Is Linux Out of Touch With the Average User? 1067
MrSmith writes "Is Linux's less than impressive market share an indication that the movement is out of touch with the average computer user? ZDNet examines five reasons that could explain why people are still willing to pay for (or pirate) an operating system when free alternatives exist. One of the reasons seems to be that despite what many Linux advocates claim, Windows users aren't on the whole dissatisfied with their OS: 'Despite what you read on websites and blogs, newspapers and magazines, people on the whole aren't all that dissatisfied with Windows. There are millions of users out there who just get on and use their PCs without any real difficulty.'"
Why I don't use Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
It sometimes looks that way (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not reassuring to the average user.
Out of touch with most end users? (Score:2, Insightful)
#6 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
No, Linux's market share is a matter of vender lockin, monopoly abuse, aligned with the fact that Linux is still quite a bit younger than windows.
The simple truth (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, why does Linux have to take over the world? Can't you just use it and enjoy it? I understand being passionate about it, I promote it where it makes sense. But honestly, it isn't a replacement for Windows. And there is no need for it to be.
Linux is great, but does it run under Windows? (Score:4, Insightful)
Take my parents as an example. No problem with viruses, hacks, or whatnot. Why? Because I set them up right and told them what not to do. The rest of the relatives? All using Windows (one heretic uses a MAC - but she is a California girl so we let her). Kids, they want games, games run under Windows. Who cares if WINE can make their game run, thats one EXTRA step they aren't going to take.
So, basically unless Linux runs windows software seemlessly and comes preinstalled it ain't going to make a dent. People run Windows because it works. Regardless of the FUD you hear here it does what people need it to do. People don't care what makes it run, just that it does. If a virus takes them down they get their friends to fix it or some store.
Really, why would you expect them to take the extra STEPS to change something that is adequate for their need? what does Linux do that Windows can't? (and don't go on about security - they don't care)
It's not Linux's fault... (Score:5, Insightful)
The answer is to just do what we do best. Show people, educate them, and let them see what Linux is. Keep up the grassroots movement. It will take time, but as long as we keep educating people that they have a choice, Linux will catch on. Microsoft started in 1975 with some stolen code on paper tape, and they didn't become a household name overnight, either.
Re:Yes (Score:1, Insightful)
It is fair to say that while linux is out of touch with the average user, so too is the average linux user out of touch with the average user.
Asked and answered, your honor (Score:4, Insightful)
The question contains its own answer. Most people - even most technically adept people - are not interested in installing "the movement" on their PCs. They want an operating system. They aren't interested in making a statement, bringing Microsoft to its knees, or sacrificing their souls on the altar of RMS' inevitable apotheosis. They want an OPERATING SYSTEM.
Linux is a great operating system, with - IMHO - just a few minor hurdles that must be overcome before it can be seriously offered to an average person (most importantly, AAA games and hardware support - like USB 802.11x dongles). And those hurdles can be worked around if the average person knows someone with some knowledge of the OS (much like the hurdles of Windows can be worked around if they know someone with some knowledge of the OS).
But yes, "the movement" is out of touch with the average computer user. As long as it thinks of itself as "the movement," it always will be.
Re:Ignorance? (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the average person is also entrenched in the windows paradigm. They really don't want to know how things work, but they have built up a certain level of knowledge in windows and might not be too inclined to start over again. Most windows users know how to load a new driver for example - you download it, then you double-click it (they are usually in executables that do all the work.) There are a lot of little things like that are big "achievements" for the average user, and he doesn't want too feel stupid all over again learning a new system unless he's REALLY been sold on the advantages.
Re:It sometimes looks that way (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course it is (Score:3, Insightful)
Is Linux's less than impressive market share an indication that the movement is out of touch with the average computer user?
Of course it is. What we're really arguing is whether that's a bad thing. Remember when AOL users all piled on to the internet?
Re:Ignorance? (Score:5, Insightful)
The average user only *has* one box.
The fact is, there are a *lot* of computer users out there. Most--I'm not exaggerating when I say it's probably 95%--don't care to know anything about their machine other than which icons to click to launch IE, Word, and Solitaire. Most users don't know what an OS is, or that Windows is one; they certainly don't know that there are options. They don't know the difference between memory and storage, they don't know the difference between the desktop and the hard drive; if you change their wallpaper they freak out that their computer is broken, etc etc etc. Computer runs slow? It's been two years, buy another.
To respond to the question in question, yes, Linux is light-years out of touch--not that it's unusable, but that most users don't know what it is, where to get it, or why they'd want it. The fact that it's bulletproof against malware isn't enough--they fear change more. Don't underestimate the power of inertia.
Re:The simple truth (Score:1, Insightful)
If Windows didn't threaten the freedom of its users, there wouldn't be. But with Microsoft having shown themselves willing to do whatever the *IAA want to restrict users from their fair rights (such as fast-forwarding through commercials on legally-purchased DVDs) there is a need to change the situation. The only way to do this is a credible threat from free software.
Re:Ignorance? (Score:1, Insightful)
I've been a linux user for 10 years and I think it's a great OS for many tasks. But my main machine is a Windows box.
Why? Because it has all the apps I need and I have to spend much less time maintaining the system. Tinkering linux config files can be fun for a while but after a while it gets boring and for normal people it's NEVER fun.
A few years ago I did a presentation of BeOS and linux to a bunch of "normal" users at a computer club. The simplicity and speed of BeOS was very appealing to them and most of them would have been willing to switch if enough apps had been available. They weren't very interested in linux, though, none of the technical arguments nor the philosophy of open source made much of an impact.
Naming (Score:4, Insightful)
Imagine using Linux for the first time.
Noob: What do I use to play CDs and MP3's?
Linux Teacher: XMMS
Noob: What do I use to edit photos?
Linux Teacher: Gimp
Noob: What do I use to play movies?
Linux Teacher: There's xine and VLC.
Noob: How about for IMs?
Linux Teacher: GAIM
Noob: Email?
Linux Teacher: Evolution
What the hell's an XMMS, Gimp, xine, VLC, or Gaim? Those names are awful, and they're often acronyms. If you ask any average Joe what a Gimp was, they'll tell you it's a guy who walks funny. How the hell are you supposed to know that that's an image editing application? Evolution's for email and not something to do with biology?
Photoshop. You have an idea what that's for. Internet Explorer. Same thing - I probably use it to explore the internet. Those are good names. If you're new to Windows, and you want to do something but can't remember the name of the program you're supposed to use, just look around in your Start menu or Programs directory. The names will probably clue you in.
