GNOME’s Luis Villa has wrote an interesting entry in his blog, explaining why it is in Linux’s best interest that distribution communities seek out small Linux OEM companies and help them in providing the best Linux experience possible. “Obviously it is in RH, Canonical, and Novell’s interests to actively pursue Big Enterprise Fish like HP and Dell. But I’m really surprised that the communities around these distros haven’t sought out the smaller, and potentially growing, companies that are offering computers with Linux pre-installed. It seems like this is a win-win for everyone.”
Most entries on his blog are very interesting. I’d recommend everyone to also read his views on the latest chapter of the Linux/GPLv3 saga.
This one is another great read.
As long as there is no Linux distro targetting enough the average user with dumb easy usage, I see no benefit in forcing a system for an audience that will be unable to use it. And people have no problem paying for Microsoft Windows BTW, which Linux folks do. If buyers don’t want Microsoft Windows preinstalled, they just ask the computer without the Windows system. There’s no problem about it if you shout loud enough in the store.
As long as there is no Linux distro targetting enough the average user with dumb easy usage
Normally I like to explain my posts better, but perhaps you haven’t heard of Linspire? Though oft-reviled from within the Linux community, it is essentially the “Windows of the Linux world”, making many default decisions for you, and including media capabilities out of the box. It renames things to newbie-friendly names, even.
And people have no problem paying for Microsoft Windows BTW, which Linux folks do. If buyers don’t want Microsoft Windows preinstalled, they just ask the computer without the Windows system. There’s no problem about it if you shout loud enough in the store.
I have never seen that. I have been forced to either buy Windows with the system I want, or not buy the system at all. Yes, I can go online and build/buy white boxes, or even select from a meager selection of no-OS PCs from vendors such as Dell (who, by the way, often makes promotional RAM or LCD offers on the Windows versions of their PCs, but did not offer them on the no-OS version – at least when I looked last year). However, you specifically mentioned stores. I have yet to see a store targetting typical consumers offer to remove Windows and reduce the price of the PC by the cost of the Windows license. Never.
//As long as there is no Linux distro targetting enough the average user with dumb easy usage, I see no benefit in forcing a system for an audience that will be unable to use it.//
http://www.pclinuxos.com/page.php?6
http://www.pclinuxonline.com/wiki/HomePage
Easy as.
So much for thinking “no Linux distro targetting enough the average user with dumb easy usage”. Myth well and truly busted, in two easy links.
Edited 2006-09-24 07:13
If buyers don’t want Microsoft Windows preinstalled, they just ask the computer without the Windows system. There’s no problem about it if you shout loud enough in the store.
That is virtually impossible. 1st they will ask you to jump through a dozen hoops, pass you around a few sales-person/drone and then at the end of the day they will say it is illegal for them to sell a computer without MS Windows XP.
…Some people mod me down for telling the truth. Tell me why it’s not wrong to impose an operating system to people if most of them can’t use it and will reinstall Windows on top.
No they won’t “re”install Windows on top of it. They don’t even know how to do it.
They don’t even know they are paying for Windows. They don’t even know what an “OS” is.
And if they do, they are likely to use warez.
GNU/Linux is very usable, also for newbies. They may need help from geeks in order to maintain the system, but that’s equally true if they were running Windows.
All I can say is either:
– you have no experience providing support to people who are new to Linux
– you have experience but you don’t recognize that Linux is not made for average users
http://osnews.com/story.php?news_id=15811
you have no experience providing support to people who are new to Linux
Visit http://ubuntuforums.org or any other linux forums. Providing support for people who are new to linux is what we do there. How good is the help? From what I can remember as a new user 2 years ago… the people there did a fine job of guiding new users.
Pointing average users to a support forum really shows that you misunderstand what “average user” means. We are talking about people here who have no experience with web forums nor don’t want to learn it just to get their computer working, which should just work in the first place.
That’s exactly the reason why we are talking about pre-installed GNU/Linux computers. These are the kind of users that do not care (freedom, liberty and etc) but just want to use their computers.
By pre-installing GNU/Linux and making sure everything works, these customers will be getting the same experience with a MS Windows system. And for most first time computer users, it will be just another brand new computer.
1) The article written by Martin Girard is hilarious. He is effective babling. His article is complete invalid and based on so funny and wrong assumptions, that I won’t waste more time on it. Let him live in his own weird world. He has gotten it all terribly wrong.
2) Of course the average _WINDOWS_ user will have problems switching to Linux. So what!? They are not likely to switch anyway, because they are so dumb, they are almost noobs. That nephew you wrote about in the other post, is such an average user. They think they know a lot but they don’t. They are however almost as few as the geeks. His parents will be perfectly fine with Windows or Linux, Mac, eCS, desktopBSD or Solaris for that matter.
