. When the final version comes out, there will most probably be a “single file” installer, like there was for versions 1.X.
But why can’t I install software without trouble, why don’t I get a menu or quicklaunch icon. I want to download, install and use a program immediately.
Use Mandrake.
“Exactly. What is the point of replacing one with another? Just because?
A well tuned Windows is very easy to run. A well tuned Linux is very easy to run.
Both require time to get used to- both require a properly trained user to run it. ”
The point is
>>> open source [cliche but still you asked for it
]
Who cares? Not “average user”. This “opensourceness” can even throw some people away – they want something real, having value. (Do not argue about “free speech” vs “free beer” vs “open source” here – not many users can see difference.)
>>> free vs. $$$$/piracy
This not reason to replace existing OS. $$$$ or piracy – if anybody does have running system, then replacing it without clear incentives does not happen.
It’s that easy – just like Russian Guy stated.
“These are two OSes for the same hardware and for the same group of users.
Neither one of them can offer anything conceptually different to users.
To users, I said- not to developers.
Conceptually, I said: meaning they both share same concepts of a file system, keyboard, monitor, GUI, modem, LAN, hardware upgrade, applications, software installation, priviledged vs. unpriviledged user and process, and so on.
It is that easy.”
Right they’re conceptually alike, except that with linux
You don’t have to activate it by connecting to the big brother mothership to guarentee you’re running a verifiable legal copy or call in and beg for an activation code when it ultimately crashes (Mainly beause Linux doesn’t crash),
You are free to distribute as many copies of it as you like to anyone you want,
And if you play your cards right, you’ll never see another disgustingly rights depriving End User License Agreement again.
One guarentees your freedom, the other craps on it… But ya, not really too much difference conceptually.</sarcasm>
Who cares? Not “average user”. This “opensourceness” can even throw some people away – they want something real, having value. (Do not argue about “free speech” vs “free beer” vs “open source” here – not many users can see difference.)
I say the following as someone who has worked on 8+ releases of commercial off-the-shelf software. One product sold over 5 million copies and was OEMed and bundled by other companies including Microsoft (over 200k copies for a Microsoft-sponsored Visual C++ promotion).
I’d be glad to get back in that business any time and would be glad to brag about it to anyone.
Frist off, let’s talk only about companies (vendors). I say this because you don’t seem to be impressed or interested in people who do OSS as a hobby or for non-monitary reasons. Even if this is incorrect, it does eliminate many of the issues you specifically don’t care about such as individual freedom irt. software.
The odd thing is that … for users, developers, from a purely practical standpoint … open source is damn useful and quite ‘real’. Here’s a few reasons why open source is good for users of software even if they only deal with companies (vendors);
1. Your vendor can’t screw you over. If the vendor tries, a competitor can replace them. This possibility keeps the primary vendor(s) of open source from doing the wrong thing or getting greedy.
* Closed source for-a-fee vendors aren’t motivated to play fair. If the budget is tight, they can and will put the screws to paying customers who absolutely must have the software they produce (even in the short term).
* Freeware (no fee) software is usually released as-is or as only a tie-in to other necessary products that cost money.
==> Neither of these benifit the user of closed source applications, only the vendor.
2. Most open source licences (though not all) do not give one vendor additional power to force the software to fit some marketing agenda. No one vendor is able to ignore all contributors.
* Closed source vendors have a unique licence to do with the software they make as they see fit…including not offering it anymore at any price or changing the next release to pressure/force the customers to upgrade.
* Freeware vendors can use closed source to show how clever they are for marketing (ex: http://sysinternals.com, http://grc.com – both excellent sources, btw) or they can add in spyware as a revenue stream (if forced by circumstances or as a part of the original product idea).
==> Open source vendors would be thwarted quickly if these were attempted; a fork of the code, an export mechanism for the data to a new application, the special knowledge could be put in other tools, and/or the evil bits could be removed.
I hope you see a little more how open source is good for the users. There are about a dozen other reasons I could mention, though this post is getting long enough so I’ll stop here with the examples.
Many of the problems that Windows (as an OS) suffers from is that it comes from a single vendor. Linux has problems as a product, no doubt, though most of these issues are being delt with and there are clear timelines for new enhancements. If you don’t like the Linux way, there are other open source unix-like operating systems out there…come to think of it, except for Windows just about every OS is unix-like these days. [raises eyebrow and clasps jaw] Hmmmm…interesting.
With Windows the same issues keep comming up again and again and never are completely resolved. Even with the very impressive .Net/CLR/C# combo, the single-vendor issues will remain and cause problems. For example, just as some vendors with VB 6 experienced staff are now complaining to Microsoft about the VB.net changes they do not like.
> “You don’t have to activate it by connecting to the big brother mothership”
This is the feature. Example: I can name you a version of Windows that does not require activation. I can name you a Linux distro that reports user computer data to the big brother mothership every time user installs that distro.
Conceptually- the same.
> “You are free to distribute as many copies of it as you like to anyone you want”
That is so irrelevant for end users who receive OS as a part of a new computer they buy once every few years…
It is relevant for freedom fighters- but not for end users.
> “you’ll never see another disgustingly rights depriving End User License Agreement again”
As it is now, Linux and Windows EULAs are very much the same in depriving users of their rights, if under “Linux” we mean not the kernel but the distro.
> One guarentees your freedom, the other craps on it…
As an end user, I need to run software, access WWW, work with emails, write documents, stuff like that. These are my freedoms.
*********************
A little of a personal experience (please ignore that part if you think it is irrelevant).
This weekend, a single mother of three asked me to help her purchase her first computer. She needs it for very basic stuff, and she wants her kids also share the same PC, she can’t afford more than one computer. She can put money into broadband Internet access (the cheapest one, priced close to the dial-up, available where we live).
To simplify her and mine life I am going to recommend her buy a computer with OS preinstalled.