Marketing and branding can definitely help - more and more people are hearing about Firefox, but that gained popularity first in Windows. Access and Excel aren't that descriptive, but they became household names because of marketing and bundling with Word, which is descriptive.
If people want to make Linux more "user friendly" developers should think a lot about the name they give their programs.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
That argument doesn't hold water anymore. Linux is approximately 16 years old and is based on a design that is ~40 years old. The original Windows codebase would be 22 years old this year if it weren't dead and buried. Windows NT technology replaced the original Windows line in the 90's, making the current Windows platform only 14 years old. So in actuality, it's Windows that is the young'un.
Re:Yes (Score:2, Insightful)
My wife browses the web (complete with flash for her all time favourite site YouTube) with Firefox, sends and receives email with Thunderbird, reads and writes documents with OpenOffice, NONE of which I had to compile from source or even drop to a command line to aquire.
Making claims like this is on par with Linux fanbois still decrying Windows for BSOD's.
I suggest that for the
- average
user who's interested in media, document and web a distribution such as Ubuntu is fine.Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
The hassel factor (Score:5, Insightful)
My home laptop (which is my main computer) is dual boot XP/ubuntu.
What do I boot to 95% of the time?
XP.
Simply because its less hassel.
I've used wineX, cadega, etc. I've built it from cvs, submitted bugs and the occasional patch to it, I've contacted game devs and worked with them to get new games to run under it (and had screen shots from my PC posted on developement group walls after they were impressed about it running under linux)
I only have 1 game even installed under windows, morrowind, and I know for a fact I could get it running under linux.
Why don't I?
Time.
It would take me an hour or two of messing around to get it working under linux.
It would also take me that time or more to get my wireless networking working how I like it under linux (ie knowing the WPA key for several different areas and using whichever is available at the time).
I'm a very busy person and I just feel no need to do it, when its already working without the hassel on my windows partition. I'm not fond of windows, but cygwin covers me for most things I need to do, if its really desparate I'll boot to linux, but thats a pretty rare occurance.
My home file server runs linux, my firewall runs linux, my personal IMAP server runs linux - I dont have an issue setting these up.
But when someone like me tends to use windows as a desktop it points to the fact that there still needs to be moreease of use put into linux on the desktop.
Users are lazy, until its actually easier to run linux in 99% of cases then its not going to happen. (and I don't mean better, I'd argue in general linux would be better for almost all things I do, but it isn't easier)
They dont want to be like us. (Score:5, Insightful)
The sheer arrogance displayed by the majority of us who want the world to take a look at Linux is miles beyond what is going on by those pushing Windows or even Macs. To most of the world, we come off as intemperate assholes who hate anyone dumb enough to not agree with us. Never mind that the world has managed to function pretty well in spite of Linux not running everything, we act as though all wisdom and knowledge reside strictly with us.
Hate Microsoft, hate Apple, but those organizations do not treat potential customers as primordial slime until they have evolved into dual booting at the very least. We talk down to our audience, we cringe at the thought of making adoption the slightest bit easier for noobs, and if you are a hardware vendor that balks at creating a driver for our benefit, well, we just might shoot your mama in the head.
Someday, our community may figure out that Marketing wins, period.
Nope, we wont, we have had enough time and evidence to know this, and we have rejected that argument.
Microsoft has another record quarter, while we just stay pissed off.
Take your best shot, I've got karma to burn, bitches.
Re:Ignorance? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It sometimes looks that way (Score:2, Insightful)
Thus the noobs will ever haunt the forums in the quest for a definitive answer. But the free software world lacks such a center of gravity, and almost everything boils down to preference. I'm an Xfce on debian guy myself, and that's what I recommend.
The only solution I can see is that we make an agreement among free software users like: "Everyone endorse Ubuntu whether you like it or not" so as to present the appearance of a "mainstream", a less confusing picture with less choices that's easier for the noobs to grapple with.
But, you know. Good luck with that.
Because maybe Linux is only just now usable?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is a good thing (Score:1, Insightful)
When you buy a car, you expect certain things - the fuel mixture to be appropriate for the engine, the doors to open and close, the sunroof not to leak, etc. I have several gearhead friends, and they all tweak everything on their cars. None of them, however, says I should drive a GTO because I'll have an excuse to be under the hood every weekend changing how the carb is functioning to make it run better. I'm an average car owner - I have no idea how to change my fuel/air mixture - and I "just want it to work". Car manufacturers take great pains to make sure when I turn the key on my Acura, it turns on no matter what, without my having to pop the hood.
Same thing with the OS. Average users really do care about security, but they don't know, or want to know, how to get iptables to properly function. Windows, largely, will handle this for them (maybe not as well as we'd like, but better than when it started). To state that it is a good thing that Linux is out of touch with average users does a disservice to those trying to bring the system to the "Common man". We make it easier for Grandma to use and see pics of the grandkids, without her having to drop to a shell every time she turns her printer on, the system will gain more ground.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:1, Insightful)
Well, lets see, if you want to use anything slightly less than a "everyone and their grandmother has this" kind of program (such as firefox, open office, ect) then it will likely have both a windows executable, and a source that you can compile to whatever version of linux you currently have.
Different language (Score:2, Insightful)
If this is any indication of what "just works" means to the community, then yes, Linux is very much out of touch with the average user (as well as a few non-average users). At least I didn't need to modify text files, however.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Until one of the steps was a completely vague "now write a shell script to enable all the attributes".
At that point I gave up and walked-away, and remembered WHY I haven't personally used Linux in years.
I'm the go-to guy for computers for most people I know. I have a 4.93 GPA in the IT course I'm taking. But Linux... it's just a pain in the ass.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason is user attitude (Score:5, Insightful)
When someone gets Linux, he installs is, starts it up and starts clicking around. Some things will work, some won't, but those that won't discourage him. After all, everyone says Linux is a geeks-only system, nobody but a true blooded geek can figure it out. So they don't even try and toss it as "too complicated".
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
If all the programs I own worked just as well under Linux than they do in WinXP, I'd change immediately. It has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the interface or anything else. People want an operating system to run applications and that's it. Everything else is far down the list.
I've wanted to use Linux for music and video production for ages. The combination of the emergence of the horrible Windows Vista, combined with the release of Ubuntu Studio have convinced me to give it another try.
