| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Why people really don't switch to Linux | |
|
||
| Time: 16:44 EST/21:44 GMT | News Source: *Linked Within Post* | Posted By: Andre Da Costa | ||
|
Opinion -- Over in the DesktopLinux forums, people have been talking about why -- if Linux is so darned great -- don't people give up Windows and move to it. The usual suspects show up. There aren't enough applications. The right application isn't available. You still have to use the command line for some things. Some equipment doesn't have drivers. There's some truth to those, and some nonsense. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 333 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:30:13 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 75046 (201.52.233.175) at 5/19/2007 5:11:44 PM |
| Just because Linux is not this "darn good" after all... why we must use it just for that stupid penguim? Nonsense... |
| #2 By 79018 (70.180.232.32) at 5/19/2007 6:13:08 PM |
|
You ask most Windows user's if they have heard of "Linux" you will get a blank stare. Some users I know don't even know a mac OS is not Window and some have not heard of VISTA. The will buy a VISTA PC when they need a new PC and all the salesman will have to say it's the latest Windows version. They never look at a website about OS's, even a Windows site.
If you are on this site your not a typical pc user. One quote in the article stood out "I also know that most desktop Linux users will need to go to a shell to type in commands as often as their Windows-using brothers and sisters will need to manually adjust the registry. And yes, some equipment doesn't have Linux drivers that work very well. On the other hand, have you you tried running Vista with an NVIDIA video card lately"? The fore mentioned PC users have never seen the registry. They ask a geek friend like me for help. |
| #3 By 1401 (69.27.196.98) at 5/19/2007 6:21:42 PM |
|
At home, I've got a laptop running Ubuntu 7.04 and a desktop running Windows XP Pro.
I have to run Windows XP in order to be able to use my SSL-VPN into the office. In fact, it won't even run on Vista. Otherwise, I'd probably put Ubuntu on the desktop too (it's running in a vm on the desktop) |
| #4 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/19/2007 6:22:58 PM |
|
The Devolution of the Geek - formerly, the evolution of the PC enthusiast
There are very likely a great many people who come here that have never used a Lincues, or Unices based personal computer. So in order for those people to be able to easily experience running a Linuces, without having to commit the time and energy it would take to either partition a hard drive, or install an additional drive, or dedicate an additional computer, as a host, please go to Puppy Linux here, http://www.puppyos.com Without having used an operating system, it is next to impossible for people to understand it, much less imagine how it "feels." Not saying it can't be done - just that such people are rarer and usually found mumbling about all the cream pie being gone from the cafeteria as they wander the long halls of the NSA's corridors. Puppy Linux can be installed to just about anything - a CD, a USB Thumb Drive, a partition, or a new drive, if you like. Puppy Linux runs entirely in memory and unlike other pre-install, or [PE] environments, it will allow one to free up their CDROM/DVD burner as a storage location where one may store and save files created during a session. I recommend very new users simply create a CD, or DVD and boot from it and once Puppy is running, use the burner as a save to location for files. I use a USB Thumb Drive and often use PE's to look at and repair computers - though now, Windows Vista allows builders to create a great PE and hidden drive partition that their customers may use to repair or recover a Windows Vista installation, so older PE's aren't as necessary for me. [I'd like to write about that - the creating of a technician's computer and complete WDS environment for the distribution of Vista images (did you ever want to deploy an entire company's network computers in 15 minutes? I can show you how it is done)]. This may be a long one, so for those that don't like to read much in forums, it's time to skip over what I have to say. Cont... |
| #5 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/19/2007 6:40:16 PM |
|
Ok, so now you have a Linuces running and perhaps you have configured the network and installed some applications and begun to explore the operating system. You'll find a great deal that appears very familiar to you and much that doesn't, but with a little examination and some study, it won't take long to figure out what each component is used for and how they relate. This is important, because as I shared, it is improbable that most computer users will understand why Linux has failed and also why it might yet succeed as a great operating system - I won't say alternative operating system because that does not covey the respect that it should. The Linuces are just another family of operating systems and the selection of any of the commercialized distributions is [as it should be] regarded as a choice, not an alternative. Mentally, that levels the field of choices and best prepares computer users to make objective decisions.