Now, obviously I can choose for her any of the current desktop OSes available. They all can do the job she needs a computer for.
Should I recommend her to make her choice based on:
1. How much of open source the OS is?
2. What license is it distributed under?
3. What type of Internet-based activation will be required first time she turns the computer on?
4. How many copies of that OS she can distribute between her daily work and her evening college classes?
5. What flavour of EULA does she have to agree when she buys a computer?
6. How easy it is for her to patch the code and submit the diff to the package maintainer or bug report to the vendor?
You really think that these issues will concern her?
You really think that one desktop OS could make her more free than another, in her opinion?
Did he ever spent time peeking at Eclipse or KDevelop as professional IDE’s as …
Yeah, probably so. Those tools can’t compare to Visual Studio.
Here is why Linux is not yet widely adopted for the desktop:
I downloaded both the Windows and Linux version of OpenOffice (2.0 beta). The Win version was a single exe file which easily installed the software. The Lin version unzipped to a bunch of RPMs. Of course my Debian-based system likes debs better, so I had to run ‘alien’. Then I had to….
You get the picture?
Yes, I *do* get the point. I *hate* having to install RPMs, edit configuration files, and jump through lots of hoops just to install a lousy piece of software. Linux devs don’t seem to care about setup. For them, it’s a secondary thing that “won’t bother experienced users”. But that’s precisely the point: Windows and MacOS have gotten users accustomed to a standard of automation for setting up apps that they aren’t willing to backtrack on. You can’t convince them that Linux is better when they have to futz around with config files, run some random script, and say a silent prayer just to make something work. Linux, itself, has certainly got better — but Linux, the general working environment, has a very long distance to travel before average desktop users will feel comfortable using it. And, no, don’t even bother pointing me at Linspire or any of those Windows-ish shells for Linux. That doesn’t solve the problem.
Did you shoplift the pooty?
“This is the feature. Example: I can name you a version of Windows that does not require activation. I can name you a Linux distro that reports user computer data to the big brother mothership every time user installs that distro.”
Really, do you need an activation key? I don’t know of one version of windows which doesn’t require an activation key. I also don’t know of a Linux that requires an activation key. Maybe you could explain.
I didn’t have to activate my distro, and it isn’t communicating with anything.
If that’s “conceptually the same” to you, then I’m glad you’re not doing my taxes.
“That is so irrelevant for end users who receive OS as a part of a new computer they buy once every few years…”
If I bought a computer with windows xp I could only put it on one computer. I couldn’t put it on anyone else’s because the activation scheme will not allow it. That is irrelevant for users? Who’ll have to pay $200 a copy if they can only afford to upgrade an OS? Most users now are running windowsxp, and guess what, they didn’t all get it by buying hardware. People are buying that crap off the shelves. If you think that’s small-time business, then I have to wonder what planet you’re on. Planet Russia maybe where you can easily get a boosted copy for pocket change? Stop embarassing yourself.
If I can’t upgrade my brother’s OS freely when he asks me about it, then that IS a problem for a user. If I can’t give him a copy without going to jail, then that is a problem.
Are you completely blind to the proliferation of file-sharing by regular users? These people risk jail daily because they try to share their proprietary software over the internet. End users want to be able to share software… don’t you get it?
“As it is now, Linux and Windows EULAs are very much the same in depriving users of their rights, if under “Linux” we mean not the kernel but the distro.”
Everything on my computer is GPL last time I checked. One license. Not 2000 different EULAs which are impossible to read if you value your own time, and declare you a criminal if you five a copy of it to anyone else.
“As an end user, I need to run software, access WWW, work with emails, write documents, stuff like that. These are my freedoms.”
Good for you. You can continue buying versions 4, 5, 95, 2000, xp, mx, pro, elite all the way until the day you die and waste your time and money doing so. You are completely free to do that if you wish. They will change formats from version to version and not make them interoperable with other formats so that you’ll be locked in with them forever. And someday when your ancestors want to open a file that you have created, they won’t be able to do it unless they buy into the same product slavery which you bequeathed on them. You are free to do so. And heck, while you’re at it, why don’t you pay for your free speech by the hour?
And your example of the poor woman… for her children, at the very least have the sense to recommend her to a free system which allows them to have quality office suites, graphics applications, layout programs, software development programs, and countless other programs already included and free.
That way they can actually have a head start with some very functional programs, programs which they don’t have to pay out the ass to get upgraded versions of, and the freedom not to be stagnated in their learning because they can’t afford the next version of a piece of software.
This is especially important for kids, as they deserve the right to grow up with software which is constantly upgrading, so they are able to grow with it, and know it inside and out. They don’t need these gaps where they can’t progress, and then become disinterested in learning altogether.
Give them windows and you curse them to being enslaved to programs they can’t afford. If you can look yourself in the mirror after that, then I would have to pity your existence.
Activation. Activation isn’t really an issue to end users. The overwhelming majority of them get their OS activated by Dell or Gateway or whoever — before they even receive the box in the mail.
Upgrades. OS upgrades account for less than 1% of Microsoft’s revenues, according to available data. So there are very few people actually doing upgrades.
EULAs. Ask an end user what he or she thinks about their “EULAs”. They’ll look at you strangely. They have no concept of the EULA and, if they do happen to see a EULA somewhere, they see it as “one of those annoying screens that I always click OK to, whenever it appears.”
Secondary Machines. Users don’t install OSes. They rely upon OEMs such as Dell or Gateway to do it for them. And, consequently, they get any secondary machines with the OS installed at the OEM. This is a non-issue.
Choosing an OS. Steering somebody to a free OS simply because you think it makes them “more free” — and solely on that basis — is just plain ridiculous. I would ask the woman what she wants to do with the computer, what sorts of things she wants to do. Odds are, she wants to do finances, browse the Web, send email, run educational software, and allow her kids to play games. With the last two requirements alone, you’ve eliminated Linux. It’s simply a non-starter in the educational and games spaces.
