Misinterpreted. I think that is about the best word around to describe the reactions to my previous article. Whether it has been misinterpreted due to people only reading what they want to read, due to an unclear choice of words on my behalf, or other factors, I am going to try it again. I will try to explain my position, again. Now, more stable, the code has been rewritten from scratch!
Editorial Notice: All opinions are those of the author and not necessarily those of osnews.com
General Note: Please forgive any grammar mistakes as the author is not a native english speaker.
Why The Comments Weren’t Hell…
Some people said I was unexperienced, some said I did not try enough distributions, some said I was favouring Windows over Linux, some even accused the editors of OSNews.com of pro-Microsoft propaganda. What have I written to upset you so much?
I never imagined so many people would not get the idea of that article. I never had the intention to diss Linux in any way; I said it in the article itself, I said it many times in the comments area, but I am going to say it again (and again, and again…): I like Linux! But just because I like Linux, it does not automatically mean I totally loose touch with reality. Linux is not perfect. Just like Window has, it has its flaws, it has its downsides, just like Windows has (and to keep it simple, and straight, I do not prefer one over the other). But that goes for everything in life, from girls, to cars, to politicians (although I cannot seem to find a bright side when it comes to that kind of people).
I wrote the first part of the article to clarify and address the fact that some of the die-hard Linux fans tend to deny the fact that Linux is not bliss (again, “bliss”, I like that word). Some people just cannot seem to look at Linux (and of course I mean the different flavors/distributions etc. of “Linux”, but you get the point) without their pink goggles on (Dutch saying, meaning you only look at the bright side).
How strange it may seem, I can understand that. If you have never experienced any problems with your OS, it has been stable like Mount Everest, fast as Micheal Schumacher’s F1 2003, and you never had to do a reboot, then it is natural to think that way. It’s like being in love; the girl cannot do anything wrong (although I do not state that your OS is as important as your girl 😉 ).
But for some (or a lot, I do not know) people, Linux has not been all that good. And to dismiss those people by saying “They should read a manual”, “They will learn it, over time” and so on, is just, with all due respect, kind of stupid. How would you feel if you got told by your driving instructor: “Hey man, driving is easy, figure it out yourself. And if you don’t succeed, here’s the manual. Still not working? Well, buy a bike, for god’s sake!”
And then you have people stating that the problems I mentioned, aren’t problems at all. Well, if I find those things annoying, uneasy, or just plain stupid, then sure as a rock there are people who agree with me (you have to be a little arrogant sometimes). Simply knowing no one who ever got Aids, does not mean Aids does not exist (the movie “Kids”, anyone?).
But the comment that astonished me the most was by Lorm (2003-07-27 05:18:39). He stated:
|””In 2001 I bought my own computer” [note: speaks volumes]”.|
This really pissed me off. I was astonished to see someone write a comment without actually reading the article. Yes, I indeed bought MY OWN computer in 2001. But I have worked with computers since 1991 (my parents then bought a 286, what a beast of a machine that was!). But at the age of seven, in the year 1991, it’s impossible to have your own computer. It was all new, back then. To cut a long story short, he accused me of not being experienced enough. Sure, my friend, and the pope still plays soccer every day. But… that was not all from this post. Next, he stated:
|””I think the major Distributions should all “join hands” to create one version of Linux, with one desktop, a uniform look, with one update system and so on.” [note: thus expressing a fundamental ignorance of the nature of Linux].”|
Anyone who has really read the article also read the last paragraph. I stated there:
|”Of course that [one version of Linux] kind of takes away the essence of the Open-Source concept. Open-Source is all about letting everybody not only use the software, but also letting everybody improve the software. This has led to a diversity in the available software. This is a good thing, if you are an expert willing to put time and effort into your OS, but if you are not, than Linux just isn’t for you, at this moment.”|
I rest my case.
…Or Why The Article Wasn’t Bliss
I made some flaws on my behalf as well. Some people rightfully addressed the apt-get issue. I stated:
|”(…) if we forget the crappy way software is installed (with the exception of apt-get, or so I’ve heard).”|
That was an unlucky choice of words. What I meant was that I haven’t used the apt-get system long enough to make a proper judgment. That’s a matter of statistics. But since a lot of people told me apt-get was good, I added that last remark. You should read it like “(…) or so I’ve heard [from people around the net].” I apologize for the inconvenience.