Windows-geeks will have little problem in switching, because they _are_ in control. The average user (and they are few) are not in control, but they think they are. They will have to relearn, but they will quickly understand it. If they don’t, then they aren’t average. Then they are n00bs and need help from true average users.
If they cannot install an application on Windows, they will be equally helpless on Linux. If they can learn how to do things on Windows, they can learn how to do it in Linux. And installing applications in Linux is usually much easier than in Windows. Windows is the least n00b-userfriendly OS atm.
Maybe we should be making a point of the difference between “use” and “maintain”.
Linux is definitely ready for the average USER, provided they have a competent MAINTAINER.
As I said (or tried to) in the article Joe User links to, whether or not Linux is ready for you depends on 1.) the problems you’re likely to encounter versus 2.) your ability to solve those problems (which can include calling That Computer Guy over to get him to help you).
For instance, Grandma probably has no problem-solving skills (other than calling her grandson), but she’s not likely to run into many problems because her needs are simple and well-defined.
On the other hand, a sysadmin trying to network a bunch of computers and interface with Windows, Linux and Mac terminals probably WILL have lots of problems, but he hopefully has the skills to deal with them, or the resourcefulness to find solutions.
You just godt a mod point upwards
Yeeessss preciousssss, let’s make a point out of the difference between “use” and “maintain”.
But making that difference also proves that GNU/Linux is everybit ready for the desktop as is Windows – well that is if any of those two can be considered desktop ready. Personally I consider OS/2 2.x much more desktop ready than Windows or GNU/Linux + Gnome or KDE.
No they won’t “re”install Windows on top of it. They don’t even know how to do it.
They don’t know how to do it, but their nephew does. This nephew know Windows but not Linux.
They may need help from geeks in order to maintain the system, but that’s equally true if they were running Windows.
Same as above. All computer store knows how to deal with Windows, and has cheap hour rates. None of them knows how to deal with Linux. If you ever find a company that provides Linux support, it’s damn expensive, so you end up paying more than the Windows license after a few hours of support.
GNU/Linux is very usable, also for newbies.
It is. Only if these newbies are young geeks. My grandma is problably gonna give up on Ubuntu. Windows is hard enough for her.
Yes, GNU Linux is very usable for some people. But the determining factor is not whether you’re a newbie, hardcore windows users, profesional artiste or etc etc. The determining factor is how you approach a new learning /life experience.
GNU/Linux is desktop ready for anyone who is open-minded and has the willingness to try anything new.
It is definitely not ready for closed-minded Joes that only eat a single type of food in his life and refuse to try any other kind of food and declare other food sucks.
GNU/Linux is desktop ready for anyone who is open-minded and has the willingness to try anything new.
It is definitely not ready for closed-minded Joes that only eat a single type of food in his life and refuse to try any other kind of food and declare other food sucks.
Then we both agree. Linux is not for the average Joe user, in other words, 99% of people won’t be happy with a Linux box.
Ubuntu includes drivers for most common hardware. Install it and it works. Windows, on the other hand, … well, I hope you have to time to spend searching the Internet for drivers.
Exactly, Windows comes with less drivers out of the box, but for all exotic hardware you have drivers, jut go to the vendor’s web site and download the driver for your win printer or for your webcam. No exotic (or very little) hardware have linux drivers. All cheap chinese hardware only come with Windows drivers.
2) Of course the average _WINDOWS_ user will have problems switching to Linux. So what!? They are not likely to switch anyway, because they are so dumb, they are almost noobs. That nephew you wrote about in the other post, is such an average user. They think they know a lot but they don’t. They are however almost as few as the geeks. His parents will be perfectly fine with Windows or Linux, Mac, eCS, desktopBSD or Solaris for that matter.
Windows-geeks will have little problem in switching, because they _are_ in control. The average user (and they are few) are not in control, but they think they are. They will have to relearn, but they will quickly understand it. If they don’t, then they aren’t average. Then they are n00bs and need help from true average users.
If they cannot install an application on Windows, they will be equally helpless on Linux. If they can learn how to do things on Windows, they can learn how to do it in Linux. And installing applications in Linux is usually much easier than in Windows. Windows is the least n00b-userfriendly OS atm.
You gotta be kidding. Are you being sarcastic? So now, installing software on Linux is easier than on Windows? Then my grandmother is able to compile her own kernel any time. At this point there’s no reason to keep discussing, really….
Normally I like to explain my posts better, but perhaps you haven’t heard of Linspire?