Look, the bottom line is that some of you guys just don’t understand end users. There’s a complete and utter disconnect between you perceive as their needs — and what they actually need. I don’t know whether this is just wishful thinking on your part, or whether you truly don’t know what’s going on with end users.
Give them windows and you curse them to being enslaved to programs they can’t afford. If you can look yourself in the mirror after that, then I would have to pity your existence.
Huh? There isn’t free software available for Windows? Since when?
“Activation. Activation isn’t really an issue to end users. The overwhelming majority of them get their OS activated by Dell or Gateway or whoever — before they even receive the box in the mail.”
It is a problem if someone else would like a copy and you would like to be able to give them one, which was the point. Having been on a college campus I know for a fact that some people would want the latest version of an OS that someone else has. Tons of people bumped their systems from win95 to 98 to me to 2000 illegally. If you live in some sort of fantasy world where no one updates their os to a new version if they have an opportunity to do it freely, that isn’t my problem. People are going to jail for “software piracy” all over the world, so I don’t know which part you’re imagining that there isn’t a desire for this.
“Upgrades. OS upgrades account for less than 1% of Microsoft’s revenues, according to available data. So there are very few people actually doing upgrades.”
Umm… and how much of their revenues are from the desktop OS of users? You might very well be looking at a very massive number considering how much different business Microsoft is actually involved in. Microsoft doesn’t only sell its OS the last time I checked.
“EULAs. Ask an end user what he or she thinks about their “EULAs”. They’ll look at you strangely. They have no concept of the EULA and, if they do happen to see a EULA somewhere, they see it as “one of those annoying screens that I always click OK to, whenever it appears.”
And therefore it shouldn’t matter? It shouldn’t matter that they don’t know what their getting themself into? ARe you also approving of predatory lenders?
“Secondary Machines. Users don’t install OSes. They rely upon OEMs such as Dell or Gateway to do it for them. And, consequently, they get any secondary machines with the OS installed at the OEM. This is a non-issue.”
Every computer comes out of a factory perfectly to you guys, doesn’t it. The guy who installed my dsl last month told me how he had his friend install win2000 on his copy since it didn’t require the activation scheme that xp does. He told me that he knew it was illegal but he couldn’t afford it and win 98 was crashing on him continuously. People are doing this, especially if they are making close to minimum wage… maybe y’all live in Beverly.
“Choosing an OS. Steering somebody to a free OS simply because you think it makes them “more free” — and solely on that basis — is just plain ridiculous. I would ask the woman what she wants to do with the computer, what sorts of things she wants to do. Odds are, she wants to do finances, browse the Web, send email, run educational software, and allow her kids to play games. With the last two requirements alone, you’ve eliminated Linux. It’s simply a non-starter in the educational and games spaces.”
Unless the kid wants to learn programming and how his os works. But I can guarentee they will have no spyware and viruses bringing their experience to a complete halt in a few months. If they can barely afford a computer… they aren’t going to be buying educational programs and games anyways. AT least the programs they do have will always be up to date as long as they click the update link an their distro.
“Look, the bottom line is that some of you guys just don’t understand end users. There’s a complete and utter disconnect between you perceive as their needs — and what they actually need. I don’t know whether this is just wishful thinking on your part, or whether you truly don’t know what’s going on with end users.”
Look, some of you guys think everyone is stinkin rich, and don’t want to share there OS and software with other people. That is complete BS. I’ve seen objective evidence of it with my own eyes… and the whole file-sharing thing is completely in full force… and prosecution is growing daily.
There is something like 30 different keygen/cracks for XP alone. You don’t think people want to be able to share their OS? Give me a break.
“Give them windows and you curse them to being enslaved to programs they can’t afford. If you can look yourself in the mirror after that, then I would have to pity your existence.
Huh? There isn’t free software available for Windows? Since when?”
Well, if you buy them into windows and the requisite EULA which comes up when winmediaplayer10 wants to install and spy on their “digital rights”, you’re not really inspiring them to look for free solutions for their freedoms sake to begin with.
> “Activation. Activation isn’t really an issue to end
> users. The overwhelming majority of them get their OS
> activated by Dell or Gateway or whoever — before they
> even receive the box in the mail.”
> It is a problem if someone else would like a copy and you
> would like to be able to give them one, which was the
> point. Having been on a college campus I know for a fact
> that some people would want the latest version of an OS
> that someone else has.
Happens rather seldom, since that other guy got an OS with his computer too. You are right that those are *some* people as apposed to the masses of Joe User clones.
> “Upgrades. OS upgrades account for less than 1% of
> Microsoft’s revenues, according to available data. So
> there are very few people actually doing upgrades.”
> Umm… and how much of their revenues are from the
> desktop OS of users? […]
Fiddling with numbers doesn’t help here. Real experience with Joe User from the neighborhood suggests that he doesn’t know how to install software or drivers, let alone know what OS updates are good for or how to do them.
> “EULAs. Ask an end user what he or she thinks about their
> “EULAs”. They’ll look at you strangely. They have no
> concept of the EULA and, if they do happen to see a EULA
> somewhere, they see it as “one of those annoying screens
> that I always click OK to, whenever it appears.”
> And therefore it shouldn’t matter? It shouldn’t matter
> that they don’t know what their getting themself into?
> ARe you also approving of predatory lenders?
It doesn’t matter what *should* matter. It *doesn’t* matter for Joe User, and it never will since Joe User isn’t going to be sued for breaking the EULA. In the very very very rare cases where he *is* sued, nobody will notice.
> “Secondary Machines. Users don’t install OSes. They rely
> upon OEMs such as Dell or Gateway to do it for them. And,
> consequently, they get any secondary machines with the OS
> installed at the OEM. This is a non-issue.”