Another, more important, mistake I made, was about WindowsUpdate. I never experienced any problems with it, no matter what version of Windows, no matter what configuration. After I read some of the comments on my article, stating the dangers of using WindowsUpdate in some cases, I scouted the web, and I indeed found stories about WindowsUpdate delivering major problems. I will drop this issue. WindowsUpdate is not always as easy as I thought it was.
Comparing Linux To Windows (read disclaimer)
Now I will try to compare some parts of our two favorite Operating Systems, the parts most commented about (read the disclaimer at the end of the article first, please).
1. -Windows boots faster than Linux-
I have tried many distributions (Mandrake, Red Hat, Debian, LindowsOS, Lycoris, Morphix, EvelEntity (anyone? ;), … )
and they just boot/booted slower than my Windows install does/did. That is just an observation. And again, the rule I stated before goes: If I am having boot problems, then other people will have them as well. Matter of statistics. And about the Virus Scanners in the background, I do not run a virus scanner (they annoy me). Okay, no comments about me being brave and all.
2. -Windows file system is clearer than Linux’-
To me (and to a newbie) I think it is more logical to have all the files of a certain program in one directory (eg. ~/Program Files/Program X/). The executables, the config files, the documentation, and so on. Of course not all Windows programs follow this standard, since some tend to install with a bit less logic. But good, decent Windows software installs using this standard. I think it is easier to browse to ~/Program Files/Program X/ than trying to find Program X’ binary in /bin, the documentation in /doc, etc. Since so many files are usually stored in these directories, they tend to load very slow. I never used the My Documents either, until some months ago. I started using the My Documents/Downloads/Music etc. folders in Windows and I realized it was kind of easy to use them! Maybe a tip to others: try using them for a while, maybe you will like them…
3. -Windows installation is easier than Linux’-
I know for sure that if I would ask some of my computer-illiterate friends to install both Windows and Linux, they would say that Windows was easier to install. So I am talking about the newbie here. For me, on the other hand, there is no difference between a Windows installation procedure or a Linux installation procedure. They both run smoothly for me, because I have the experience to make them run smooth. But, in Windows I do not have to configure X, I do not have to choose confusing packages (it is another thing whether not being able to do so in Windows is a good thing or not), no boot loader configurations, no mounting options… And remember: look at this from a newbie’s point of view. He would not know what to do, now would he? And the help provided during install isn’t always a great help either.
Why Windows Isn’t Bliss
But, Windows is not perfect either (surprise!). A thing that especially bothers me about Windows are its shortcomings when it comes to themeing/skinning/eye candy etc. Might be a non-issue to the most of us, but for me it’s quite important. The advanced skinning features provided by for example KDE and Gnome are far beyond superior to Windows’ standard offerings. Oh, you can theme Windows, but you will have to pay quite a lot for 3rd party programs. Open-Source alternatives such as LiteStep suffer from the lack of a standard (doesn’t that ring a bell?).
Another, well-known Windows specific problem is its vulnerabilty when it comes to virii, worms and so on. Although I never experienced a single virus in my life (and I do not run a virus scanner, isn’t that a miracle?), it is of course unquestionably true. We all know that Linux is a million times less sensitive to this problem.
But the most important drawback of all are the, in my eyes, absurd high prices for Windows and Office. I am sorry, but I just do not buy the “research costs money” or “Bill Gates’ children need to eat too” nonsense. Would people buy a car for 200,000 USD without bothering the lack of brakes? No. Then why accept the high prices for Windows? Well, economically speaking, people will only buy a different product if the costs of the alternative are lower without giving in on quality ((very) simply put, that is). Makes you think, doesn’t it?
I hope I clarified my view with this response. If not, I did my best.
Disclaimer
1. I do not favor Windows over Linux.
2. I know comparing Linux to Windows is kind of silly, but right now I think it is the only way of telling you my difficulties with Linux, since the more freestyle method I used in version 1.0 did not really get through.
3a. As stated in one of my posts (in the comments area): The fact that I find parts A and B of an OS not good, does not mean the same goes for parts C through Z.
3b. Also stated in one of my posts: When reading reviews/editorials etc, don’t read more than the author has written.
3c. Also stated in one of my posts: When reading reviews/editorials etc, read the entire article, not just what you want to read.
4. I do not favor Windows over Linux.
“Can your girlfriend reconfigure and recompile her kernel to improve boot time?”
DCMonkey: Actually, she can, and is better at it then me, I might add. =)
I know that wasn’t your point, but still, I found it funny.