Yes I have, I even tried for a few weeks last year, and I didn’t figure out how to use CNR. I used default applications that were already installed.
Sorry guys, I actually use Linux for development, but that’s it. Linux is hard to use by geeks, it’s unusable by regular people. It’s not for mom and dad, it’s developped by immature selfish people and as long as it’ll stand true, Linux will be a hobbyist OS. This can still last years.
Exactly, Windows comes with less drivers out of the box, but for all exotic hardware you have drivers, jut go to the vendor’s web site and download the driver for your win printer or for your webcam. No exotic (or very little) hardware have linux drivers. All cheap chinese hardware only come with Windows drivers.
Linux has support for much more hardware than Windows :
http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/ols_2006_keynote.html
Which was the first OS to support these things you think ?
* USB 2.0
* Bluetooth
* PCI Hotplug
* CPU Hotplug
* memory Hotplug
* wireless USB
* ExpressCard
You gotta be kidding. Are you being sarcastic? So now, installing software on Linux is easier than on Windows? Then my grandmother is able to compile her own kernel any time. At this point there’s no reason to keep discussing, really….
Please stop the FUD. Installing (and updating) software on Linux is much more easy than Windows. For example on Ubuntu (a good distrib for new Linux users IMHO), clicking on “Applications/Add Remove program” and making one click to download and install an application with forever automatic updates is much more easy than googling for an application, downloading it, installing it.
“Linux has support for much more hardware than Windows:”
Yes, this is true, as I found out myself recently. To my surprise the Windows install disk lacked an Adaptec hardware RAID driver for my computer–a very common RAID controller. The Windows install disk has fewer drivers than any recent kernel you can grab from kernel.org. Of this, there is no doubt.
As Joe User was pointing out, however, the difference lies in the nearly universal availability of drivers for Windows. When they are not on the install disk, they are easily obtained from the manufacturer’s web site and just as easily installed: no kernel recompile, no worrying about generating a .deb from the .rpm you found, and no wondering: is this going to work? Well, this isn’t exactly true, there is always a moment when you wonder if it’s going to work regardless of the platform.
I like and use GNU/Linux alot, but to say that it is easier than Windows is untrue. The day may come when many of the tasks that require a lot of manual intervention and user familiarity with the inner workings of the OS are automated and installing a driver or any other software will be no more complicated than a double click. I know that for most software in Linux this is already true. If this trend continues then we may see widespread adoption of GNU/Linux.
Or, maybe, our OS will be so coupled to the hardware through a TPM/DRM module that no one in the future will be able to use any OS that has not been signed by a “trusted” manufacturer. The kernel devs say that they don’t want to restrict the freedom of the manufacturers and their corporate sponsors. In their idealized, fantasy world the freedom-loving market will cause the commercial failure of devices controlled by TPMs and DRM, and the technology will die a “natural” death. In reality commercial success or failure will be decided by how the 99.99% of the population that knows next to nothing about software and hardware chooses to spend their money. And when they are faced with a choice of getting the latest and greatest technology, albeit with a TPM chip that restricts what OS and programs they can run, or a system in which they have to compile their own kernel and live with restrictions in their ability to watch HD-DVD and hear the latest pop music of the day, I am pretty sure most people won’t think twice about the TPM chip in their computer. To think that the market will decide upon freedom is very naive and ignores alot of history. The kernel developers are pragmatic people and just want to continue to write software regardless of the use of their software, but in an age where digital technology pervades our lives, a principled stand in the cause of freedom by those who are most knowledgeable would have been important, if only because of the weight and authority their opinions would have. Instead, they choose to live in a libertarian utopia.
In their idealized, fantasy world the freedom-loving market will cause the commercial failure of devices controlled by TPMs and DRM, and the technology will die a “natural” death.
So you think we have to embrace TPM and DRM or otherwise innovation will be at stake?
they choose to live in a libertarian utopia.
Err,they do just what they like,coding for human beings not per se shareholders.And preferrably under a license that ensures equall sharing and continuity.
Or, maybe, our OS will be so coupled to the hardware through a TPM/DRM module that no one in the future will be able to use any OS that has not been signed by a “trusted” manufacturer.
No one can force you to utilise a DRM/TPM chip,it’s just a piece of hardware.Without an OS that makes use of the chip itself is pretty much useless.And then again i’m confident about the fact that what mankind has made can be circumvented.
I agree that joe average user doesn’t mind because he/she doesn’t know of the TPM/DRM existence unless their favorite computer activities are badly influenced.
“So you think we have to embrace TPM and DRM or otherwise innovation will be at stake?”
The technology that I was referring to was DRM/TPM. The stated position of the kernel devs is basically: “Don’t like it? Don’t buy it, don’t use it,” and DRM/TPM will die.