> Every computer comes out of a factory perfectly to you
> guys, doesn’t it. […]
Firstly, single cases don’t matter. Secondly, if something doesn’t work, Joe User calls his friend who “knows about computers”. It’s up to that poor guy to curse the damn MS tactics, incompatible software, uninformative error messages and what not. But Joe User doesn’t care. I know this because I happened to be the poor support guy too often, either for friends or for people I don’t like, without being paid since asking for money would be unpolite.
> “Choosing an OS. Steering somebody to a free OS simply
> because you think it makes them “more free” […] ”
>
> Unless the kid wants to learn programming and how his os
> works.
Few kids want to learn programming. Even if they do, by the time they want to learn about *OSes* they know rather well what they’re doing and have no problems switching to whatever OS they like. Besides that, what percentage of the Joe User community have you targeted this at?
> But I can guarentee they will have no spyware and viruses
> bringing their experience to a complete halt in a few
> months.
Joe User doesn’t care about spyware and viruses. Popups and crashes are annoying but one can live with them. When the computer is too messed up to work with anymore, they call the poor support guy in the neighborhood. And I promise that your face will turn to pink and green stripes when you see what “too messed up to work” means to Joe User.
I don’t deny that there’s an unseemly underbelly of society that trades in pirated goods. But the vast majority of people in Western nations don’t install pirated operating systems. And I think it’s clear that, despite the fact that they *can* but they choose *not* to, they care less about OS upgrades than you think they do.
You’re not listening. EULAs — regardless of whether you like them or not because of their restrictions/limitations — simply aren’t an issue for users. They don’t care. Seriously, try asking 10 random people you meet on the street. They won’t even know WTF you’re talking about or why they should care. People don’t equate lack of freedom with something they don’t care about.
Nobody said that computers coming out of Dell or Gateway are perfect. That’s a strawman. I never claimed such a thing. But it’s a load of cr*p for you to suggest that the machine you get from Dell or Gateway isn’t functional when you get it. Nobody is gullible enough to believe such nonsense. If you want to say that your friend destroyed his computer, fine. I believe you. You can certainly shoot yourself in the foot, if you try hard enough. But I don’t think that’s the point you really wanted to make.
There’s no reason to even consider spyware or viruses as a factor when buying a computer, given the superb FREE automated tools that exist. Try Ad-Aware, Spybot, or MS Anti-Spyware Beta. The latter prevents spyware from even getting installed — so, seriously, you’re going to have to try harder to come up with downsides. There just aren’t any.
Bottom line: You still don’t understand end-users. I think you may be living in some kind of open source reality distortion field, where all of your problems are solved by the GPL. Either the software is free and your time isn’t worth anything — or you should admit that you have to spend considerable time configuring/maintaining/tweaking open source software, your time isn’t free, and, therefore, the cost is far greater than you’d like people to believe.
Straw man. You don’t have to install WMP10. Use an alternative media player, if you like. Winamp. Real. Flash. Quicktime. Or install a freeware open source player. The point is that GPL’d code doesn’t just run on free operating systems. It runs just fine under Windows. Which completely decimates your fundamental argument. There’s no reason you can’t get the same advantages of free software atop a commercial operating system such as Windows.
Ahhh… Joe User, I’m sure Mcaffee and Norton have made millions because Joe User doesn’t care.
Have you seen the support center at a compusa? Have you seen people bring in their crufty computers filled with viruses and spyware? Apparently since you know and see all.
There are businesses all over the country like this which Joe User is forced to pay an arm and a leg to because some fool sold them a windows system. Joe User has become a thriving business of exploitation. And just because you want to ignore this fact, doesn’t mean Joe User doesn’t care… it actually means that you don’t care.
“Few kids want to learn programming. Even if they do, by the time they want to learn about *OSes* they know rather well what they’re doing and have no problems switching to whatever OS they like. Besides that, what percentage of the Joe User community have you targeted this at? ”
Good call… why not play god here. I had a commodore 64 when I was young, a system where I was forced to program on it to get anything out of it. There is no reason to limit your kid from any sort of computer based education.
“It doesn’t matter what *should* matter. It *doesn’t* matter for Joe User, and it never will since Joe User isn’t going to be sued for breaking the EULA. In the very very very rare cases where he *is* sued, nobody will notice.”
And therefore we she continue to support it as the status quo, because we don’t care? I actually do care, a user shouldn’t feel like they are commiting a crime by using their computer for whatever they want to. I know you don’t care, but some of us have a conscience.
“Fiddling with numbers doesn’t help here. Real experience with Joe User from the neighborhood suggests that he doesn’t know how to install software or drivers, let alone know what OS updates are good for or how to do them.”
Maybe you live in West VIrginia or something… people I know aren’t quite as stupid as you seem to think they are. They haven’t been exposed to GNU/Linux yet, but that time is coming.
I’m fiddling with numbers? If you can’t tell how much of their percentage is desktop sales, then doesn’t keep you from drawing a conclusion from it if you have any sense?
I like how much respect you have for “Joe User”. Since neither of us can prove our claims, how about we consider the fact that Microsoft forced the activation scheme in XP. I’m sure they were just doing it for the heck of it.
…for desktop acceptance???
“There’s no reason you can’t get the same advantages of free software atop a commercial operating system such as Windows. ”
Hmm… right, except my next version of it will be free, and the next, and the next. When I want to change an OS, I won’t have to throw my comp away, or have to buy a new $200.
We are reaching a stage where the computers we use today raen’t going to be complete garbage after 3 years. Computers are reaching a level of power compared to its use that many people will be keeping the same computer for much longer. Maybe it is your dream that they remain with the 10 year old OS. I’d rather they got used to free upgrades, not a locked in product cycle with prices which get higher and higher with each new release.