But still, I'd much rather not have to learn all new software in order to use Linux. If a well-financed company came out with a commercial operating system that ran Windows programs properly, it would be a huge success, if only because of all the ill-will Microsoft has created for itself over the years. I know that I'd support such a project, and be willing to pay a few hundred for it, too.
Re:Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not saying 'they don't understand technology' or any other single thing. They lack any sort of sense whatsoever. To fully appreciate the stupidity of the average human, you have to have worked in a non-tech job where everyone has access, like a supermarket or restaurant. You will be amazed at how mind-numbingly stupid people are.
People with average intelligence and above are fine. It's the 50% below that point that really amaze.
Re:It sometimes looks that way (Score:1, Insightful)
I decided to stick it out there for awhile, hoping to listen and learn some stuff. I quickly realized that #linuxhelp really should have been called #linuxFlamePeople, as there was a lot more yelling at people to RTFM than actual help being doled out. I have been in and out of similar chatrooms since then and the situation is the same if not worse. There are at least some good forums out there now, like the Ubuntu forums, but for an average user who doesn't even understand computers, its pretty much an absolutely hopeless situation.
IT's the apps. (Score:5, Insightful)
Cinerella is unstable and not even 1/2 as usable as Adobe Premiere 4.0.. Apps like Sony Vegas, the current Premier, Canopus, and Avid Dv express kick the absolute living crap out of all the linux video eding apps all rolled together hands down.
DVD authoring also stinks under linux. It's not even at the par of the dirt cheap Dvd-Lab product out there without being a comand line expert.
Dont get me started with the effects and composting apps that simply do not exist under linux.
How about Engine tuning software? ALDL or ODB-II scan tool software? Electronics design software (Eagle Cad is the ONLY ONE and it's not that good) how about a Decent CAD package that is even 1/2 as useable as autocad was from 3 years ago?
It's the apps. People cant rip their DVD's easily (no anydvd for linux), they cant sync with their ipod without pulling teeth, they cant sync with their phone's contacts easily, installing non free and not in a RPM repository apps is something that even a seasoned linux user sighs at.
Linux is there, it's a rock solid OS. it just suffers from the same problem that OS2 and BeOS sufferd from. Nobody is making software that people want for it.
Hell I'd buy a decent video editing app for linux. It does not exist. Main Actor is utter crap and is the only commercial offering.
I'd pay for a native photoshop and Dreamweaver+flash suite for linux, and thousands of others would to.
It's the apps, plain and simple.
Re:Yes (Score:1, Insightful)
A geek has just baited you into an unwinnable discussion by being very coy with semantics and is attempting to boost his Karma and his imaginary standing among his imaginary Slashdot friends. He is using "Linux" not in the conversational sense, the same sense that Ubunutu uses it, but he means only the Linux kernel itself. The kernel itself does not involve a UI, that would be a 'userland' compnent, Gnome or X or Beryl or some other of the amalgamation of bits and pieces a person needs to end up with a functional Linux machine.
So by arguing with you that the 'Linux Project' has no need for UI people he is establishing that he is geekier than you. He will almost certainly be modded up by his likeminded peers because, just like him, they think that demonstrating minor semantic knowledge makes them 'smart' and they wish to perpetuate that.
Out of touch indeed.
Windows - the VW Beetle of computer systems (Score:3, Insightful)
People used to fall in love with the VW Beetle - hands down the worst car ever - but everybody knew how to fix it...
On the whole, people don't know what an OS is. (Score:4, Insightful)
And that's only because 'people on the whole' not only have no clue what an operating system is, they don't recognize the OS is often the seat of their frustrations, nor are they aware there are alternatives. It's actually a refreshing to have a user not blame their own PC ignorance for the delicate nature of their work environment.
If I only had a nickel for the number of times I've had to explain that Word is not Window, not only doesn't come with the OS, but you have to buy it. That inevitably leads to the question, "What is an OS?". That leads to the explanation of what Linux is - because there IS a choice and they deserve to know about it.
So - my own empirical experience - Windows fragility and weaknesses are not only a motivator for the development of Linux, but a well used marketing channel as well.
Re:Naming (Score:5, Insightful)
Need a spreadsheet? "Excel" will be the first word that comes to mind!
Want to get your email? "Lotus Notes" or "Outlook Express" - almost the DEFINITION of names that clearly explain what the application does.
Need to view a PDF? Good thing you've got the intuitively-named "Acrobat" available, isn't it?
And "Quicktime" is the first place I'd look when I wanted to watch a movie file. Really.
Re:Yes (Score:2, Insightful)
People like, and are comfortable with, what they know and most don't want to have to relearn "everything" just because they install a different OS. They aren't like us who like to tinker and exploring a new program isn't fun for them. I play with new programs all the time and throw them away if I don't like them. Most people don't want to do that... learning something just to throw it away when they find out it doesn't do what they want is not fun for them. This is particularly troublesome when they don't want to have the risk of having to move wholesale to a new platform (OS) and are afraid to find out that something they want/like doesn't work the same or doesn't work at all and then they have to move back.
And... believe it or not... many 'older' people do not know how to type. Telling them that they can type stuff on a command line and that it's 'more powerful' does NOT make them happy. In fact, it repulses them. Particularly when the experiences they've had when trying to deal with a command line even on Windows and they learn that you cannot make mistakes (syntax or otherwise) or the computer will 'fuss' at them or, at worst, do something they didn't want it to do. Think of "find . -name \*.jpg -exec cp {} ~me/pictures \;" and what that would look like to them and what they would be afraid would happen if they got any of those wierd characters wrong.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Everybody works with things they don't understand, and you cant understand everything (although you can try).
Calling IE the "internet" or even saying it's their "operating system" (or saying "Office 2007" is their operating system for that matter) is ignorant (by the definition of the word - lack of knowledge), yes. It however is not idiotic.
Computers are still not as simple devices as we'd like to believe, and for a casual user, there is a lot to remember. As a similar example showing my ignorance: I you show me a car, I can't tell you the make/model, and if you give me a model, I can't tell use the manufacturer in most cases. I'm ignorant in such matters - everyone has their own ignorances, and just because you know something that someone else doesn't, doesn't make that person an idiot - thinking everyone should know it, however, might make you one.