As to “forcing” anyone to buy a computer with DRM, you may have well not have a choice if all the mfrs are employing it which they may well do if there is a strong market demand for restricted content. The majority of users may well not care. You can always build your own computer I suppose, but those people will be very few. So what happens to free software and to its users if most machines start shipping with TPM modules that tie the OS inextricably to the hardware? As you said there will always be methods of circumvention–what one man can do, another can undo–but is this the kind of world we want? Perhaps these questions are better left to the political arena, but to deny that there may be problems is to close your eyes.
> It is definitely not ready for closed-minded Joes that
> only eat a single type of food in his life and refuse
> to try any other kind of food and declare other food sucks.
You are making a mistake here: You conclude that a user is closed-minded and eats only one kind of food just because they don’t want to mess around with their computer. There is a great difference between being open to new experience, and being open to new computer programs. To most people, their computer isn’t their life.
True. Computers, food, car, atm machine, clothes are not life. But it is a part of life experience. As time goes by, some becomes a larger part of life and some becomes smaller.
Whether we want to admit it or not; computing is one of many experience that will become a larger part of a modern life. And to some extent, how a person face a part of life experience can tell us a lot about how he face life in general.
It is a great lost whenever a person tries to ignore a large portion of a life experience. He/she will try to justify it in many ways. But at the end of the day, it boils down to fear of change.
Here are some quotes by those who fear / fail to see / underestimate change:
“The telephone has too many shortcomings to be considered as a means of communications” –Western Union 1876
“Everything that can be invented has been invented” –US Patent Commissioner 1908 (not so sure about the time)
“The phonograph has no commercial value at all” –Thomas Edison (1880)
“The radio craze will die out in time” –Thomas Edison 1922
“The automobile has practically reached the limits of its development” –Scientific America 1909
“Man will not fly for fifty years” –Orville Wright 1901
“A rocket will never leave the earth’s atmosphere” –New York TImes 1936
“There is a world market for maybe five computers” –IBM’s Thomas Watson 1943
> True. Computers, food, car, atm machine, clothes are
> not life.
Food and clothes are life. Computers are less important. ATMs aren’t important at all. Most people do spend time when choosing what to eat, or how to dress. In contrast, much less people do spend time with their computer. ATMs are at the lowest level, meaning nothing to people except when they don’t work.
I should have been a bit clearer than saying “computers aren’t their life”. Actually, computers play an important role to office people, computer gamers, and so on. What I intended to say was, “tweaking/understanding the computer until I can do what I want to do” is *not* part of people’s life (unless they are the support guys).
> It is a great lost whenever a person tries to ignore
> a large portion of a life experience. He/she will try
> to justify it in many ways. But at the end of the
> day, it boils down to fear of change.
The reluctance of most people from switching to Linux is only remotely connected to fear of change. It has much more to do with spending a lot of time with something that just isn’t interesting.
Compare that to the examples you have given:
– using Linux allows me to use other, maybe even better, more stable software on my computer
– the telephone allows me to talk to any friend, girl, relative, or colleague instantly
– radio and CDs allow me to listen to music and to dance without a band playing where I am at the moment
– fast automobiles allow me to visit people who live in other cities very quickly. They also allow many people to go to the next big city every day, to work there and meet friends
– the plane allows people to go to holiday very fast. They also allow to visit other contries and see a different culture.
Guess what is more exciting?
So if the nephew knows Linux, everything’s fine then, right?
Your argument doesn’t seem to have anything to do with Linux itself at all. Windows is hard for some people to use, the only reason it ‘wins’ in your examples is that’s what people think a computer is.
If they can’t use Linux it’s Linux’s fault, if they can’t use Windows it’s THEIR fault? I suppose it might be valid to agree with this (especially because linux is still not perfect) but you’re still placing Linux at a disadvantage because it’s NOT WINDOWS.
Linux will NEVER be Windows.
On the other hand, many people don’t need Windows specifically, they need something that lets them check email, write documents, listen to music*, chat with friends… Guess what? Linux is capable of such things! So why are you effectively saying “why should you even dare try?”
*Yes, it is capable. It may need configuring, but it can.
My grandma is probably gonna give up on Ubuntu. Windows is hard enough for her.
Oh, really? What makes you say that? Given a web browser, and perhaps a word processor, what applications do you think the average Grandma needs?
Let’s face it. Those are the things that most casual users do with their computers: web browsing and word processing. Firefox and OpenOffice are no harder to use than there Windows counterparts. As for the platform, what exactly can you not do in Ubunutu that you can in Windows XP?
