“The clerks at Zumiez, a national chain of snowboard and skateboard shops, tend to stick out from the crowd. And it’s not just because they sport black hooded sweatshirts or smack their gum while ringing up your kid’s new $100 “deck.” It’s what lies under the hood of the old Compaq computers they use as cash registers that makes them true deviants.” Read more at Business 2.0.
Linux for the Rest of Us
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
It’s happening 🙂
I don’t get it. Linux for the rest of us but it talks about a very narrow use of it. (BTW, I think that this is probably one of the best ways to use Linux.)
I’ve always said that (desktop) Linux currently has a much better shot at a workstation/small business solution than it currently does as a replacement for Windows in the home. Home users tend to have a higher demand for games, ‘whiz bang/flashy’ hardware and ‘CompUSA’ software that office users tend not to care as much about.
Plus, unless you’re running some kind of specialized solution that is Windows-only, Linux seems more than capable of doing the average, every day tasks. And in the event that you need doc/xls compatability that open source apps can’t handle, there’s always Crossover Office.
“Like all open-source software, Linux applications are developed by amorphous communities of programmers who work on the code in their spare time.”
Wow, I never thought the Darwin developers were part of an amorphous community that works for Apple in their spare time.
The guy / girl who wrote this doesn’t know what they’re on about. They have a graph on the second page, which attempts to show the functionality of linux compared to windows, but fails miserably.
First of all, they’re comparing XP Pro, with additional software installed, to simple applications, on their own. If he was to be fair, it would be a default installation of WinXP, and a default installation of a major Linux distro, like Mandrake or Redhat.
In that case, Windows would not have the functionality that he claimed it to have, but Linux would takes it’s place, with the ability to do everything, out of the box.
Comparing a single application to and Operating System, with additional sowftware installed is just not fair.
I don’t think he know’s what he’s on about.
“I’ve always said that (desktop) Linux currently has a much better shot at a workstation/small business solution than it currently does as a replacement for Windows in the home”
Yup considering most small businesses just need a basic office suite to get their work done something like Redhat 8 would fit perfectly. Evolution is a great Outlook clone and of course Mozilla works well as a web browser.
Of course it takes skill to learn and setup a new OS, but then again everyone was new to Windows at some point in time as well. In the end though what’s exciting today is you can get freedom from Microsoft AND a fully functioning Office PC something that was much more painful a few years ago. Most companies may not even take advantage of this, but its nice to know its possible.
“rst of all, they’re comparing XP Pro, with additional software installed, to simple applications, on their own. If he was to be fair, it would be a default installation of WinXP, and a default installation of a major Linux distro, like Mandrake or Redhat.”
I don’t agree with you here. Even though more apps with Windows costs money, it’s fairly trivial to drive down to (insert name of nearest computer store here) and get whatever you need.
With Redhat or Mandrake, you’re pretty much limited to whatever comes in the box. Sure, there is more avaiable, but which is easier … to buy something shrink-wrapped and pop in the CD or try to download/install something from freshmeat or your nearest RPM archive?
The click and run distros handle some of these problems, but Joe User would still be kind of limited to what’s in their ‘warehouse’, unless he knows a Linux guru who can tell him “Ok, type in this command …” And even the graphical installers in Linux don’t always put an icon in the Linux ‘start’ menu for you.
“Of course it takes skill to learn and setup a new OS, but then again everyone was new to Windows at some point in time as well.”
Actually, this is rather weak arguement and is actually a point against Linux. Why? Because as you said, ‘everyone was new to Windows at some point’, which means that there are a whole lot of people who aren’t new to Windows anymore, which also means that when it comes to setting up the OS and office suite (if that is necessary), there is usually somebody in the office who is ‘good with computers’ (ie: Windows). And if there isn’t, usually one of the secretaries can convince one of her 16-year old kids or nephews/nieces to come to the office on a weekend and set everything up for them. That’s what my stepmom did to me when she needed to upgrade from Win98-to-Win2k at work
With Linux, it is still not entirely likely that secretary or stepmom is going to know someone who’s that good with Linux, and even more unlikey that someone in an average office setting is going to know how to do it. (Of course, this will probably change as time goes on
And I highly doubt that Jane Secretary or Joe Lawyer is going to try a Redhat 8 install on their own.
True, which also means, people looked dumb once when learning Windows, I don’t think they will want to look dumb twice when learning Linux.
“And I highly doubt that Jane Secretary or Joe Lawyer is going to try a Redhat 8 install on their own”
Speaking as “Dave Doctor”, I wouldn’t make such sweeping assumptions. I’m posting this from the Debian unstable installation I put onto my office desktop after repartioning to carve out a few gigs from the Win98 setup it came with. I’m pretty sure a Redhat 8 install would be easier than a floppyless install of Debian over the net, which is what I did.
You do have a point, however. I have never met anyone in real life who has ever done anything with Linux, including the computer support personnel at our organization.