... Linux is ready for the avg user ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Look at windows, most software you use is bloated with spyware in it as it is. Why would a user want to pay for a OS that has big security holes and needs patched every week and hide known security holes from the user's because they have not patch it yet and lie about it. Next look at DRM who want's DRM in their system. There's a lot of reasons not to use Windows, and just saying user's are having issues picking between Vista Home, Pro, and all that who cares... Vista Sucks IMO they had VIDEO cards being labeled Vista Compatible and they wouldn't work with vista, that don't sound too great... Linux has it's strong points, and is NOT a alt to windows, people will want to use Linux because it is a Great OS overall, and the community is very helpful to new, or geeky users who need help!
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Say my grandmother clicks Applications -> Add/Remove and decides she doesn't want GAIM. It shows up in Add/Remove with a checkbox next to it so she unchecks it. She is greeted with a message that no, GAIM can't be removed from here and she needs to launch Synaptic Package Manager. If it can't be removed from Add/Remove then why is it even there? This is the case for half of the preinstalled packages that show up there.
Next, say she want to listen to an MP3. She fires up Add/Remove again and installs the first one she finds. Audacity I think. She launches Audacity and points it to an MP3 she has in her home directory, but it doesn't play. Of course there are no error messages or anything to alert her as to why it didn't play, it gives her no indication of that anything occurred at all. Looking all over the awful Audacity interface she randonly clicks on icons that look nothing like any other icons she has ever seen before, and certainly aren't accompanied by any text descriptions, she finally locates some kind of error list that succinctly informs her that MP3s can't be played because there is no MP3 plugin. No direction as to how to obtain the plugin, not even a hint.
She wull have exactly the same experience with every single MP3 player in the repo until she gets to XMMS, at the end of the list.
Or maybe she never gets to the end of tyhe list. Maybe she deciedes to play GnomeNetHack instead. She launches it. It asks her her character info. Once that is complete it promptly disappears from her screen with absolutely no explanation of why, or where it has gone, or anything else. Launching it again GnomeNetHack informs her that she has a game on and does she want to quit that game and start a new one. She wonders where this game is on since she certainly isn't playing.
Anyway, the repo idea is great and it might be the path to get Linux software installation to where it needs to be. But pretending that it 'just works' is silly. There is still a load of manual work that has to be done by users to get it there. You don't necessarily have to compile anymore but you might, you certainly need more knowledge than any given Windows user.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not a "Linux" problem, per se, it's a problem that most hardware manufacturers don't support Free Software (yet). So, just chill with your current favorite OS for a while. In the coming year, the whole IT industry is going to change. Dell is selling computers with Ubuntu. This will give hardware manufacturers an incentive to release specs, or write "open-source" drivers themselves, and (not soon enough) hardware support under GNU/Linux will be better than any other operating system (considering GNU/Linux runs on so very many platforms).
The other thing to note is that change takes time. The geeks will always be on the front lines of technological progress, and the regular joe sixpack and jane boxwine may follow along sometime later.
Re:IT's the apps. (Score:1, Insightful)
copy&paste (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Naming (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not as hard as you make it sound.
Only geeks buy a computer for the OS... (Score:3, Insightful)
The question you have to ask yourself is not what do end users think about Linux (they don't think about it), but what to commercial developers think about it? Why aren't they porting their apps to Linux as well as Mac and Windows? When you answer *that* question, you may have some idea as to why Linux isn't ready for end-users...
Re:Yes (Score:2, Insightful)
Nice try.
Re:IT's the apps. (Score:1, Insightful)
You are operating in the lower end of effects and production. On the high end, Linux is what people use...
There is Autodesk Maya, the best 3D animation and particle application in existence. Everyone uses this... have been since the 90's... when is called PowerAnimator and Wavefront...
There is Autodesk smoke, fire, flame and inferno. This is what is used for editing and compositing, in Films, MTV, etc etc... This is what is used at post houses...
You can easily burn dvds in linux...
Remember, you are talking to film students, not industry professionals...
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
i don't know how to rebuild an engine. i don't know anything about tax law. i can't separate waste from water to make it drinkable again. i can't start or fly a commercial airplane. i wouldn't know the first thing about properly laying a brick sidewalk. i am completely incapable of stitching up a wound...
none of the people who excel at any of the above tasks have ever once called me an idiot. why should i look down at them because they may not know something that i do?
the world is made of of all types of people for a reason. thinking you are above any one person makes you more of an idiot than they'll ever be.
dude.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
i've never understood this sentiment, however. that guy "who barely checks his email" is the guy who fixes and maintains the elevators in your building, or prepares your food in a restaurant, or builds the home you'll raise your family in, or in all truth, teaches your children. it's weird to look upon those people in such a fashion because they are "people who can barely check their email".
The very nature of our western civilization depends on these people to "play" their position - to sludge through toxic sewage and repair potholes @ three in the morning so you have the luxury of smooth driving surfaces and clean water.
this is the problem with a lot of smarter people in general. it's this broad-day perpetual masturbatory "how could you not know that? everyone knows that?" attitude - that permeates techies in general.
It's interesting - the adage of absolute power. If only a few IQ points has you feeling so superior - imagine if you had real power over others. Bananas.
Re: your points.
1. IE IS THE INTERNET. Unneeded complexity. To the user there is no reason why their concept of the browser should not be consistent with the internet. To a driver, ignition makes the car run - is it sufficient to have the average user need to understand further principles of ignition and internal combustion in order to be considered an adequate user of a driving vehicle? I contend it is unneeded complexity to have the user even be aware of anything other than what it is they desire off the web. I contend that apple gets it in this regard - it is UNNEEDED complexity. I contend that we can't have it both ways - if we have an educational system that produces drones (as the US system does) then it is important to give them simple tools that work. Can't produce drones, then introduce unnecessary complexity and then complain when they don't comprehend.
2. TURNING OFF THE MONITOR DOESN'T TURN OFF THE COMPUTER. Again. unneeded complexity. apple gets it and got it for a while. the monitor is and can be the computer. Less components are better.
3. REPRODUCTION: as many might argue that reproducing is the point of it all - and reproduction rates tend to vary inversely with IQ (i read that somewhere but i might be wrong) then it might be that these idiots aren't so dumb after all.