Installation and initial set up are probably the only areas that might potentially cause problems for this type of user. However, they would have the same problem with Windows if they had to install it from scratch. The only thing Windows has going for it in this area is that it comes pre-installed and configured on 99% of desktops on the market.
I think I can safely say that if it were not for that fact, Windows would actually be harder to install. Ubuntu includes drivers for most common hardware. Install it and it works. Windows, on the other hand, … well, I hope you have to time to spend searching the Internet for drivers.
In short, this argument is bunk. And as Linux gains popularity, it will only become more obviously untrue.
“Oh, really? What makes you say that? Given a web browser, and perhaps a word processor, what applications do you think the average Grandma needs?”
Grandma wants to see her grandkids live…meaning a webcam and live video over an IM client such as Yahoo..so Linux is not for Grandma and won;t be until the devs pull their heads out of their ass and allow proproetary code to be linked. Else Linux will stay where it is..hobbiest OS at best. I use it..but can not for everyday tasks due to the extreme political nature of Linux. Fact, whether you want to believe it or not.
> so Linux is not for Grandma and won;t be until the devs
> pull their heads out of their ass and allow proproetary
> code to be linked.
I think this conclusion is coming too fast. The feature set of Linux is only remotely connected to licensing. Evidence is the huge growth in features that Linux has experienced *without* proprietary code. So I’d rather say: Devs need to understand that webcams and the like *are* important for adoption.
*LOL*
Their nephew is MORE likely to know Linux than Windows. He will be the one to introduce them to Linux
The computer stores are irrelevant. The question is whether Windows is easier than Linux or not. Fact is, users are equally screwed on Windows than on Linux. Where they get the help from is irrelevant in this regard.
And no, Linux isn’t usable only for young geeks. I know of several persons (complete n00bs) running Gentoo. I maintain the systems, but they run them. They can easily figure out how to open OpenOffice.org or Firefox or Thunderbird. They used the same applications on Windows, so they cannot see the difference.
Your grandma is probably above 70 or perhaps above 80. I’d expect her to give up on all OS’es
My father is using Gentoo, and he is 68. And complete n00b in regard to computers.
GNU/Linux is very usable, also for newbies. They may need help from geeks in order to maintain the system, but that’s equally true if they were running Windows.
Truer words have never been spoken. My close friends and family members who are computer novices would probably never survive in the Windows world without my help. That being said, if one of them were to switch to Linux, they would be S.O.L. because I don’t know enough about Linux to be of any use to them. And I don’t personally know anybody who knows enough about Linux to be of any help either.
That just underscores the fact that there are a lot more people knowledgeable about Windows in the world (or at least here in the US anyway) than Linux. I think either OS is fine for novices if they have a geek standing over their shoulder, but both OS’s pretty much suck if not. The difference is that if a novice chooses Linux as his OS, he has a lot less avenues to turn to for help. Most people aren’t willing to spend hours pouring through Google, mailing list archives, to get their questions answered. If they were, I’d never get any calls
“GNU/Linux is very usable, also for newbies. They may need help from geeks in order to maintain the system, but that’s equally true if they were running Windows.”
Mom and pop know that linux is NOT usable. They use it for instant messaging over Yahoo with voice and video..not supported under linux..they are looking for a job and need to submit their resume in MS Word format, they do it in OO and the resume looks like crap as the formatting is not right at the hiring companies end…you should be getting the picture. Fact is Linux only does what geeks want it to do, not what regular people want it to do. That is the problem. Yes, I use linux, but guess what, I wanted to talk to my family when I was in Iraq..that left me options which Linux does NOT support. Fix those issues before you say it is a useable system for the everyday user.
They use it for instant messaging over Yahoo with voice and video..not supported under linux..they are looking for a job and need to submit their resume in MS Word format, they do it in OO and the resume looks like crap as the formatting is not right at the hiring companies end…you should be getting the picture.
Yes, the picture is clear. Ordinary consumers have put their eggs in the basket of proprietary vendors, who have shown again and again not to care about the needs of their customers, but to their own need of propping up the bottom line. A need that is invigorated by nameless shareholders, who go for maximum profit and don’t really care about the ethics involved. They can push the ethical responsibilities on the corporation.
Using closed, proprietary formats and protocols locks you and your day to day computing activities to a small group of very wealthy corporations, locking you in and forcing you to stay on their top dollar wares.
You could have looked around to find stuff that doesn’t make you a money bleeding slave, beholden to the interests of faceless shareholders through a corporate entity. You and all other computer users could have opted for fair competition and open formats and protocols. This way you could have used whatever program on whatever system to communicate via video, audio and what not.