If you've started to push your Linuces installation at all - even a little, the main reason the Lincues are not mainstream will have become very, and frustratingly obvious to you - application file association automation, or the lack of it When most Linuces users try new things, for which there is no application associated with the file type's extension, the operating system starts to fall well short of modern user expectations - the OS will ask the user what to do and offer little help of any kind in applying a solution. While this has improved in the last two years especially, it is still no where nearly as evolved, or automated as it is in Windows operating systems. In fact, file association automation is one of the things that made Windows so successful and users of Windows Vista, nearly headless. Cont... This post was edited by lketchum on Saturday, May 19, 2007 at 18:44. |
| #6 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/19/2007 6:58:46 PM |
|
The Devolution of the Geek is an expression of my personal frustration with our industry. I have no reason to be frustrated, for there is a reason that Geeks are harder to find - the are hidden amongst millions of new faces that do not love computer science and technology - a sea of people that simply wanted a good paying job. The "geek" as we have come to understand him or her, is very special - a perfect combination of intelligence and passion, bound together with discipline, conviction and resilience.
As computing and computers became commodities and appliances, the science became diluted where it was at its most prevalent - in the open markets. This is a natural and very good evolution because it provides the fuel necessary to enable further and more advanced research and development. The point is, there aren't any fewer Geeks, there just aren't any more as a percentage of the population than there used to be - they are harder to find, because they are harder to see. Now, where we have devolved is not in the science, it is in the description. Far too many people [with money] have defined people in the group just looking for a good job as Geeks. They aren't. Geeks are, as I said, rare and hard to see. So where are they and what impact does it have on the Lincues and their potential for success? Cont... |
| #7 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/19/2007 7:19:26 PM |
|
The Geeks I love, admire and seek to hire every day are not interested in the Linuces. <begin bashing now>
As I hope I have shown, installing a Linuces is not hard - if one can insert a CDROM and press a power button, they can run Puppy Linux. It doesn't take a Geek to do that. Geeks have and do run the Linuces, Unices and probably at least a dozen other operating systems, but they do not choose it over Windows Vista, Vienna and beyond. Geeks already know what is possible in computing science and they want to get there as fast as possible - they can't wait for Vienna, Fiji, or W2K8 Server. Geeks have relegated lesser development tasks to automation and less season junior developers - they have examined, tested and dissected the Linuces, Unices, Darwin and they already know how these operating systems have a nearly impossible hill to climb as multi-core and eventually, heterogeneous multi-core hybrid and fused CPU/GPU systems rapidly evolve. They've read the Intel roadmap and understand how much of a leap it has taken and how wide the next strides will be. Linux has not failed because it is harder to use - the main reason I listed before is the main reason it fails for users, but not Geeks and Geeks drive all the innovation in computing science. Linux has failed because Geeks don't prefer it, or develop for it, and they don't think, they know, it has a future that presents too many challenges without the kinds of technical returns that they know equally, are not just probable on Windows, but assured. Don't think for one second that the main reasons Apple delayed the next release of OS X is due to the iPhone. Apple has read the Intel roadmap too and they know as well as anyone, that OS X is in serious trouble and that architecturally, they are out of head room. Their hybrid OS has some very serious limitations and Geeks know this and exactly what they are. Geeks know their history, too - they know where the Lincues came from and why. They know why the Multices went off-line and why the universities stopped distributing source. Geeks know where they want to go and they know that they can't get there on the Linuces, Unices, or any hybrid [OS X] built on them. Geeks know they can get there on Windows Vista, and that what they build will run on Vienna and the OS that comes after it and that is why Linux has failed. |
| #8 By 20 (66.68.61.203) at 5/19/2007 9:29:22 PM |
|
It has not succeeded because no one has told end users that it's really good and they should buy it. Some Unix dork on a newsgroup is not sufficient. Until someone they a.) know and b.) trust tells them it's so great and wonderful, they won't buy it.
So, someone like Dell needs to start shipping it and then it'll suddenly be legitimate. Then users will get it, be frustrated and it'll suck and it'll cost Dell a fortune in support and then someone (maybe even Dell) will start filling in all the gaping usability holes that the Linux geek developers left out. They (mostly) only code the cool stuff that they themselves want or what they think everyone else wants. They have no concrete evidence of what real (non-geek) people want, so they haven't built it. After a few false starts and both bad and good press (mostly Good because the media loves an underdog, especially a socialist-type one that isn't a nasty, greedy, evil corporation), eventually it'll hit some sort of stride and find a niche and then it'll be like Apple for 10 years or so and then probably have some sort of breakthrough, or return to geek obscurity forever. It may eventually "die" (lose critical mass entirely) because the momentum it built will have evaporated and something else cool will come along to fill the void. But it all has to start with that initial credibility of being promoted, sold, and supported by a mainstream OEM like Dell, Gateway, even Apple. This post was edited by daz on Saturday, May 19, 2007 at 21:31. |
| #9 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 5/19/2007 11:17:43 PM |
|
Linux as a desktop replacement?