I like being contrarian. it's a boring day. let the flames ensue. I do remember reading about how european women on west indian plantations during slavery never understood why survival rates were so low for white babies but they insisted on having slave nannies (who poisoned the babies in turn - after all, they were slaves) LOL. Morlocks and the Eloi - hell, even Fight Club. It's such a dangerous attitude to have - yours - and it's documented EVERYWHERE.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
I do IT consulting all day, and I found the whole process thoroughly disheartening. I can understand that yes manufacturers need to release specs or drivers or manuals so that people can write things cleanly and easily, but I'm going to be waiting a while before trying it again. And I tried searching for the original link (I think on ubuntuforums.org), but that just underscores an additional problem: there's no one place to go when a user needs to just look something up.
Re:Naming (Score:4, Insightful)
Non-issue. Yeah... sure... Open Source folks seem to like picking wierd names. They're not marketing specialists. But its not the stumbling roadblock you make it out to be. A real neophyte is going to just go clicky-clicky on an icon or media file and go with whatever comes up. Heck... how many times have you heard a new user talking about "using the Internet" without a clue about what ISP or browser is involved (or even if they ARE involved).
I can play the name game in the Windows world too.
Imagine using Windows for the first time.
Noob: What do I use to play CDs and MP3's?
Windows Guy: WinAmp
Noob: What do I use to edit photos?
Windows Guy: Paintshop Pro.
Noob: What do I use to play movies?
Windows Guy: WinAmp or Windows Media Player
Noob: How about for IMs?
Windows Guy: AIM or ICQ
Noob: Email?
Windows Guy: Outlook Express
How many of those names are intuitive?
What's important here isn't the name of the applications. It is either access to Linux (sitting down at a computer that has it already installed and going with it) or specific applications. Most people have never seen a Linux desktop. And those that do rarely get their favorite applications. I would love to go to my local Fry's, walk down a software aisle, and pick up a software package knowing there's a native Linux install included in the box. I'm fine with most OSS alternatives. But I'd also like the choice. Competition is good.
linux is not Windows, never will be. (Score:3, Insightful)
Because your average user is not capable of building their own white box PC and installing linux or Windows for that matter. If you buy a pre-manufactured PC your choices for an OS are Windows or ... Windows. Go figure.
Correction, the PC HARDWARE market is extremely cut-throat. The cost of proprietary software is outrageously expensive especially when you compare the manufacturing costs of hardware versus software.
One word, games. Windows is a gaming OS, the majority of the games are for Windows, I suspect a majority of the pirated Windows installs are running games.
Actually the Mac is in the same boat as linux, small market share and competing with a monopolist for the desktop market. If you focus "most people" on servers you find that linux has a significant portion of the market based on IDG world wide server market reports. Why is that, because Microsoft has not been able to achieve a monopolist position in the market.
Every family member with a Windows PC has called multiple times with problems related to Windows insecurity. Often times it results in breaking down and reinstalling because recovery is virtually impossible. The only calls I get from family members I've given linux to is when they can't get a Windows game to run under wine. If there is no dissatisfaction its because users have been beaten into submission and accepted their fate of using a sub par OS.
Hardly, I suppose consumers are also shell shocked by the overwhelming number of hardware and software options for the Windows PC and so they end up never buying, right. When major PC distributors start selling pre installed linux desktops the choice will be made, or as is my case I help make the decision because I provide support.
Absolutely, and its hit and miss with Windows versions even when the box says it works. But as with Windows you will have a great machine if you choose the right hardware and software. It is also important to keep in mind that linux is not Windows so while there are obvious software alternatives in linux like Open Office or Firefox the more obscure solutions are there but will take some research to find. The open source projects don't have the massive marketing waste that proprietary solutions have but they still have solid solutions.
So don't use, but what kind of idiot would propose that the most powerful user interface be dumped in the name of making clueless mouse jockeys happy. And comparing the DOS command line to linux or any *nix shows the ignorance of the writer. I have to laugh anytime I watch the Windows IT guys doing something as simple as comparing two ini files by opening them in notepad and doing a manual line by line comparison, how lame and archaic is that.
As if the average user understands the inner workings of Wi
Re:I have 3 words for you: (Score:5, Insightful)
I know I'm being unfair, and that you could install the patent-restricted stuff to make the first two work (actually mplayer works better than anything on Windows), but that's not "without significant difficulty" for average users. They will see the error messages, either laugh and leave, or spend days making it work and then tell their friends that Linux sucks.
I don't know how to make #3 work. I tried dosbox, VMWare, Wine, and nothing runs it properly. And so it goes...
me thinks... (Score:4, Insightful)
I think what Windows has done is made computer users less intelligent, less intuitive, and MS likes them this way. Ignorant computer users will stick to what they know, they have brand loyalty whether its a good product or not, and they have learned all sorts of little tricks and quirks along the way so that when something breaks, they might be able to fix it.
Back in the day, you used to have to have some pretty extensive knowledge to operate a computer, and this could even be true for Windows 98, though it would boot into the GUI automatically, it was still running on top of DOS, and if something happened to your autoexec.bat file, you might have to mess around in DOS again to get it working.
If the common user spent more time learning about all the modern advances in computing, I'm sure many of them would at the very least have a dual boot system. Its true though, Linux is not 100% capable of replacing the common users desktop for the simple fact that they wouldn't know how to install software no matter how easy you made it. Modern Linux distro's are getting there when it comes to software distribution and system upgrades, but sometimes you do have to get your hands a little dirty in the terminal... as you once did in DOS.
I installed Ubuntu Linux 7.04 on my parents computer and turned it into a dual boot machine. I then rebooted into Ubuntu, and made sure that everything was up to date, and the applications they would need for their limited use would function. They were already familiar with the Firefox icon, so they knew they could check their email. They were also familiar with the concept of a "Desktop" so they could easily save email attachments to it, and then open them with whatever application loaded on the screen when they double clicked it. They Knew they were not in Windows while using it, but they didn't complain, and they actually said that they liked the ease of use, and the "smoothness" of whatever they were using.
That was all the proof I needed that Linux could be quite useful for the common user... especially if you consider that the common user only really uses a computer for word processing, solitaire, web browsing, and web based email services.
Some gamers previously posted the issues they've had while trying to use Wine to play their Windows games, which is a true downside to running Linux as your sole operating system. However, if the market share were large enough, it would be just as easy for the programmers to develop cross platform games which could then even open up the Mac world to even more video games as well.