Most people didn’t and now they find themselves imprisoned in an inescapable Win32 world, because leaving means losing communication with those who are still incarcerated. Sad, but no longer reversible.
The new generation of kids, and only the ones who are not hampered by their parents, will probably discover GNU/Linux and run with it. They will overcome the lockin barriers and build another ecosystem, free of money interests influencing how they communicate.
The kids, whose parents actively force the Win32 situation on them, will become dependent on that prison as well. They will eventually be left behind with the current generation stuck on win32.
There is only one sensible reason that some people defend the current Win32 situation. They are dependent on that system, as they are irreversibly locked in. Any alternative system gaining the upper hand will automatically transform them into digital have-nots.
Anybody sane will try to fight becoming irrelevant as long as they can, but if you are on the losing side of the battle, it will only postpone the inevitable. The buggy-whip industry is dead too, after all.
“Using closed, proprietary formats and protocols locks you and your day to day computing activities to a small group of very wealthy corporations, locking you in and forcing you to stay on their top dollar wares.
You could have looked around to find stuff that doesn’t make you a money bleeding slave, beholden to the interests of faceless shareholders through a corporate entity. You and all other computer users could have opted for fair competition and open formats and protocols. This way you could have used whatever program on whatever system to communicate via video, audio and what not.”
Your points are valid, with the exception of that there was only propietary systems that did what business needs and the consumer needs on the desktop back when the decisions were made. My point remains, that until they can do voice and video over the standard IM clients, poeople will not switch. That becomes a deal breaker. Propietary or not makes no difference, the capabilities still need to be there, as only then will there be true choice. I use linux for most of my day to day activities myself, though I do have to reboot into windows to take care of certain other things as well, mostly business and government related. The big picture needs to be looked at, not just what OSS developers feel that people need, but rather to listen to the people and find out what is needed.
It’s so untrue.
OO.o has fine formatting. I have yet to find a complex Word document that didn’t look right in OO.o
Excel documents however is a different issue
Perhaps yahoo video messaging is common in USA, but it’s not how it is in the rest of the world. And video messaging _is_ supported on Linux.
“It’s so untrue.
OO.o has fine formatting. I have yet to find a complex Word document that didn’t look right in OO.o
Excel documents however is a different issue
Perhaps yahoo video messaging is common in USA, but it’s not how it is in the rest of the world. And video messaging _is_ supported on Linux.”
Well, my OO.o word documents have never looked right when opened with Word after doing them. Could be just my experience of course, or something I am blatantly doing wrong, no denying that.
Yahoo is what is in use by many businesses and people in the US, simply as it was there before MSN was. I do know that MSN is in use heavily over the world just not in the US. Since that is where I live, that is what I use in order to communicate.
Voice and Video is in Linux if you can get someone to use Netmeeting, as it does not work with MSN either without crashing out.
I’ve run into problems with the end-of-page orphan control. I’ll set everything up just the way I want it in OpenOffice, and then discover that Word has decided to move an entire paragraph onto the next page, and turn a long document into an even LONGER one… or messing up a document such that only the paragraph header is on one page…
But that’s about it.
OpenOffice.Org writer is very good with its Word compatability.
Is anyone actually reading the screen that comes up when you mod down someone?
Please do not use this feature to vote down comments that you merely disagree with, or even ones that contain factual errors or misinformation. Rather, use the reply feature and enlighten us all with your opinion or correct facts.
This doesn’t seem to be off-topic, offensive or spam…
Some people mod me down for telling the truth. Tell me why it’s not wrong to impose an operating system to people if most of them can’t use it and will reinstall Windows on top.
No one is imposing GNU/Linux on anyone. It will only be provided as an option. Customers can still asked for it to be removed and not to be charged for it OR for another OS to be installed.
The same can’t be said about computer/systems manufacturers that has an OEM agreement with Microsoft.
http://system76.com/ even has a support section in the ubuntuforums –> http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=158
I have no experience with them, but so far the general feeling i get from people that bought their system there is of satisfaction.
his credibility is degraded by the fact that he codes in C and not in assembly (like a real programmer)Lol
this guy is always very insightful and agree that users of linux should monetarily coerce computer manufactures into being foss friendly. vote with your wallet and
eg dont buy OPTUS ISP because its cable modem have no linux USB driver. buy only hardware that is linux friendly.
let your small retailers know that you want only OSS software in your PC
and buffalo soldier i agree with your comment, people are ignorant and lazy(most of them)the problem is not whether linux is better its that they caught in prison they built themselves. they can’t and won’t improve.
after all if ain’t broke dont fix it, – a typical luddite PC user.
but thankfully linux is picking up. i used to think that people would never pick as it was too hard. but its changed and since we have companies like IBM using OSS as a weapon against Microsoft i think we’ll be alright.
guys vote with your wallet. pick linux friendly companies.
eg i hate monoplies so naturally i thought Intel was bullying AMD. it probably is. BUT intel has OSS graphics cards. so the next vega card i get will be an intel (hopefully they can compete with ATI and Nvidia).
when other companies made excuses about trade secrets INTEL came out and boldy showed that they are not afraid of competition. so guys go with linux freindly companies. Intel is my first.