I have one word. Har, har har (maybe thats three words). |
| #10 By 52156 (64.229.151.65) at 5/20/2007 11:13:29 AM |
| Seriously, for a linux noob like me, linux is just too easy to break down when I'm poking around. |
| #11 By 79274 (75.67.161.119) at 5/20/2007 11:47:38 AM |
|
a) your suppose to just be able to put in a disk and let it install. I have NEVER seen linux install with a nice GUI. I'm not talking about drivers here. I mean just the install. Seems most installs i have tried can't even show a VGA display.
b) The software is just unstable not so much the os but the apps that run on it. Open source means lack of quality control agents that companies that need to make money on it have in place. argue it all you want but its true. You do get what you pay for. Not all open source is bad but the majority is just sloppy. c) firefox is a joke itself, standard compliant, ya right. How about respecting the widths of its own generated fieldsets ? Either support window.event or don't but don't secretely switch it during a patch so if(window.event) returns true. d) office, developer tools, etc.. They are extremely lacking compared to Microsoft. Sure you can do your basic stuff you expect from a word processor but nothing fancy like you can with MS office. Visual Studio is just the best developer tools. e) Integration. Plain and simple monopolies = good integration. I know if i use something from MS it will integrate (most of the time) with something else Microsoft. If you buy something from someone else and than soemthing from soemone else they wont integrate. Best analogy to me is the issue with DnD electronic tools. There are some good tools but they are disconnected like E-tools, Fantasy grounds, dundjinni or CC3. |
| #12 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/20/2007 1:25:36 PM |
|
#8, Dell is a hardware company and Apple is a products company - neither is a software company. It will take a software company to bridge just the gaps that would make for a viable Linuces based desktop solution. I don't think Dell wants to make that kind of shift - so what they kick out will be very specific and limited to very few device configurations - something they can manage, but something that won't have much headroom or ability to scale. So #9 and 10 nail it.
#11 gets what the real meaning of my posts about the Linuces, Unices and Hybrids. For those that tried Puppy Linux as I suggested - not very evolved, is it? Plenty of choices, for sure, and many decisions - but even basic things are not easy for end users and not very attractive to devs and engineers. For #11 a), Xorg support in Puppy is pretty good and the installer has a series of tests one may run before selecting to use the better performing Xorg over a less polished Xvesa. Regardless, it isn't even close to Windows, much less Windows Vista. |
| #13 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 5/20/2007 3:33:53 PM |
|
#12
Correction. Most Wall Street folks consider Apple (and Sony) to be consumer electronics companies. On the other hand Google is, D - none of the above. And I predict eventually Google will unseat MS when software becomes a commodity like hardware (very soon now). |
| #14 By 7754 (75.72.156.204) at 5/20/2007 9:39:35 PM |
|
And the author is? Surprise, surprise. Steven J. "One 'Hate Microsoft/This is the Year of Desktop Linux Article' Per Week" Vaughan-Nichols.
Hey, Steven... got a challenge for ya. You find for me an easy, well-supported throughout the industry, open source, runs-on-Linux app to replace ANY of the critical, vertical market apps in my company, and then we'll start a real discussion about desktop Linux. Until then, make up any reasons you want. It's still not the "year of desktop Linux." |
| #15 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 5/21/2007 10:01:46 AM |
|
I found lketchum's posts thought provoking...