“And about GUI consistency, have you ever heard anyone complaining that it is a hell to play computer games because they all have a different UI?”
Computer games != Productivity apps
When I’m playing a game that’s all I’m doing, it has my full concentration so it’s easy enough to remember it’s controls. When I’m working on a project I’m constantly switching between different apps and have multiple apps open on screen. Having to remember different keyboard shortcuts, menu implementations and all the other little differences slows me down by destroying any muscle memory I might have built up. If you’re just using a single app 99% of the time then consistency probably isn’t important, but I find it makes a big difference to my productivity.
“It seems that if the elements (scrollbars, buttons, edit boxes) behave *roughly* the same, it is good enough. On the application front, you can see this too: who complains that Mozilla uses it’s own toolkit?”
Actually the aesthetic differences are the most minor problem, I could happily live with apps that just look a bit different, even in Windows and Mac OS consistency isn’t perfect. But not having consistent keyboard shortcuts and not being able to cut/copy/paste between apps is a serious usability issue for me.
I do quite a lot of DTP, even if Linux apps were as good as Windows equivalents, they’d still have inferior usability while I can’t build up a document using copy and paste. To me this is a really basic feature, even the Apple Lisa let you copy part of an image and paste it into a different app. I’m amazed that this hasn’t been fixed long ago, surely it can’t be that hard to implement one consistent clipboard for all apps?
Quote (Peter Moss):
“If you boot Windows and try to use it the instant the GUI is up and running you will find that it is still slogging away for a few minutes. After a while you can actually use the machine. This makes it appear faster.”
This is what counts, though – the user is presented with a desktop sooner.
“Linux on the other hand (at least Gnome and KDE) wait until everything is loaded until they let you use the OS (as, if you’re going to crash and overload the system you’ll do it in those minutes its still loading).”
And therefore, the user must wait longer to begin interfacing with the system.
An improved method would be to lower the priority of the start-after-boot processes in Windows, so that the sluggishness (which is present the first few moments after boot) is greatly reduced.
My slackware 9 gets from lilo to gdm in about 18 seconds. It then takes about 4 or 5 seconds to get from gdm to gnome. Of course usually the computer is on, so users only encounter about 4 or 5 seconds.
“Linux is not 5 years behind, not even close to it. It is very much on the same level if not better. I believe that some of the easier distributions are just as easy to use and install as Windows.”
That depends on your hardware and what you need to configure, there are still some Linux features that are far behind Windows. To be honest it’s amazing how easy to install some Linux distributions have become, most things were configured out of the box by Mandrake 9.1. But unfortunately there are still a lot of features that don’t have nice graphical configuration and don’t work out of the box.
Windows has a built in Hibernation option so I can start my computer with my apps running and documents open. That saves a lot more of my time than faster boot speed and to me is an essential feature. In Linux the only equivalent I’ve found is a hack called SWSUSP, which is very difficult to get working and dangerous to the system IME. I killed my current Linux installation trying to get SWUSP to work, despite spending days studying the documentation and carefully checking all my configuration.
Then there’s graphics card configuration and dual headed display support. I’ve got an Nvidia graphics card which is meant to be the best for Linux. After a lot of work I managed to get very slow 3D acceleration, but I couldn’t get a resolution higher than 1024×768, not very pleasant on a 21″ monitor. Dual headed display support is simply garbage in Linux, Xinerama is a joke compared with Windows or Mac OS. In theory Nvidia’s Twinview is much better and doesn’t disable 3D acceleration, but I spent days researching it and editing config files without doing anything except crashing X a few dozen times. In Windows the Nvidia drivers add an extra tab to the display control panel and the display can be set up with a couple of mouse clicks.
Windows has it’s faults too, but I can’t think of anything in Windows that’s wasted as much of my time as trying to get these features working in Linux. Surely even the most hardcore Linux zealot can’t argue that Linux is as easy as Windows when it comes to these features?
“Do you have any experience with maintaining a Linux machine? I left windows because of the maintnence issues. Maybe your experience has been better but that doesn’t make it fact. For me Windows has destroyed my computer several times. Many programs won’t uninstall, dll’s from other software break the system, and programs tend to always find a way into the system tray. Inexperienced users never delete any of the 50 million icons off of the desktop and they never remove items from the system tray. After a while the system becomes unusuable. I love trying out new programs but with windows it’s not a good idea to install and uninstall programs over and over unless you plan on doing a reinstall of the entire OS. That has been my experience and the biggest reason for my switch.”