Which came first? The chicken or the egg? In order for Linux to stand a chance on the common users desktop, we must first have consistent and simple methods for the user to install and run programs. Not to mention that programmers need to also take an initiative, throw out those god forsaken C# and
Linux, like Mac OS X, will not be replacing all Windows installations... but I think more users will be willing to take the plunge and delve a bit into Linux or Mac OS X. People have been asking me what a good laptop purchas
Windows is not 26 (Score:2, Insightful)
Windows has definately not been a household name for 26 years. 2007-1981 = 26, but your problem is that Microsoft didn't launch Windows in 1981. It had DOS in 1981, and that "brand" is all but dead. If you want to compare Windows as a brand to Linux (created in 1991), then they are at best the same age. And that is if you are comparing pre 1995 versions of Windows to Linux, such as Windows 3.0. However, the first Windows most people would associate with the "Windows Brand" would be Windows 95. When people think of Windows as a brand, they think of the Start button, the flag, and all the other branding that first started with Windows 95. Thus, if you are going to do a realistic brand vs. brand comparison between Windows and Linux, Windows is 4 years younger than Linux.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is the point. Cars are designed for everyone to be able to use. The above poster chose to call everyone idiots, and frankly, the lowest common denominator is pretty damn low. Computers should also be designed for everyone to be able to use. They should be as close to idiot proof as possible like cars are (a big enough idiot can easily fail it when it comes to a car).
Now sure, you can argue that windows is hard too and even the "user friendly" Mac OS isn't that easy to use, but none of that changes what the goal should be. To make a computer that is as easy for any person off the street to use as a car is.
I will grant that cars are more familiar to people than computers and its not really fair to expect computers to be easy to use for people who spent most of their lives never having heard of them, but they could be a lot easier than that currently are.
Re:Ignorance? (Score:3, Insightful)
The one counterweight I can see to this: Microsoft's and other proprietary vendors' heavy-handedness is probably what works mostly against them. That is, the numbers may favor taking the low-risk road for your OS and staying where you are. But despite the endless geek plaint against PHBs, many managers take their geeks' distrust as a data point - if your engineers strongly say that you should beware of a vendor because of lock-in, heavy-handedness and underwhelming delivery, that message starts to sink in. You can in fact translate that kind of thing into management-speak - it's about unearthing risks. And that's exactly what we've been seeing - open source is levelling the playing field in vendor relationships, even as it fails to make an adequate change for mass change away from Windows on the desktop.
In the US a large-scale analogy we have to this is land use and sprawl. Nobody really wants more sprawl, not even the people who live in it. I mean if you moved to the exurbs you probably went for some combination of cheaper land and lifestyle costs, more space, a little exposure to the natural environment, and privacy. If your community doesn't tame sprawl, all of those things will be either cut into or lost entirely: the nice big lot your house used to back up onto will be subdivided, increasing traffic and costs and decreasing privacy and exposure to nature. Yet to tame sprawl, you have to change your own land use - drive less, accept less space in the first place, pay more for a more carefully designed built environment etc. The momentum for sprawl is not that people believe in it, they simply don't want to change. This is how you end up driving from York PA to DC, despite 4 soul-sucking hours day commuting to and from work. Change is harder than continuity.
Re:Yes (Score:2, Insightful)
One thing to remember though is that when people speak of Linux's "user interface", they're referring to something that isn't part of the actual OS, but instead is yet another series of applications developed by outside parties, which is going to complicate matters infinitely. On the plus side, it also means that if you don't want to (or for some reason can't) use Xorg, you don't have to.
Re:#6 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:2, Insightful)
every recent distribution has a package manager where you can search for what you need and it downloads and installs it completely automated . there may be a few exceptions , but that's just the same for some windows apps .
I can only tell you this , Linux is not windows . so don't expect everything to be going exactly the same way . every OS needs a bit of effort to learn .
Re:I have 3 words for you: (Score:5, Insightful)
You COULD NEVER just click on an encrypted commercial movie in Windows and have it run out of the box. You had to install the proper video drivers and then you had to install a commercial codec that you purchased or received as part of an OEM deal. You never were able to play an encrypted movie without doing that.
Once you install the two codecs in question you can do the same thing under Linux as you are doing with Windows.
Just stop giving people uninformed information. If you don't know what is happening you shouldn't be volunteering your point of view based on that lack of knowledge.
You NEED to purchase a commercial codec to play encrypted DVDs under Windows and you need to do the same under Linux. You need not pay for mp3 support because Microsoft provided that but they did so at the expense of other companies and got sued for it.
If you didn't install it then someone installed it for you. That's the same thing that would happen in Linux. If the Linux user didn't install it someone could do it for them.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
Congratulations, you are one of them.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been thrown off by that uncanny acting skill even when I was the one benefiting. Let me paint a picture. I'm at some megastore, standing in line with Jenny Random Girlfriend, both wise and educated individuals, at the customer service desk to get a refund for Gadget-X that sucks. I make my plea, explaining how I'm dissatisfied with my purchase and would like a refund, all done in a friendly tone; they send me a manager to convince me otherwise. After a few minutes of condescending bullshit from the kid with the darker pants, Jenny steps up and unleashes a tsunami of enraged nonsensical babble worthy of a Jerry Springer award. No matter what the kid says, it's as if she were deaf as she repeats the same childish chorus. We walk out minutes later with our money and I give myself a headache trying to figure out how the hell that worked.
You see, it's impossible to reason with truly dumb or lazy people, because their logic skills is shit, they will always rebut your carefully crafted arguments with mindless drivel to frustrate you further as nothing you say will get through their thick skull. If you flip it around and act stupid, you give your adversary no option but to give in to your demands. Like the saying goes, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
This is also a major hurdle to people. How is Joe User going to know which of the 30 browsers he should use, or 20 file management utilities, or 20 calculators?
Umm, the same way he picks wheat to drive - a Chevy Aveo, or a Kia Sportage, a Hyundai Sonata, a Porsche 911 Carrara, or a used Jeep Wrangler, or ...? The only real difference being that cost is no longer a factor in choosing software.
Now don't get me wrong - I grok the idea you're getting at, in that most folks don't want to sit down and actually do this for each and every proggie they want/need/desire. But then again, if (as is the case anyway) most distros provide a set of solid defaults, then the rest is up to curiosity and desire of the user. Much like most users are fat and happy with the 'Baby's first GUI' look of Windows XP's desktop, yet there is a whole niche market of desktop modification programs out there for those who want things to look and behave a bit differently.
Re:They dont want to be like us. (Score:4, Insightful)
For instance, does XP support NFS out of the box? How about NIS? How do I get XP to reflect home directories and common NIS passwd signon?