I believe for a real newbie person, it wouldn’t matter much what OS they’re using. As long as he/she can get their objective work done.
My girlfriend is a good example. She’s not computer literate(misspell) and at one point I used to dual boot with Win XP and Debian, using Gnome.
I’m not sure if she really knew it was different, and I may come and boot into Debian, but she never said a word to me as far as what system she using. I eventually stop booting into XP and she still haven’t asked about it.
She does use Win XP at work for minor input.
true ghostdawg people can be converted. but we cant convert everyone. people need to actively seek an improvement.
youre right the typical user sees no merits in OSS, perhaps were are race apart to the average person.
Buffalo Soldier hit the nail on the head! ghostdawg has a very good point as well.
Linux has always been a year away from being “ready” for the desktop. Thing is that it’s always got something in beta being worked on, this is the nature of Linux. Many people all working towards an end goal, but not necessarily ever working together, or seeing each others code.
Sometimes you are working on a project and the specs change all the time, the users don’t even know what they want or need. How do you attain a goal when they kep on moving the net. How many software projects failed due to inability to define what it is you want, how ’bout them FBI…
Linux has been ready for my desktop since 1996 when I first discovered it, well shortly after as there was no video drivers for my Matrox Millenium II right away as it was brand new on the market. That did help me get used to the command line faster though.
When I think about it, with Linux, each and every year the same people tell me it’s not ready for desktop because of something alpha/beta that came out in the last year isn’t there yet. Meanwhile you can go years without any significant functionality improvements on another OS I see around, and people just clamor about how great it not knowing what is coming down the pipe or rave about what the next version will have. But they don’t tell me how they can’t use the current version until the new one is released. And yes there are special cases where there is no choice and yes that applies to windows more than any other OS for modern computing. My point is however that for many people, the Linux desktop is “ready”, and I think the people that say how they love the current version of their windows would consider the Linux desktop “ready”, and those that hate Microsoft can do whatever they want.
Microsoft may be entrenched, and people do not like to change when they are comfortable, but that doesn’t mean the Linux desktop is not “ready”. Nor will there likely come a time that one operating system is right for every case and last forever.
Many people take detrimental actions against themselves every day, putting themselves through hell because they can’t bring themselves to change. When it comes to computing, I’ve learned to accept the changes that make my life better on a whole. I still have my vice, smoking and others, so I won’t claim to be any better, simply state that I understand.
I don’t know that computer retailers/integrators should be the ones to support the os on the machines they sell, even in piecemeal. I want the specs from Lenovo/Creative/ATI/etc… each time they release a machine or piece of hardware to be able to write functional drivers for the hardware they sell. Give that to the Open Source community and the hardware will be appropriately supported.
I remember thinking that Linux was ready for the desktop when Caldera 2.0 came out (what? 9 years ago?). You know what http://www.caldera.com has now? A SCO name. You know the only operating system with a screenshot on the page? Windows Mobile.
I remember thinking that Linux was ready for the desktop when Caldera 2.0 came out (what? 9 years ago?). You know what http://www.caldera.com has now? A SCO name. You know the only operating system with a screenshot on the page? Windows Mobile.
And this proves what? That a (bad) change of control at a failing Linux company might make the company pursue other avenues, like destroying their credibility and profitability through bogus litigation…
For every dead GNU/Linux company of the past, a new one has popped up. Overall the current crop of GNU/Linux companies are doing fine.
Caldera 2.0 may have been ready for the desktop of that time, but time has moved on and so has GNU/Linux. Current distributions don’t resemble Caldera 2.0 in any way. Similar to Windows XP not resembling Windows 3.11.
Why should the community seek out these small companies and offer them free help, instead of the small companies seeking out the communities for free/paid help?
Why put the burden on the community when the burden should be on the companies?
If the small companies make money from it, they should pay for the help as well
> Why should the community seek out these small companies
> and offer them free help, instead of the small
> companies seeking out the communities for free/paid help?
Because the goal is not fair distribution of work, but establishing Linux as an OS for the average user. Also, the communities *do* get a bonus from such work, since their userbase increases. You can count this as a kind of PR work.