It’s ironic, the main reason why I’m deleting my Linux partition is that I find it almost impossible to maintain. I’ve installed masses of junk on some of my Windows systems, sometimes I’ve had problems with uninstalling software using the built in uninstaller and it does damage Windows performance. 3rd party uninstallers can fix many problems but sometimes it is necessary to reinstall the OS to fix everything. Windows certainly has it’s problems, but for me Linux has been infinitely worse.
Linux is a very stable OS, but that doesn’t mean it never crashes. I sometimes have powercuts that last longer than my UPS’ battery and I don’t have another Linux box to be able to ssh in and fix problems when the system has become unresponsive. In Windows a crash is usually a minor annoyance, I’ve never had a crash in Windows 95,98,2K or XP damage the system, other than the loss of the date I’m working on. While in Linux almost every fatal crash I’ve had has caused serious damage to the system. This latest time a single crash caused by SWSUSP wiped out a large number of apps, including the graphical login and Mandrake control centre. Even some apps that still seemed to work have problems, for example KWord crashes when I try to use the spellchecker, XFCE loads but contextual menus are gone, some other apps load then crash after a few seconds. Even if I knew all the packages I needed to reinstall to get it all working again, it would probably be faster to reinstall from scratch and there’s nothing to stop this happening the next time there’s a crash. This isn’t just an isolated incident, I’ve had things stop working after a crash multiple times when I used Mandrake 7 and 8. The main reason I gave up on Linux then is that one crash damaged it so badly it wouldn’t even boot.
I’d rather have an OS that eventually requires the OS to be reinstalled, than an OS where half the installed software fails because of a crash.
“And the Windows trolls couldn’t possibly have too much time on their hands, could they? And could their time be better spent plugging/finding security holes in Windows?”
Yes, yes, of course they also have too much time on their hands! That doesn’t mean Linux people also have to waste it in the same way! Does EVERYTHING have to be about Windows vs. Linux? What an incredible waste of time! How many of these advocates are actually employed? The only difference I see is that a large proportion of Windows users are blissfully unaware of the “Win vs. Lin” debating, perhaps to their benefit. Now before another advocate starts jumping up and down saying “but, but, there are also LINUX USERS who are also blissfully unaware!! Nya nya!”, I am not saying this is a benefit of Windows – only a characteristic of its userbase.
In the end, computers are designed to make our lives easier. I use Linux and XP in their areas of respective strength. I don’t force myself to use Linux for a problem when XP has an easier solution (e.g., symbolic math software). Nor do I blow large sums of cash on proprietary XP office bloatware when an OSS Linux solution does the job (I prefer OO in Linux to XP). Horses for courses. I am far too busy doing my job to have any emotional investment in an operating system, Linux or XP. I do wish Linux (and FreeBSD!) a lot of success, because competition is good, and it will probably make Linux and MS future offerings better.
No, I’m not related to the OP. I just thought he got a bit of a bad rap in the comments on his article. Even if he was a Windows troll – which I highly doubt – aren’t the people replying wasting just as much time as he would be trolling?
Cheers!
I don’t claim to be a Linux or Windows guru, but I can get on with both reasonably well. I takes time to get to grips with both, and yes both have there flaws and benefits.
As a few people have stated, the biggest gripe for me about linux was the file system. It has some nice features, but like someone said, why have a million differnet places for binaries, config files etc. I personally like Apple’s approach. Each application has it’s own folder in which i keeps its config files etc. Why not have /apps/ for this, and then have say /lib for libraries etc.
Before people jump down my throat, about how I’m simplfying things to much… yes I am. I don’t know the in’s and out’s of the linux file system. Just because it’s complicated doesn’t make it the right, and good approach.
On another issue, Linux could do with some standardisation, more than it has so far… that was the only benefit of windows. If a programs is for the windows platform it works (generally) where as for linux you have so many differnet distributions, etc that things become a pain… not necessarily hard, just more work than it should have to be.
Well.
It’s me again. I read through the posts posted when I was asleep and at work, ready to respond to some issues that seemed to dominate the posts.
1.-Comparing Windows To Linux Is Like Comparing Apples To Oranges (Although I Think Using “Apple” Isn’t Very Wise Here
–
If you’ve read my article carefully, you would’ve surley noticed the disclaimer. Read it, and you’ll know why I used a short comparison. Again, is “not reading carefully” an infectious disease that hasn’t reached The Netherlands yet?