[Geeks] are hidden amongst millions of new faces that do not love computer science and technology - a sea of people that simply wanted a good paying job. The "geek" as we have come to understand him or her, is very special - a perfect combination of intelligence and passion, bound together with discipline, conviction and resilience. Agreed. What motivates a geek is foreign (or laughable?) to the typical person. A geek would do what he does without compensation. A geek that is superior in what he does will see excellent compensation as well. Geeks are, as I said, rare and hard to see. Not usually. Try looking for overweight, pale-skinned, corrective lense dependent, lacking in style, with an unusual laugh, and completely lacking in athletic ability. (Martial arts are the nerds' idea of "competitive sports".) Geeks have and do run the Linuces, Unices and probably at least a dozen other operating systems, but they do not choose it over Windows Vista, Vienna and beyond. Geeks already know what is possible in computing science and they want to get there as fast as possible - they can't wait for Vienna, Fiji, or W2K8 Server. Geeks have relegated lesser development tasks to automation and less season junior developers... I've noticed in my consulting and full-time work at three huge corporations in three different industries that a distinguishing factor in the success of these companies is the willingness to embrace automation. Technology in-and-of itself is not sufficient and does not necessarily lead to advantage. Automation, however, can cut expenses, reduce errors, increase efficiency, and improve customer satisfaction. I've seen technology embraced for selfish reasons and out of executive media-induced ignorance--the result has been unfortunate in every instance. Geeks know where they want to go and they know that they can't get there on the Linuces, Unices, or any hybrid [OS X] built on them. Geeks know they can get there on Windows Vista, and that what they build will run on Vienna and the OS that comes after it and that is why Linux has failed. Here I disagree. The very challenge of making something work is what draws the geek's interest. For some geeks that may be extending Windows, for other's it's hacking, in the coder sense, Linux or a variant. |
| #16 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 5/21/2007 10:20:21 AM |
|
I remember having a discussion with a coworker in 1999 about Linux. I’ll never forget his comment: “Linux is for college kids who don’t have girlfriends”.
Not much has changed! |
| #17 By 2332 (66.92.78.241) at 5/21/2007 11:06:09 AM |
|
Strange. I don't use Linux because I like Windows and it does everything I want it to do. In other words, I see absolutely no advantage that Linux has that would make me consider switching.
Have there been in the past? Sure. Security was a big one. But, honestly, with Vista that has pretty much been resolved. Windows Vista is *more* secure than Linux, at least so far. Maybe if Ubuntu had come out 5 years ago, they would have had a chance. |
| #18 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/21/2007 11:50:10 AM |
|
#17, Exactly.
It's because there is a sense of fair play that exists in many societies, where we cheer on any challenger, that the Linuces are not evaluated fully, or objectively. In the context of a PC as an appliance, is how the Linuces need to be evaluated in the markets - where people choose Windows Vista for so many reasons - now, including better security. Within the technical community, the Linuces are evaluated in many ways that are not practically relevant to end users, but our press makes comments and offers opinions as though the possibilities on a Linuces are easily accessible to non-technical end users. The practical application of intelligence is where the Linuces fails for users who are either already well served by Windows, or who do not wish to, or have time to, make a Linuces work for them. The natural motivations to root for and cheer on the challenger that some hope the Linuces to be, blend what might be possible with that which is practically impossible for regular users. Apple, on a hybrid model, addresses this by closing its ecosystem and keeping it small enough to manage by limiting choices - and as they limit choices for devs and hardware engineers, they limit choices for their users - the very reason Boot Camp and Parallels exist - to restore those choices by running Windows [sort of dilutes Apple's marketing to my thinking]. The practical truth about the Linuces is what our press has the responsibility to share They won't however, and we're proof of it - the ad based idiocracy, that drives hits, is too compelling for even the most disciplined moth to resist.... my own dribble being only one example. |
| #19 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 5/21/2007 12:00:49 PM |
|
I don't use it because it does not fulfill my needs. It's as simple as that.
TL |
| #20 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 5/21/2007 12:24:35 PM |
|
There needs to be a compelling reason to jump to Linux, such as a dynamic new interface. From what I have seen Linux is simply trying to copy Windows, and not very well either.
Vista SP1 will probably solve most of the driver problems that now exist. Linux will always have driver problems. |
| #21 By 37047 (74.101.157.125) at 5/21/2007 4:01:08 PM |
|
There is a very simple reason why many people don't switch to Linux. It has nothing to do with drivers, UI, security concerns, etc. The number one reason people don't switch is...