Regarding OEMs that pre-install linux, anyone have recommendations of decent ones? I have a couple of people wanting me to recommend them home systems and I’m leaning towards something that comes with a Linux distro pre-installed. So far, these guys look promising http://opensensesolutions.com/ with Ubuntu desktops. Anyone have experience with their products? Anyone else?
Now about the thread of discussion, sure, you are more likely to find some store (who’ll charge of course, quite a bit in some cases) or a geeky friend/relative that can help folks with their windows ailments than their linux ones, but guess what? The biggest revenue generator for the folks that “fix” your computers for a fee (not counting hardware failures here in which case it makes no difference what OS you’re running) is virus and spyware cleanups. The ubiquitous “My computers getting really slow now (and I get these weird popups a lot), can you fix it?” In other words, problems you’re not going to get if you’re running a linux distro in the first place…
Luis has got some of the idea of what’s required for Linux to get wider usage, but he doesn’t get all of it.
A linux distribution needs to turn into a fully integrated operating system, with well integrated graphical tools for it to be of use to OEMs. It also needs to be given away free to get away from licensing fee problems and pressure from Microsoft. Every distribution is a long way from this.
The only company I can see that can do this is Trolltech, because they don’t make money from licensing or per box or user fees. They could fund a desktop environment and distribution, and make money through selling development tools – a desktop funded through development. The investment would even pay off. It might sound like a silly suggestion to some, but I can’t see anything else on the horizon that could self fund itself in this way.
It also needs to be given away free to get away from licensing fee problems and pressure from Microsoft. Every distribution is a long way from this.
I don’t see why you couldn’t say the same of Canonical/Ubuntu. Mark Shuttleworth has all but stated that he doesn’t expect to ever see a profit from Ubuntu, and that that’s OK with him, because by funding it, he feels that he’s doing a Good Thing.
“Tell me why it’s not wrong to impose an operating system to people if most of them can’t use it and will reinstall Windows on top.”
Perhaps because what you said is either a flat out lie or an extreme exaggeration.
The simple fact is, most people, including complete non-techies, can use Linux very easily. Today’s modern desktop oriented distros have gotten so easy that pretty much anyone can use it. In fact, most non-technical people wouldn’t even notice that it’s not Windows.
The more rational statement would have been that people with some specific Windows only software needs, where there’s no viable OSS replacement or the Windows program can’t run 100% with Wine, CrossOver Office, or Win4Lin, then that person might not be able to use Linux fully. That might be 5-10% of potential buyers.
Also, the user might just happen to have a device that is part of the very very small percentage of devices for which there is no Linux support. Again, that might be 5%.
You also said OEMs who are choosing to sell PC’s with Linux pre-installed are “forcing” Linux on their buyers. That’s such a ridiculous statement it’s sickening. Buyers can still buy their PC’s with Windows pre-installed. And what about 99% of PC OEMs pre-installing Windows? Aren’t they forcing Windows, and it’s horrific security, draconian licensing, poor stability, on their buyers??
I’d say Linux is NOW ready for the desktop – OK their a few shotgun to the foot problems SLED users might have fun watching DVDs etc. – but if low level users are given a set up Linux (say Ubuntu or Suse) box they will be happy and will be able to install the odd program etc. – Synaptic is not difficult.
In terms of Maintaining a good system the low level user will be better off with Linux, – Windows is difficult to keep in good shape, with reasonable security, I’d say getting rid of CWS compares in difficulty with installing a non standard driver on Ubuntu – No I’m lying it’s much more difficult.
The nephew problem is real, the user who thinks he’s a power user because he can install some cool cursors is going to have real difficulty setting up Compiz, but maybe this isn’t such a problem the real Windows power user will cope with Ubuntu, Suse etc they will just need to try a bit, use Google.
I’d say it is now time for smaller OEMs to build Linux systems they will sell.
I believe that now is as good a time as any for some distro to make a name (or increase their recognition) by offering full multimedia capabilities and being able to watch 95% of the things online.
Right now, if you are willing to put a little effort in, you can easily watch nearly any Windows Media video/audio file you can find- natively(read: no win32 codec pack). With more (possibly considerably more) effort, you can watch all those videos online- again, natively.
This leaves Real media files, and Flash 8 & 9 content as the only things that can’t be done out of the box.
For Real, I use the Klik package which is very convenient- Real player is also MUCH less busy and has less crap on the opening screen than the Windows version.
Flash 9 will be out in 2007, and that will fix up the only other major gap in audio/video playback on Linux.
To repeat (or possibly make my) point, it is now possible for a distribution to natively play out of the box virtually any audio or video file they find, including those online, The maintainers just have to set it up first.