2.-Booting Issue
I know it’s a very difficult issue, but it’s just my experiences. I have used several distro’s (as stated in the article) on several different configs, and my experiences are that Linux boots slower.
And about Windows booting services after starting the GUI, I thought that was a problem in the ’95 product line (for clarity, this also includes ’98 and follow-ups)? I have used XP for a while, and I never had that problem (and it’s not like I have a dream config (AMD Athlon XP 1600+, 512sdram, and a geforce2 mx400 w/64 (exchanged later on for a wondefully good performing Ati 9000 w/ 128 ddr). Right now I’m using Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition, this may also explain why I have better experiences with Windows (people tend to remember recent memories easier, surprised?;). 2003 is really a step forward, I think it’s quite suitable if you’re a bit more experienced.
Also I have heard a lot of people saying “You don’t need to reboot Linux” (which is true of course). Well, since I’m multibooting multiple OS’s on one machine, I háve to reboot.
3.-A little GUI inconsistency don’t matter-
Really? Would you buy a car with a red left door and a white right door?
I too am certainly not a guru, but I know my way around a few OSs (Windows and Mac). I love the idea of Linux, I’ve even got a PowerBook that’s exclusively devoted to YDL. It is, in fact, the entire reason I purchased the laptop in the first place.
However, that said, Linux isn’t a system ready for the masses and most of the swaking from people seems more about maintaining the “in-the-know” clique of Linux more than anything else.
The Linux file system is confusing (so, for that matter is OSX’s and Windows at times) to most/many people. It’s probably the single biggest hinderance next to avaiable applications and ease of installing applications.
I’d really like to see a distribution that cleans up the file system (or a community wide initiative to do so) and make application packages that at least SEEM a little more like what we’ve come to expect (discrete packages that install with a click).
I have not doubt that there are advantages to the current methodologies behind both the file system and application packages, but I think people would be kidding themselves if they argued that it was the BEST way of doing it. Much of it continues on as is simply because it is how it’s ALWAYS been done. It’s a lot easier to go with the flow than to swim against it and make “radical” changes.
I want to make it clear that I believe that Linux is important. Very important. It’s our opportunity as the masses to collectively determin how we wish to meet our computing needs. But long term, broad based acceptance (why is this perceived as being “bad”?) requires that people want to adopt Linux and there are clear barriers to that.
I don’t think most people care what OS they use (Many people who say they want Windows are really just saying that because it’s what their friends/co-workers say…). I would argue that the most successful operating systems will ultimately be the MOST TRANSPARENT AND THAT WHICH BEST REPRESENTS THE CULTURE OF THE GIVEN USER.
I couldn’t agree with you more.
It seems to me that this article wasn’t about which OS was better or worse. The fact is, that’s a subjective decision and it depends on the needs of each user–or, from the marketing perspective, each type of user.
Which brings me to what I felt the real purpose of the article was. He pointed out some problems with Linux. Of these, hardware support is probably the most universal. He mentioned that most people (rightly) believe that once Linux becomes popular, these problems will begin to go away.
Well, we seem to have different ideas about software popularity. Who do you think represents the largest computer-user demographic? So sorry, but there simply aren’t enough power-users–even users that are simply computer-literate–to justify Linux’s popularity. It seems highly likely that THERE NEVER WILL BE.
This is one of the reasons that Apple is still alive–that they didn’t get smote by Microsoft like so many other computer companies. Many people still think that Apple is simply the easiest thing to use out there.
That’s why we’re talking about computer “newbies.” Not in the sense that they’ve yet to learn how do use mkdir at a command prompt, but in the sense that they just found out they need a computer at home to surf the internet. They simply don’t care about a command prompt and never will. Those are the facts.
Having said that, I feel the article was attempting to suggest ideas to make Linux more popular AMONGST THE MASSES, so that some of the more troublesome problems can be addressed by our CAPITALIST SOCIETY.
Anyway, I just felt that this commentary, by and large, was taking the wrong point of view. Forgive me if the article is actually trying to say “Windows is not as bad as you think it is, but Linux sucks,” as one commenter suggested.
-Mark
P.S.: I specifically didn’t mention my OS preference because I really don’t think that was the intended issue here. But, it’s definetly Windows. I’m definetly what you could call a power-user, and while Windows isn’t as tweak-friendly as Linux (I have used Linux and UNIX extensively, at my university), Windows also isn’t as crash-prone as the Linux community accuses it of being. Well, at least not 2K and XP.