You aren’t understanding that the poor cannot afford these upgrades, and really do need a free system. They aren’t a minority these days, as you and your friends here seem to think.
DO you realise that you are calling people’s grandmothers “pirates, from an unseemly underbelly”? Have you bought Microsoft FUD hook, line, and sinker? And of course you have absolutely no idea how big the warez underground is, so I see why you are misperceiving this whole scenario.
I actually don’t have to maintain my open source software, so there’s nothing to admit. All I have to do is click the update link when it turns red. Pretty simple.
Every person I know who has bought a dell or gateway has had a completely broken system within one year. I’ve seen it all over campuses and computers of family members. Mydoom, blaster worm… yeah, I guess that’s small time stuff.
I guess the problem is Joe User is always asking me to fix the computer that some MS shill sold them. If they had linux, I wouldn’t be faced with these issues. The rpm and debian systems built into updaters these days have taken care of dependency hell.
Bottom line, I spend no time maintaining linux installs… I spend all my time fixing other peoples windows installs… so please, take your bottom line and shove it. You can’t lie to someone who has had to clean the messes microsoft has left behind.
What are you saying? That you’re going to pirate Windows, with each successive version? If so, that’s rather pathetic. You can justify it any way you like. But you’re a thief.
The poor don’t need to upgrade their computers with every OS release. Get real. You can’t seem to get that through your head. Put a computer behind a good hardware firewall, install some free anti-spyware and anti-virus software — and JUST DON’T UPGRADE IT. MS can’t force you to upgrade. And, assuming that the hardware is reasonable, the computer will continue to run year after year after year. No additional costs. The notion that you MUST UPGRADE is a fantasy of yours borne from ideology, not reality.
Regarding your friends with broken systems, and as I said earlier, I would advise that they take some minimal steps and install a hardware firewall (no software–it’s too easy to disable), install good free anti-spyware and anti-virus software on their machines. Don’t install attachments sent in email. Don’t run random cr*p off the Web. End of problem.
Bottom line, I spend no time maintaining linux installs… I spend all my time fixing other peoples windows installs… so please, take your bottom line and shove it. You can’t lie to someone who has had to clean the messes microsoft has left behind.
Damn frustrating, isn’t it?
You can install firewalls, anti-spyware software, heck even have a hardware firewall. You can defrag, clean temp files and Windows will still fail.
Windows as an OS is bad. Some people on this very discussion believe MS crap. Really sad when their something so much better.
Ditch Windows, use Linux and increase the quality of Life.
“What are you saying? That you’re going to pirate Windows, with each successive version? If so, that’s rather pathetic. You can justify it any way you like. But you’re a thief.”
Umm, no… I’m saying that I can go from Fedora 3 to Fedora 4, to Fedora 5… year by year, release by release, for no cost. Since you’re apparently a windows user, I see why that concept would be foreign to you.
“Regarding your friends with broken systems, and as I said earlier, I would advise that they take some minimal steps and install a hardware firewall (no software–it’s too easy to disable), install good free anti-spyware and anti-virus software on their machines. Don’t install attachments sent in email. Don’t run random cr*p off the Web. End of problem.”
Why go to that much trouble when I can put them on linux which is not susceptible to spyware and viruses to begin with? Not to mention that the system comes with everything joe user could ever need. Joe User doesn’t play games. Most people over 40 don’t play computer games. On top of that, they can easily keep every program on their system up to date with a mere click.
My mother was using frontpage2000 for 5 years, needless to say it was far outdated and making all of her pages bloated beyond belief. Then I installed NVU for her. It will likely constantly be upgraded so we don’t ahve to worry that the program is going to be archaic and useless within a year, and she can keep up with making quality web pages with the times, not bloated pages that choke the web.
“The poor don’t need to upgrade their computers with every OS release. Get real. You can’t seem to get that through your head. Put a computer behind a good hardware firewall, install some free anti-spyware and anti-virus software — and JUST DON’T UPGRADE IT. MS can’t force you to upgrade. And, assuming that the hardware is reasonable, the computer will continue to run year after year after year. No additional costs. The notion that you MUST UPGRADE is a fantasy of yours borne from ideology, not reality.”
Why shouldn’t those who want to upgrade their system be able to? Because they don’t need to because they are poor? When people are stuck with the same system year after year, they are very soon left behind, when there is no reason they should be. We need to get people used to upgrading their system, because supporting the status quo because it is “business friendly” has done nothing but support disinterested users. Nobody should be on Microsoft for life support. Nearly everything that you do on Windows can be done on GNU/Linux. Have you tried it?
Folks, I love OSS and have been addicted to Linux and the BSD family of operating systems since the early 90s. And I have to tell you that the very thing OSS advocates crow about – – diversity and ease of customization – – is pure poison as far as corporate decision makers are concerned. I know: I run a tidy little network of 9 regional locations, about 250 employees, and Windows has never had a tighter grip on the desktop than it has now. I’ve tried to raise some interest in Linux kiosks, training workstations, terminals, etc., but, in the end, it’s too much trouble to retrain users and technicians. We just can’t see the profit in it.
Microsoft watches in glee as the number of “new” distros grows from month to month. The inconsistency of the Linux experience from one distribution to another not only bewilders the people who guide companies into the future, but it also leaves developers shaking their heads. Most developers are already so overworked that the idea of doing multiple ports or installation scripts for a single OS (if you can call Linux a single OS) is distasteful, to say the least.
There’s a lot to like about Linux as a server and, for those who are willing to take the time to play with it, it’s a powerful workstation. But until familiar applications can be slapped onto dozens or hundreds of Linux boxes remotely and in fully automated fashion – – without weeks of bumbling with scripts, etc. – – the desktop tide will not turn in favor of Linux in established businesses. You may say, “Yes, but look how many versions of Windows there have been in the last ten years.” True. But Microsoft has made it a simple matter to distribute packages via SMS and Active Directory. It just works. Linus himself knew it years ago: it’s the applications, stupid. You have to have them, first; and, second, you have to be able to distribute them quickly, and maintain them (i.e., with patches) with ease.