<drumroll> It doesn't run Microsoft Office natively. Microsoft owns the office productivity market, and consequently, most companies run Windows so they can run MS Office. It is as simple as that. |
| #22 By 79383 (65.212.114.226) at 5/22/2007 7:17:20 AM |
|
And I run Linux because it does fit my needs, and at a much lower cost than Windows....
|
| #23 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 5/22/2007 9:16:48 AM |
| The revolution will happen slowly. 100 years ago, nobody had a horseless carriage and some thought they were the devil's machine. Now everyone has a car. Linux is making great strides yearly, even though certain convicted monopolists are spending every iota of cash & effort to derail it -- without much success (heh, go to any Linux site and notice how there are 4-6 banner ads & flash ads per page all promoting Microsoft... It smacks of desperation.) I can't say if Linux will ever make an impact on the desktop. Most people I know can barely handle Windows. However, Linux will NEVER go away. EVER. It will just keep growing and getting better & better. |
| #24 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/22/2007 11:02:33 AM |
|
#23, 100 years ago it was 1907. The Ford Motor company had been operating its automotive assembly lines for four (4) years - it had opened the first such lines in 1903. By 1907, millions of people were driving gasoline powered cars - considered economical and environmentally friendly. Gasoline was a by-product inherent to the production of Kerosene and gas used to sit around in vats and simply evaporate. Cars themselves were considered a huge boon to the environment, because horses produced so much solid waste it used to pile up in lots - the "sandlot" so many of us played on became empty and playable, because Horse Poo was no longer piled up there.
Point is, your logic is right on, BUT it does not support the Linuces – the reverse is more accurate. The history above aside, the truth is at that time and through 1929, there were many dozens of car manufacturers - just as there were many OS distributors from 1965 to 1995. Most were consolidated and either they were bought, or they went out of business because they didn't, or couldn't respond to market demands - features and price. Ironically, serviceability and reliability were the key issues. ***The crash of 29 started the consolidation that would be complete by the time America entered WWII. Perhaps more ironically, I studied this subject for several years as I sought to evolve a philosophy for the company I founded. I sought what were "Liberating Technologies" - with the automobile being among the most significant. That became the name of the company and the ideal behind it. The automobile, its industry and history, were the model selected and the concept of hardware as a service came from observing what tanked the small companies competing against the likes of Ford. BTW, the first car I ever worked on was a 1929 Model A Ford - the original owner could not afford shocks - so we soaked rags in oil as was common then and re-packed the shock cylinders. “Motor Heads” – racing enthusiasts that were more common after the war, were also huge Geeks and not so ironically, automotive engineers migrated into electrical and then digital electronics engineering and computing – playing with surplus gunnery computers as a hobby. If one could afford it, the track went into aviation, but since it is not nearly as accessible as a car, or computer…. well… you get the idea. ***Shoot, the ironies continue – the laws which were applied to Standard Oil, were applied to Microsoft – rulings which were overturned, in Microsoft’s case, because they did not apply. I guess I saw it very simply – the car liberated people physically, and turn-key, individually customized PC’s liberated them mentally, but also practically. |
| #25 By 6859 (206.156.242.36) at 5/22/2007 11:57:55 AM |
|
Anyone who does the 'computers to cars' analogy should be stopped right there, that form of argumentation has so many holes in it that you litterally could drive a Mack through.
Why don't I use a Linux distro (pick one) on my home machine? Because ATI + 3D + Linux = fubar. Once that's ever fixed, I'll think about it; but until then...nope, gonna stick to friendly XP Pro. I tried half a dozen different distros, 4 different version of the fglrx driver, two different xorg-xserver variants...all, and I mean ALL...would lock up after no more than 5 minutes of 3D use (in my case, Quake 4). Hardware issues? No, why? I can run under XP on the exact same machine--not an identical one, but the physically identical machine--and Quake 4 runs like it should, and the system doesn't lock. So there's something with the combo of ATI + 3D + Linux that doesn't work right yet. ATI has craptacular support for Linux, maybe someday they'll fix it so that I can switch. Maybe not. That's not up to me. I submitted logs, bug reports, tried everything I could. It was out of my hands. I was "hosed." Buy an nVidia card, you say? Gee, that's nice, but I shouldn't have to. It should just be fine, ATI and nVidia are the two biggest hardware dev houses for GPUs, I'm not going to buy a 7300GT to replace my x800GS just to fix something that I have provided the pummel-work to point out to ATI. They need to step up to the plate. So, really, Linux isn't at fault, it's something in conjunction with Linux that keeps me from going there. I tried for a month, it failed. Bummer. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 333 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:30:13 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