Absolutely!
There are many paths Linux can follow. It can continue on as a ‘cult’ operating system for techies, developers and servers,
or
it can evolve into a operating system that functions at a root level allowing the masses (and really we’re just talking about people–regular ol’ folks like Mark points out) to compute. most people just want to PARTICIPATE not tweak code. and by participate i mean involve themselves in this medium of communication and information exchange (“They just want to surf the internet.” Most of them will never even need an app like OpenOffice, etc.)
but evolution requires change and change is hard. it requires that WE DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT than what we’ve done before and that can be SCARY (or annoying, or whatever).
and the thing is, there are always going to be those who DO want to tweak code…they beauty is, they can do that and at the same time bring millions (if not billions) of people along with them.
Let me just add this…
not everyone can be, or wants to be an engineer, but that doesn’t mean that everyone shouldn’t be able to drive a car or use a computer or fly in a plane.
no?
I favour Windows.
I have 11 years of programming experience, about half of it in x86 assembly and UNIX device drivers and other half in windows programming. UNIXes/programming tools are nowhere close to Windows on usability.
My question to the author is this: You have been forced to repeat “I do not favour windows over Linux” umpteen times in your article. This is a pointer to the nature of open source community: Hate microsoft without reason.
That’s exactly the metaphor I was trying to think of. I think that one of the greatest social benifits of the open-source movement is that it has great potential for inspiring competition that ultimately benifits the average joe. That’s what the computing renaissance has been all about.
But it’s a fact that large companies–Microsoft–won’t be interested in competing with a product unless it poses a threat to them from a financial perspective. The only way Linux will ever be that threat is if it becomes popular amongst the entire computing community.
Something that just ocurred to me, however–and this is the reason for my new post–is that perhaps there is a better goal than making Linux popular: perhaps we need to focus on making the open-source movement itself more main-stream. It’s happening on Macs now with OSX, and I even see the beginnings of it on Windows. I think we need to face the reality that an OS war would ultimately be detrimental for the computing industry at large. One of the reasons the software industry is growing so fast is that, for the most part, companies only have to develop for one platform. This means that they can focus on making it work for that platform, instead of devoting time to producing the same code for multiple OSs and ultimately hurting the quality of the title.
I think a common misconseption of computer users is that all software companies are large. Actually, most software companies have 20 or fewer employees, and this applies game studios as well. Such companies simply do not have the resources for multi-platform development.
However, when we take it at a lower level–say that of word processing, CAD/CAM, or any area where there is currently existing competetion, I can see open-source really boosting the software industry. Even small companies can benifit from swapping each-other’s code.
—-It might even inspire people to write cleaner code (or at least comment it once in a while) :-P!
Actually, I think I may have one practical idea as to how we can bring about this kind of change. I think that copywrighting code is the wrong idea–we should patent it. Think about it: the original idea of having patents expire in 10 years was to both encourage innovation and cut down on the chances of monopoly. To my knowledge, the idea of patents hasn’t hurt anybody detrimentally. Also, I think that open source is, in effect, a software patent that expires immediately.
I think another reality we just have to accept is that (and I keep mentioning this) our capitalist society will never embrace the concept entirely. This is why I think patents would be an excellent middle ground. I also think that the open source movement is gaining enough steam and notice that the industry could see it as a viable option.
Open source isn’t perfect, either. In the end, software companies have to pay their programmers, artists, receptionists, whathaveyou their salaries so they can go home, watch some DVDs on their nice TV that their college education let them buy. Companies have to pay rent on their buildings and buy software and new hardware. We need people to pay for software, and smaller companies simply can’t rely on donations. Software is just another route to the American dream (on a global scale), and I think we need to foster that.
I do see a couple of issues: namely, that a ten-year patent on software is the equivalent of a 1000 year patent on the steam engine. By the time the patent expires, the patented material is obsolete. This seems to imply that we need a different set of laws governing software patents–at least a different life-span (I would suggest 2 years).
Secondly, what about international companies? Once source code is published, anyone (and I mean ANYONE) can take advantage of it. This means that companies in say, the Netherlands (:-P) or Canada could use American source code but American’s couldn’t use theirs. I can see that being a major problem.
Another issue: do we need to regulate the quality (readability) of published code. I can easily see a company publishing purposely obfuscated code in order to minimize the chance that people could use it (or even bother trying). In fact, there are already code obfuscators on the market (what happens to these guys? do they just die out?) for .NET–probably one of the, if not THE, easiest language do dissasemble out there.