As much as I like the Linux scene, the realist in me sees that Linux will most likely remain a niche product – – a good server OS, a great high-performance computing platform, and a fine development platform for those working with Web apps and Unix-oriented code. The corporate desktop, like it or not, belongs to Bill G., and will for decades to come.
I have to say I disagree. I think we can all agree microsoft wants Linux to die. However in doing taking this stance they are trying to upgrade their product line and the new product line demands new hardware.
They are trying hard to say old hardware be damned, get new hardware.
Microsoft in a short time will only support longhorn, if you don’t have it oh well.
I know of two big corporations that are considering the move to desktop Linux because of microsoft tactics.
Oh and by the way Linux is a single OS, it has many distrobutions but one OS. Microsoft has mutliple OSes.
Of course liking the Linux scene you should know that, unless your a microsoft shill
> Have you seen the support center at a compusa? Have you seen
> people bring in their crufty computers filled with viruses
> and spyware? Apparently since you know and see all.
No. Here in Germany it is damn hard to get support at all, let alone good support, so those people would rather ask somebody they know.
> There are businesses all over the country like this which
> Joe User is forced to pay an arm and a leg to because some
> fool sold them a windows system. Joe User has become a
> thriving business of exploitation. And just because you
> want to ignore this fact, doesn’t mean Joe User doesn’t
> care… it actually means that you don’t care.
Yes, Joe User is exploited, but he doesn’t care. And actually, all Joe Users I know still have two arms and two legs, so it can’t be that bad.
Only a few geeks (including me) care about the quality of their software, which is probably why their/my computer runs a lot better than that of Joe User. Still, he won’t care.
> Good call… why not play god here. I had a commodore 64
> when I was young, a system where I was forced to program
> on it to get anything out of it. There is no reason to
> limit your kid from any sort of computer based education.
No, of course there is no reason. My first computer experience was also a c64, and I learnt a lot with it. Still, only a few geeks care about it.
> “It doesn’t matter what *should* matter. It *doesn’t*
> matter for Joe User, and it never will since Joe User
> isn’t going to be sued for breaking the EULA. In the very
> very very rare cases where he *is* sued, nobody will
> notice.”
> And therefore we she continue to support it as the status
> quo, because we don’t care? I actually do care, a user
> shouldn’t feel like they are commiting a crime by using
> their computer for whatever they want to. I know you don’t > care, but some of us have a conscience.
Firstly, of those people I know who pirate software, few do it conciously. Those who do aren’t what I would call a “Joe User”. Secondly, they don’t feel guilty. It is very honest of you to feel guilty about software piracy, but my neighbor won’t change his opinion because of that. He doesn’t even know what “software piracy” is.
> Computers are reaching a level of power compared to its
> use that many people will be keeping the same computer for
> much longer. Maybe it is your dream that they remain with
> the 10 year old OS.
No, not at all. This is not my dream, it is sad reality. As said before, do you think that a user cares about OS upgrades, if he doesn’t even care about device drivers being installed properly?
> I actually don’t have to maintain my open source software,
> so there’s nothing to admit. All I have to do is click the
> update link when it turns red. Pretty simple.
>
> Every person I know who has bought a dell or gateway has
> had a completely broken system within one year. I’ve seen
> it all over campuses and computers of family members.
> Mydoom, blaster worm… yeah, I guess that’s small time
> stuff.
No, in *my* opinion it makes a computer damn unusable. But *they* don’t care.
> I guess the problem is Joe User is always asking me to fix
> the computer that some MS shill sold them.
Exactly.
> If they had linux, I wouldn’t be faced with these issues.
That, on the other hand, is a lie. Joe User would soon find out that he has to buy additional, *Linux-compatible* hardware just to make it run –> end of Joe’s Linux experience. He’d rather stick with Windows, which was included with his computer and doesn’t cost an additional $50 for new hardware. Apart from the fact that opening the computer and exchanging hardware might void your warranty.
Things might be different with pre-installed Linux, and I’m really curious whether it will by accepted by Joe User.
> Bottom line, I spend no time maintaining linux installs…
> I spend all my time fixing other peoples windows
> installs…
Just what I expected. Still, Joe User doesn’t care.
—
Please, just explain what part of “Joe User doesn’t care” is so hard to understand?
I and several people I know have struggled with multiple installs of Linux. The 3 things we find extrememly necessary before the average person begins to even THINK about using it:
[1] No hassle install.
a) 1 package works on every distrobution.
b) Needs to be able to install a program on a computer not hooked up to the internet.
c) Needs to have 1 install for a program and not have to look for multiple dependencies. [Think MS games that use DX. They come with DX and if you already have the same or newer version, it doesn’t install it].
d) No editting seperate ini files (ex. inittab). Just click and run.
e) Better error messages when installing.
[2] Better development tools (yes really)
a) Microsoft has done an awesome job with Dev Studio. Nice interface, full control, compile and debug with all the options I need without having to resort to using some command-line occasionally for debug options.
b) Eclipse and KDevelop are a good start, but nowhere near as good as Dev Studio (yet).
[3] If you really want to gain the most market share, the main focus should not be on the developer but on the grandma who doesn’t have a Linux guru as a grandson. Many people have a hard time with Windows (laugh but it’s true)! If Linux has item [1] being more difficult than Windows, you’ve had it.
Once you do all three of these, the games will come, and then the people will come. I think it can be done (and I sure hope it is) within the next 5 years.
Good luck and please don’t take this as anything other than constructive criticism.