Microsoft is arrogant-- their solution is "better". Ignoring interoperability with any other common OS (SUN OS, Solaris, AIX, HP/UX).
What about POSIX support "out of the box" (a standards compliant shell environment would be nice)? X Window support?
As a programmer, how about a C99 compliant compiler?
Yes, I use Linux and Solaris and I even know WHY. I also develop for Windows. I don't mind it, because it's a massive market. But, really, it isn't "Linux" that's arrogant, it's Windows.
Re:Yes (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Naming (Score:2, Insightful)
Original poster says: Lots of linux names are bad and this is a problem. Look at some of the names in windows world that are better for examples of good names.
You respond: Wait! You n00b. Lots of names in windows suck0rz 2.
How about responding to the actual point which is that project naming is a powerful device that can help get people to use applications? It may not be a magic bullet, but what seperates linux distros from windows in useability is in the details. Details that are often poo poo'd by the linux hacker crowd that still seems to have a loud enough voice to keep the "average" user away.
Re:Naming (Score:3, Insightful)
When your program has millions of dollars in marketing and focus group research behind it, and (by and large) has the features and ease-of-use that the majority of people are looking for, you can name it whatever the hell you want and it will succeed. Notice how all the apps you named come from large vendors who can provide all that. A given piece of free or open-source software won't gain widespread acceptance until it has the same featureset as its proprietary competitor (plus additional goodies as an incentive to switch), AND requires the same level of knowledge from the end-user re: installation, configuration, and error recovery, AND has enough marketing for it that people actually hear about it.
When you're in second place, you have to try harder. That's just the way it is.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
I beg to differ (Score:1, Insightful)
There are many developers who have recognized there are too many flaws in DOS/Windows still to this day even after having existed for roughly 26 years. Some users after not having their constructive criticisms taken under consideration have resorted to approaching some developers willing to listen and develop something different. In fact, the Linux community is so willing to listen they even provide the capacity to any user to provide patches for any changes in any program for Linux applications because they have access to the source code for mostly every application in Linux. This is something Microsoft Windows has never permitted to happen. As result, the opportunity for Linux grew from the fact dissatisfied Windows users wanted more input into what their computer and applications should be able to do. Microsoft as I interpret it is saying: "We have new improvements we have made that fall in line with our business interests and not necessarily your interests. As an example we have added DRM features which constrain you from sticking it to the Movie and Music Industry. In this release we also did not show you how we built all this stuff because we don't want you to change our stuff. We will force you to update your computer and your software and ultimately pay for this. Take it or leave it. As an added bonus, if you leave your computer unattended doing disk backup to another computer, we will interrupt that and go download and install any new updates/constraints we want you to have and reboot your machine without asking you if it's ok to stop doing your backup." Rebooting a machine without the owning user's intervention is bad design in my opinion. At some point it is important to have a human in the decision loop when important events happen and interfere with the owning user's expected results.
Linux has got the human in the decision loop.
>>2. Too many distros
Both Windows and Linux are alike here. Your argument does not stand on this point.
>>3. People want certainty that hardware and software will work
If more people supported the Linux community by asking for Linux drivers for every piece of PC hardware they bought, this would no longer become an issue. Only buy hardware that support Linux up-front.
>>4. As far as most people are concerned, the command line has gone the way of the dinosaur
Both Windows and Linux have command line. In windows, just go to Program Files->Accessories->Command Prompt.
In Linux just run a terminal application of your choice and there are many.
Any advanced user on any OS will eventually want to know more about the command prompt/terminal/batch files/shell scripts. Essentially there are many ways to skin a cat and automate your human tasks in windows and linux. Batch Files/Shell Scripts are one respectable alternative of many.
You are most assuredly misinformed here. You have not done your homework in my opinion because from what I can observe you don't seem to have advanced user status to support the importance for the existence of batch files/command prompts.
>>5. Linux is still too geeky
It's only as geeky as the user wants it to be. It's ready for prime time on the desktop given the right choice of Linux Supported Hardware.
One thing is certain. Whatever you can do in Vista, I could probably manage to do in Linux...on much older hardware. Give me newer hardware, I could probably manage do it faster than in Vista or Windows XP.
If Linux is too geeky, explain to me why the most popular applications on the planet, the Peer to Peer file sharing applications like Azureus, Frostwire, Bittorrent, Limewire, Skype all run on Linux as well as windows. It is because the real developers realize the up-and-coming importance of Linux, that's why. They realize the Linux User Interface has attained a certain level of maturity that merits exposure to first-time computer users.
Install any recent flavor of
In the end, is not ready. (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember the days when getting the Linux to recognize your video settings and bring X was like winning the lottery. It was that hard.
Last week I got a brand new PC System with the Asus P5L-VM1394, Pentium D. That's it! No funky hardware.
I loaded Fedora Core 6 thinking:
I have a pretty good feeling the all my hardware will be loaded smoothly, I just had that experience happening 2 or 3 times with different combinations.
NO CAN DO!
The 2.6.18 Kernel does not carry the Attansic Gigabit net driver atl1.ko so my net chip doesn't work.
This is a brand new spanking box! With brand new spanking hardware! The least I would expect is for the OS to cover my hardware.
I had two choices then:
1. Zap the drive and install Vista.
2. Do the rounds on the net looking for those crusaders who patch drives and post them on the web for little people like me.
The Asus board had the Linux drivers on a CD but they wouldn't build. I had some sort of error:
Well, do you expect the average user to understand simple concepts like kernel headers and global replacements in the make file?
Well?
Anybody?
After 2 hours researching on the web I found out that
the Makefile was looking for a deprecated file named config.h (I find a kind soul posted the info on the web). I renamed autoconf.h and my atl1.ko was built. I installed and the network started running. The upgrade program, yum, asked me if I wanted to upgrade my packages, I said yes. Why not?
I let it rip through the night and next morning all modules were updated. I rebooted and my network was gone again!
WTF!?
yum went ahead and upgraded my kernel from 2.6.18 to 2.6.20, thank you very much, and now the atl1.ko driver doesn't work with the new kernel. IT IS NOT SUPPORTED! Sorry buddy, better luck next time.
I was pissed and dumbfounded.
Some powerful chakra let my brain and my body depleted for the next two hours.
I went to play in my mac for a while.
Anger gone, I went ahead again and downloaded the Attansic net drivers for the 2.6.20 kernel.