I think that this is something that could really change things (at least here in the States), and that maybe we, as a community (and I’m not just talking Linux here) should try putting our support to it.
In short, I don’t think that open-source is a good end for the software industry. There is too much commercial infustructore rooted in the current system that would be irreperably (sp?) damaged. Literally millions of people would loose their jobs, from CEOs to software engineers to programmers to receptionists. I think we need to find a compromise between greed and thinking only of the consumer.
OK, sorry for the long rant, it was kind of stream of conscious.
-Mark
I think I’m going to try do so some more work on developing the patent idea, so I’m going to post my email address in case anybody has suggestions or wants to help.
It’s
m a r k b i d d l e c o m @ h o t m a i l . c o m
(Sorry for the formatting, I’m trying to avoid spam-bots.)
-Mark
Yep, normally, you only pay a price if you think it’s worth. But here Micro$oft controls the market and so many people buy Windows because they have no choice.
Nearly every PC a not very advanced user can buy here (Germany) has Windows and some Office crap (mostly Works – nobody, really nobody buys this program in free choice!) installed on it. It is paid. So why ADDITIONALLY by another OS? Because you cannot run your applications (the applications you know and perhaps have to work with jobwise) on it? Because you have to learn a new one (you know the one you already have; or do you buy an alternative product without knowing the one you already have paid?)…
Linux based Systems have many flaws, but these alone aren’t responsible for the market situation of 95% of the people using Windooze. I would like a fair competition. I won’t like Windows not to be there. If it would really compete with other Systems, it also would get better in many ways (most flaws of Windows are indeed flaws Micro$oft knows the user just must live with!).
cu
Ford Prefect
What is it with all you people flaming this article?
The guy expressed OPINIONS, which are correct by very definition, and he backed them up with verifiable information. If such a well-written and forthright article raises ire in your blood, the problem isn’t with the author.
Good Grief!
Good Grief
Hey, if the author ever reads down this far through the flaming, I’d like to say it’s a good article, and more power to ya. It takes a lot of balls to walk into an OSS friendly community and have a go at Linux.
Oh, and I love Linux. I want it to succeed. I’ve got Slack 9 on my main box at home, after having tried Suse, Mandrake, RH and Deb over the past few years. But whilst I am eager to learn, I got fed up with having to trawl my directories for different libs etc every time I changed distro and wanted to compile software.
Instead I use Win98 – so the Linux zealots hate me, Mac facists hate me, and Gates hates me (for not paying my XP tax). Win98 is extremely functional and, on my machine, stable, and the UI is faster than X. No, really. Most importantly, I can play the games I like rather than going through the balls-ache of trying to get Quake II running under Linux and playing only that. Oh, and I can choose my animated cursors. Very important, that.
Everyone should learn Linux, because it gives them an appreciation of a file structure, how the software fits together, how to use a command line, and so forth. Once they’ve put the effort in, they can choose what they damn well like. My choice is based on the free time I have. Forgive me if I would rather be riding my bike, training, writing, cooking, cleaning the house or spending quality time with my other half than configuring my PC…
best
Smiorgan
———–
Use OSS apps on windows: GNU Win II (http://gnuwin.epfl.ch/)
You know, it occured to me yesterday that I had a huge blind spot in my thinking…I said there were two ways Linux could go A)Obsurity or B)Populist software.
When considering option B my mind was set on a grassroots movement. I could not figure out, however, how to get someone to make code for say my mom. Up to now what’s driven Linux is people who write code for themselves to meet their needs (and it’s great and they love what they’ve produced–populist software that meet the needs of the culture that generated it…)
But they’re not particularly interested in making software for my mom (or anyone else who’s not in their group).
Then it dawned on me…and this is the kicker. It’s likely the big guys who will end up getting it right. For the masses to get the code you need to pay programmers to write it…but you can’t (or it’s difficult) to charge for the software…so you don’t charge for the software, you make a product and run the software on it.
For example, a Dodge Caravan that has antilock brakes. It probably uses iTron to run the controller…so does your mobile phone, or washing machine. The software is transparent. It just is. (and does.)
The key is participation. It’s not the software but the activity.
Find a need (Grandma wants to see pictures of grandchild who lives 500 miles away).
Create a product(s) that meet the need. (Digital camera that can be hooked up to an ethernet connection and knows to automatically deposit pictures onto Grandma’s TiVo [itself another product].)