“Of course liking the Linux scene you should know that, unless your a microsoft shill”
Of course I know that Linux is the kernel. But people who think of “Windows” tend to think of that product as the sum of all that comes with the kernel at installation time. There is no concept of a “distribution” of Windows. And that was much of my point: IT decision makers don’t want there to be distributions of Windows. It is not encouraging to them that Linux, as they think of it – – inclusive of hundreds of Open Source packages – – is a constantly moving target, one that does not lend itself very well to standardization. And I might suggest to you that referring to people who manage Windows networks as “shills” won’t get you far in the industry, assuming you have any aspirations in that area. They are not the enemies. In fact, they often hold the keys to the doors that Open Source advocates want to open.
The Linux OS is good enough. Inevitable evolution of it is guaranteed. Applications for doing deep, sophisticated work, for the arts especially, and, for another random example of something I could use, boot encryption–out of the box, easy to use, no obscure commands–do not exist. Most Linux applications are hobbies, “works in progress”. I read on this site that Photo Shop might be Linuxized … great. More companies should do the same. Until they do, Linux is fine for writing documents, playing songs or movies, and surfing the web, but not much else.
Could you be a little nicer in your post next time, god man.
“No. Here in Germany it is damn hard to get support at all, let alone good support, so those people would rather ask somebody they know.”
Maybe Joe User is a German to you? We have a few more people over here.
“Yes, Joe User is exploited, but he doesn’t care. And actually, all Joe Users I know still have two arms and two legs, so it can’t be that bad.”
Really… Joe User doesn’t care? What about those making minimum wage or less with families to support? We are obligated to support and endorse their expoitation because??? I’m sure they care and only would need to be introduced to Linux and the freedom it could bring them.
We could keep going back and forth in this argument but it will just be circular. We will have to agree to disagree on this one as we are talking about broad swathes of people which we have absolutely no data on but our own experience, which is just too variable to make conclusive arguments from. One fact I read this morning in the latest issue of Maximum PC was that 25% of all software in the US is “pirated”.
“Windows is the most communist like because of thier practice of forcing their way of thinking onto the consumer. Trying to get everyone to be the same. Trying to rule the world.”
While I certainly share your passion for freedom of choice, it is important for even OSS advocates to be very clearheaded on one thing, especially where Microsoft is concerned. And that one thing is this: unlike political systems, where people can become helpless victims as a result of power concentrating in the hands of a few, the world of software is still one where consumer choice prevails.
The companies running Microsoft software all around the globe might agree that MS has, at times, grossly misused its market power, thereby killing companies that tried to compete and produce better products. But Microsoft has never had the power to render its consumers helpless – – there have always been alternatives for those who had the money, the expertise, etc., to acquire and run them. Linux is one such alternative. Apple has been an alternative. Once upon a time, TRSDOS, AmigaOS, and others were available. But people made their choices, and, as we know now, they put their faith – – and money – – into Microsoft. Just remember, though, that Microsoft’s position is one of economic dominance, and not one of tyranny. Anyone can choose to abandon Microsoft at any time without fear of thugs coming to do them harm. Furthermore, like the OPEC control of oil prices, care must be taken not to charge too much and push people to alternatives. There is a balance that has to be maintained, one of cost to benefit. Those who continue to choose Microsoft will, no doubt, continue to have profitable businesses and enjoy the fruits of success. This is where I think your analogy falls down.
> We could keep going back and forth in this argument but it
> will just be circular. We will have to agree to disagree on
> this one as we are talking about broad swathes of people
> which we have absolutely no data on but our own experience,
> which is just too variable to make conclusive arguments
> from.
Yep, you’re probably right about this.
How can you accept something you don’t know?
Of course this is not a troll.
I love Linux to bits.
But there is a small (or huge) price to pay for it.
If you stick with it – you may eventually start ripping the benefits.
I set myself the task of installing Linux in my sister laptop.
I thought it was going to be easy ..
The laptop is a samsung, the drivers are ATI .. I won’t blame any distro for failing to resolve the issue. I have my own favourite distro because it serves me well on the desktop, but it doesn’t even install on my Toshiba, so I preferred not to take chances with that.
Distro X .. looked very promising. It boasted a huge repository and gave the impression that by the way it install its packages I would see enormous speed. Installing a certain package could take up to 8 hours .. I didn’t notice any speed difference, and that is fundamental for the laptop since 1.5 Ghz is not the fastest of processors, anything not very streamlined will crawl. Beautiful website, wonderful community, fonts look horrid and I couldn’t get ATI drivers to install, the package management system got stuck with conflicts after many tries and reinstalls I gave up
Distro W .. A distro that boasts about simplicty and hence speed. I remember an ex-collegue having heated debates how we should forget our own and move to this one – that lead to a massive in-quarrel typical of Linux nerdy zealots
.. Distro W was fast but not faster, Distro W had issues with the Laptop and networking. With ifconfigs here and there .. I gave up
Distro K .. This distro is probably the most well advertised in the world.
I won’t say hyped because that is not fair. All distros are hyped, because we love our own and hence we believe we possess the best distro ever .. and so distro-bashing / distro-wars ensue. Distro K – the embracing the spirit of humanity, of service, of user friendliness .. but the CD wouldn’t even boot-up. :
Distro Z … Now I was very impressed with this distro. Worked out of the box. No wonder its one of the most popular. The resolution was better than all previous distros X,W, K.
ATI wasn’t fully installed but it already looked good. It humbled me .. how much work and effort these guys put into this distro – I feel small. I wrote an Ode to them – and Ode of thanks … I was happy, at last … and at last – it froze? :/
And it kept freezing and freezing .. so I read Wikis and LoverDiaries and followed a few hacks, eventually I couldn’t boot into the system at all.
Distro F .. This one looks powerful wooah … its is so compact wooah, so compressed, utterly light and optimized .. if only it could at least boot also! :S
Now I hate distro G.
I couldn’t possibly see myself installing such tacky crappy stuff.