Another post said that the drivers are now part of Linux 2.6.21..whoopee.
This time the drivers built on the first try and modprobe took care of the rest.
I was so ready to ship the damn box back and get a DELLVISTA box. But I digress.
But right now FC6 is humming along. The stand by or any power saving mode doesn't work. But sound and video really rock.
Michael and Bill are not getting my money and I don't have to sign any effing EULA contract. Not today.
My Vanilla Linux box is a keeper.
Maybe I should have started with FC7. I don't like odd numbers in my revisions of anything.
But one fact remains true:
Linux Distros will never compete with the home PC commercial domain,
until the hardware manufacturers commit to support it.
If anybody knows how to configure the acpid for an Asus P5L-VM1394 board, I'll be in my room.
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The VCR clock analogy (Score:2, Insightful)
Thanks!
Re:Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
I have an iPod, and I use windows for gaming. I'm in no way a shill, just pointing out what some people don't realize - is that having to grok the difference between thirty different absurdly and counter intuitively named components is a major hurdle for most users.
Not to mention - how are they supposed to know off the bat if a package they download and install is actually still an active project?
Now, if package management systems - like, say, a
Which brings me to the point that a lot of people make, that I'm not going to expound upon: the community tends to have their heads up their collective arse (as you have so aptly demonstrated). "You can't find the feature you want? Build it yourself! Don't bother me with your problems."
Linux is developed by developers for themselves, not as cohesive products to be marketed. That's why the UIs suck, why configuration utilities suck (tend to only do half of what you need them to do - to do anything else, you gotta drop to commandline or edit obfuscated config files after perusing cryptic how-tos and vague man files), and so on.. Projects like Ubuntu are slowly changing this, but there's a market untapped by any distribution.
They have "Easy, comes with everything a basic web-and-email-and-some-music user needs" and "Sort of easy but also kind of complicated, great as a development environment" and "Needs a PhD to use but is a very solid server"
Not to mention you have to sift through hundreds of distributions to figure out which one is right for you.
Taking the car analogy from one of the other replies to my post a little bit further:
It's like going to a car dealer, searching through the lot for the car body you want, the only information given to you on a placard in front of the car. Then, you pick what kind of seats you want. Then you pick what size engine you want, what metal the pistons are made out of, the thickness of the tires, what kind of glass you want your windshield to be, what brand of transmission - and then the model of the transmission - to put in... It seriously is a huge headache for most users.
Re:Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
What does 'Windows' mean? It is a word for a window, a physical thing in your house, a glass square that you can look out and see stuff. And your computer has a glass square and you can look 'through' that glass square and see stuff.
What is a 'mouse'? A mouse is a small thing that fits in your hand, and has a tail. And next to your keyboard there is one, and you can move it around and see an arrow move on the screen.
What is a 'keyboard'? A board, with keys. Look down under your hands, it's that.
What is 'Word', in the context of your computer? Maybe an application to work with your words (ie, word processor). Yes.
What is 'Internet Explorer'? Maybe an application to explore the Internet? Yes.
What is 'Media Player'? Maybe an application to play media (music, movies, etc)? Yes.
What is 'Paint'? Maybe an application that lets me do pictures? Yes.
What is 'Calculator'? Maybe an application that does on the computer what a real calculator does in real life? Yes.
What is the 'clipboard'? Place where stuff can be cut and pasted? Yes.
Stay with me now
What is 'Linux'? Another operating system? Good.
What is 'Ubuntu'? The first black guy off the boat in the movie Roots? (No, that was Kunta.)
What is 'GIMP'? A gay slave in black leather hood, kept in the back of a pawn shop in the movie Pulp Fiction? (hmmm. You got me there.)
What is 'Klipper'? A big ocean going ship? (arg)
What is 'YaST'? You use it to make bread, along with flour and water and eggs. (Arg)
What is 'Kopete'? A drug made from a cactus that grows in Northern Mexico? (No, that's peyote)
What is 'Firefox' - look at the icon carefully and see that it looks a LOT like your Internet Explorer icon? Internet Explorer on Linux? (Damn, good job.)
What is 'Kunta Kinte'? An operating system? (No, I already told you - he was the first black guy off the boat in the movie Roots.)
What is 'OO.org'? A porn site? (No, that's your new version of Office.) What's with the '.org'? (I don't know.)
What is 'amaroK'? Fuck this, I'm going back to Windows.
When Linux applications / applets start getting names that regular people can relate to - only THEN will we start overcoming the hurdles to acceptance. I've been using Linux of some sort or another on and off since about 1997 and there is no way in hell I'm going to say in public 'I'm going home where I will make Ubuntu and the GIMP do what I want.' Sorry, but no. Couple that with all the 'free as in beer' / 'free as in sex' (or whatever the hell) F/OSS political rantings - and we're just getting in our own way.
(Disclaimer - I'm in Firefox right now, on SuSE 10.1 Professional.)
For IE7, but not Firefox. APIs still too unstable (Score:3, Insightful)
But Firefox doesn't force you to upgrade unless they have to. Maybe FF 2.0 won't work on win98, I don't know. But all prior versions did. I used all FF's up to 1.5 on Win95 before I got a new box.
And FF 2.0 could probably work fine on any Linux distro. But the distros, for various reasons, can't easily support it. I think Mandriva 2007 had some GNOME dependencies on FF 1 stuff, so there was never an FF 2 upgrade path there.
And that is a real world issue. We Linux'ers don't mind installing a new distro version 2 or 3 times a year (and don't talk to me about apt-get distro version upgrades - I sure wouldn't trust that, so why should a non technical user do it). The one thing (other than monopoly lock-in and all the 3rd party apps) that Windows has in its favor is it's infrequent upgrade schedule. They apparently have enough functionality in their system that XP can live from 2001 to 2007 and nobody complains too much. That's a good thing.
Linux is still changing APIs (at least at the desktop level) every 6 months or so. And it's not going to catch on in a big way on the desktop until that shakes out. Why should it? I use Linux as my primary desktop OS at home, but I wouldn't recommend it for others - except other tech savvy folks that can appreciate what's been accomplished. Desktop Linux is really impressive these days, but it's not finished, and it seems unfinished *by design*. It's time to at least consider what would constitute a finished desktop Linux. Stable API's, standard sound libraries and packaging. That kind of thing.
Re:Yes (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It's about overall complexity, stupid! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:In the end, is not ready. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:2, Insightful)