Product development companies will adopt the open source software and use it because if it allows THEM to meet the needs/desires of the people…
Linux as is, meets the needs of developers and administrators. You want to make a buck. Meet the needs of my mom and you’ll find yourself on Chistmas Wishlists and on the shelves at Target.
How can this be considered flamebait?
Too many of you have forgotten what it was to be a newbie. To these a computer, like a plane, a mobile phone or a refrigerator is just a tool. They don’t care – and shouldn’t care – about how it works, that’s what engineers and programmers are for and, if they do their jobs properly, the newbie can get on with using their tool to improve their lives. That is functional abstraction at work. It is why our society can advance by implementing new technologies and its working depends on techies listening to the average user’s needs.
And to Mystilleef, before you say that we shouldn’t change Linux for the average user, let me just say that, as a computer user who doesn’t toggle boot switches to get your OS paper tape read, you are a direct beneficiary of this principle.
Now, almost none of us fit into the category of average user. Disagree? The fact that you are reading these pages indicates otherwise. So almost none of us can credibly counter concerns of Linux’s or Windows’ ease of use with “sure it’s easy, you just do -insert jargon here-” (and to suggest rebuilding your kernel to improve boot time, okay, but just don’t expect Linux to advance beyond a clique of experts this way).
While Thom is not the average user, he is clearly trying to relay some of the concerns such a person may have, and what do people do when he says “I find this confusing” or “I think this could be improved upon”? Worse than his being dismissed as misrepresentative, biased, flamed, labelled a windows propagandist etc., his point is ignored, when this feedback is precisely what made Linux what it is today and will make it better tomorrow.
And so exists a problem for Linux user friendliness. The feedback of average users is a crucial force in the survival of any CSS desktop OS, but Linux has no such dependancy, so little imperitive exists for it to become user friendly. Its feedback is derived from the techie and so an OS for techies it will remain – until they start listening to everyone else.
That is why so many have said it isn’t yet ready for the desktop and that’s where comments such as Thom’s comes in.
You all need to remember that people giving feedback is what makes Linux what it is today. It never got to this point in its development, and will never get any better, through people arguing about how good it is and congratulating each other on how well they flamed that MS sympathiser.
Linux is a vibrant and powerful democratic expression of the collective will of programmers but it is constructive criticism and the hard work of some clever and talented individuals that made it this way.
Thom has offered an opinion (and has had to vigilantly restate it), based on his experiences and how many of you counter it with “well I havn’t found that…” Well good for you then! You have nothing constructive to add, but maybe his comments will end up going towards improving some distro – and YOU may benefit from it, so SHUT UP! Let the man speak. Don’t criticise him but take it onboard.
Nothing’s perfect, but dogmatism will only ensure it stays that way.
Danke well, hor
Marc.
Nice post
And it’s “dank je wel, hoor”. But dont’t worry Dutch is the third most difficult language to learn (After Swahili and Finnish).
Thanks!
Actually, I’m half Dutch. Mum is from Amstelveen.
While I can understand a little, I definitely can’t write it! I would have thought an English speaker would find just about anything harder than Dutch, they are so similar!
But anyway, nice article Thom. Thanks,
Marc.
Just wondering if someone can clarify this hardware support thing for me. Earlier today I had to re-setup my sisters computer with Win 98 and Mandrake 9.1. Currently she has a fully working Mandrake 9.1 desktop running at a nice screen resolution with sound, network, and DVD all working fine.
Win 98? 640×480 16 colors, no sound support, no network support, no office programs, no DVD …..
Which one has best hardware support? In this case Linux, which one has easiest installation? again Linux. (should have mentioned that 98 needed to reboot 4 times before I could login, Mandrake needed 1 reboot)
Tim
it had install for games and apps like windows.
RPM’s are good if they are packaged correctly, more often than not they fail.
I don’t wish to recompile or whatever to get a program to work because my distro is different than the intended distro! Try explaining that to a windows user, it just doesn’t make sense!
Linux needs to be more user friendly, most of us wouldn’t know what iostream would mean in c++, so why would we be able to figure out how to install etc from a command line?
Windows is the most readily accessable OS in the world, apart from MAc OS, and the new AMigaOS4.
Tell you the truth, if I was to dump windows, it would be for AmigaOS4, now THAT , is a decent OS.
Linux? I like it, but it isn’t quite ready for primetime
🙂