I will download the beta version of P .. but G? no way – that is for masochists.
But I’ve installed distro G anyway .. (what the heck)
And it works .. and it is working .. and the fonts looks beautiful, the whole thing gorgeous, now I can see the meaning of the word eye-candy .. you wanna lick the screen.
How it detected the ATI is beyond me … and if that is a virtual hack, it is the best I’ve ever seen.
Just shows that while you have choice you have hope.
Of course early days ATI works but there is a hell of other things to look into now, meanwhile I am downloading distro P-beta just in case :/
.. oh and Enemy Territory for benchmarking
I’ve thought about what I was going to say here for the last 15 minutes and have come to the conclusion that no matter how I frame it, I am going to sound bad. So be it. I am the owner of a mobile computer repair business and I have made my money on the back of Microsoft. While daddies little girl spends weeks and months downloading trojans, viri and spyware onto his machine, I simply fix it and nod sadly as I deposit another check in the bank. I use kanotix and two other linux rescue program disks to work my magic. Is linux ready for the desktop?…no. But it is ready enough for a large number of people to be able to skim across the top and do their work without having to “learn” the system. Compare that with 3 years ago. In three of my offices across Texas, there is one windows machine in each for virus testing and diagnostic purposes. Everything else runs Linux. I find it hard to believe that Bill Gates is missing this point. His closest rival is called out to fix his buggy software. That’s a shame too because XP is actually a work of genius, as is MS Office…but its genius wrapped in garbage. My worst fear is that Oo 2.0 will be stunning. If too many people switch to Mac and Linux, my new lakefront home will have to wait. Luckily, I don’t see that happening for awhile. Most people choose to remain ignorant about machines that play huge roles in their lives and they spend thousands in the course of their careers on software that can in turn cost them thousands more. Exploited? No, but another adjective does come to mind.
Actually Linux is more than ready for the desktop.
it will be a battle of the Titans:
Linux / Microsoft / Apple.
Just ask your local computer shop how many times they offered a linux distro as an alternative to windows on a whitebox pc? I’ll bet you they’ll say never and continue on to tell you the hassles they have when some person walks in and asks for their new fan dangled, you beaut box to come with Linux installed. First they’ll tell you they have no clue which distro will support all the new hardware and once they do settle on a distro, they’ll then whine over and over again about trying to set it up through a DE that doesn’t even list all he hardware that’s installed, has no GUI tools to set up a new SBLive Sound card or that new ATI PCI Express Graphics card, can’t configure the sata raid or even get it working for that matter. It’s just too hard they’ll tell you, it’s not worth the hassle they’ll tell you. Just stick Windows in and all the drivers come with the hardware, stick in the CD and bang, sound happens, 3D graphics fly, the raid is auto configured, the wireless nic just works, the box is out the door in 1 hour, with Linux it’s a 2 to 3 day affair to get the same hardware running and without all the features you get if you installed Windows.
I know this is not really the fault of Linux, but until the day all the hardware guys ship linux drivers with their offerings and they work across most of the distro’s and don’t lack the features available to windows users, Linux will never ever compete with Windows on the desktop; sad but true
And that one thing is this: unlike political systems, where people can become helpless victims as a result of power concentrating in the hands of a few, the world of software is still one where consumer choice prevails.
Tim, this is Andy in MD.
New to the business, or just nieve? My work laptop runs Linux. I’ve (by request) moved a few friends and family to Linux. Our main producion servers are Sun enterprise boxes. I use OSS frequently and recommend it as the non-spyware and safer option…
…yet, by edict of management and contracts I must (!) use Microsoft Office and Microsoft Windows to do about 80% of my work. This has not changed in years and on multiple contracts. I just helped my boss write up a job profile for a new person or two that I will manage…one of the requirements? Microsoft Office experience including MS Access. The same sticky frustrating crap that I deal with on seemingly every project.
Consumer choice is nearly non-existant in many areas. I’m pressing for an Asterix PBX, for web apps, to stop using Microsoft Excel as both a database and a time tracker…and the projects we work on are for high-level government agencies and corportations.
People don’t learn. The only way around it is to constantly do something else and hope the gravity takes over…yet, Microsoft seems to be resisitant to it…they’re always there.
Andy – – you were wondering about my credentials? Ten years in TCP/IP and serial networking, five in IT management. I’ve had my hands in everything from Alphaservers to RS6000s to Compaq Proliants. I was doing contract work setting up Linux/Informix boxes in 1998 when my current employer offered me fulltime work. How about you?
Like so many soft, spoiled Americans, you really don’t understand what freedom is, do you? You say that at your place of work, you’re forced to use Microsoft software. In reality, no one forces you to do anything. You may turn in your resignation and leave when you like. The same is true for your colleagues. At any time you choose, you can swear never again to touch a Microsoft product. No one will hunt you down or persecute you. That’s what freedom is. If you lose your job because you’re too proud to use MS products, that is entirely your problem. The consequences are your responsibility.
I don’t know where you are on the management scale, but rapid growth in business is almost always built on a model of standardization. In other words, you build one unit, and from that one, you build tens, hundreds, or thousands. This applies not only to workstations, but also to corporate organizational structures and physical plants, like branch locations. My point is that the Microsoft way of standardizing is well proven at this point. Examples are on every street corner in every major metropolitan area. But what I hear repeatedly from the OSS camp are things like, “I heard that Company X is thinking about moving all their users from (insert MS product name) to Linux.” Sadly, those stories usually don’t pan out when you start asking how many companies have actually begun or completed such a move. It’s usually just bluster and myth.
So, in a nutshell, Microsoft has made countless companies billions of dollars, regardless of how buggy or virus-vulnerable you may think their products are. When Linux, for example, can make a similar claim, it will probably be the result of much development on the part of Novell or Redhat, and the price for the software will be as much as you ever paid for Microsoft.