Comments
Showing all 42 comments [View the article]
i like linux...its been a fun project teaching myself about what else is out there besides bill’s vision of what computers should be. but not everyone is like me, or you for that fact. they dont know the 1st thing about programming, using command lines, or any of that crap. and they dont want to have to learn any of it to be able to use the computer. they have been using wondows for a long time, and have become used to MS holding their hand while using the computer. and thats why linux will continue to struggle. its not designed for everyday people. until it is, it will continue to struggle gaining mainstream acceptance from ordinary people. now dont get me wrong and think im dissing linux. im not. but im trying to see it from other peoples perspectives. i greatly look foward to the day that linux can be used in a more mainstream fashion, catring to both the novices and the technically inclined, but until then...
Linux and usability is an important issue, even for professional software developers. Software nowadays is much more than just a few lines of source code. Software comprises massive models, -packages, -components, -development environments and -interfaces. The code is not the isue in Linux but the interface to the code is a major and still unresolved issue.
When developers on other platforms develop in integrated development environments like netbeans or visual studio and visualise their code. These developers handle sources and dynamic linking in a visual manner and dragging and droppeng components onto the desktop or server. Whereas Linux is troubled by masses of engineers writing command line code to configure their windows, graphics and audio.
The big problem here is not Linux, the Linux Kernel or anything Linux related. The problem is excellent software developers that are not looking at Linux in an abstract manner. Those developers are trying to adapt to a changing world in which software is not code but an abstraction. They are less adaptive to generic environments, do not work fast, stick to command line ... and that creates a problem for the rest of us.
Below are the greatest problems linux faces:
* linux is neither fun nor entertaining?
* media developers are major problem
* xorg and consortium are unadapted
* generic applicability and abstraction
* distributions are not flexible kernels
* plug and play never autoconfigured
* difficult hardware avoided not faced
* developers are often angry at world
* overall weak attack strategies etc..
still: Linux Rules!
When developers on other platforms develop in integrated development environments like netbeans or visual studio and visualise their code. These developers handle sources and dynamic linking in a visual manner and dragging and droppeng components onto the desktop or server. Whereas Linux is troubled by masses of engineers writing command line code to configure their windows, graphics and audio.
The big problem here is not Linux, the Linux Kernel or anything Linux related. The problem is excellent software developers that are not looking at Linux in an abstract manner. Those developers are trying to adapt to a changing world in which software is not code but an abstraction. They are less adaptive to generic environments, do not work fast, stick to command line ... and that creates a problem for the rest of us.
Below are the greatest problems linux faces:
* linux is neither fun nor entertaining?
* media developers are major problem
* xorg and consortium are unadapted
* generic applicability and abstraction
* distributions are not flexible kernels
* plug and play never autoconfigured
* difficult hardware avoided not faced
* developers are often angry at world
* overall weak attack strategies etc..
still: Linux Rules!
Linux taking over? Please not. I love Linux. If it takes over, it will be just like another mainstream OS. Then, I’ll have to abandon it too because there’d be less fun. I will miss the satisfaction of compiling from source (and get the best performance from an app).
I think the ability to compile from source is the best strength of Linux and open source. Just the other day I had a problem because there was no VMWare pre-compiled for Ubuntu 8.04. They have 7.10 but no 8.04. And there’s no source to compile. Fortunately, at least the vmware drivers are opensource and with a bit of tweak to the source, it can work nice in 8.04.
Then I want virtualbox but I need USB support. Again, it’s closed source. The OSE one does not have the USB I need. So, wouldn’t it be nice to be able to compile from source? Sure, it’s not as double-click-next-next-next. But configure-make-make-install is just about as easy - as long as all dependencies are there (which is the thing that should be fixed!)
In other words, let it be NOT mainstream. Let us compile from source. We’d have more options. I just wished I can compile Office 2007 in Linux right now... link it to winelib or something. And maybe Sony Vegas too. Then i can definitely ignore XP. I love OpenOffice and it can do what I want but it’s not that suitable for an enterprise environment yet.
It’s a wonder that hardware vendors care to provide Mac drivers (only 10% of the market) but not Linux drivers. Maybe Linux people should be less adamant about everything being open source. I mean, we must respect that the hardware manufacturers have only the hardware and drivers to make money... I don’t see a sound card builder making money from support...
I think the ability to compile from source is the best strength of Linux and open source. Just the other day I had a problem because there was no VMWare pre-compiled for Ubuntu 8.04. They have 7.10 but no 8.04. And there’s no source to compile. Fortunately, at least the vmware drivers are opensource and with a bit of tweak to the source, it can work nice in 8.04.
Then I want virtualbox but I need USB support. Again, it’s closed source. The OSE one does not have the USB I need. So, wouldn’t it be nice to be able to compile from source? Sure, it’s not as double-click-next-next-next. But configure-make-make-install is just about as easy - as long as all dependencies are there (which is the thing that should be fixed!)
In other words, let it be NOT mainstream. Let us compile from source. We’d have more options. I just wished I can compile Office 2007 in Linux right now... link it to winelib or something. And maybe Sony Vegas too. Then i can definitely ignore XP. I love OpenOffice and it can do what I want but it’s not that suitable for an enterprise environment yet.
It’s a wonder that hardware vendors care to provide Mac drivers (only 10% of the market) but not Linux drivers. Maybe Linux people should be less adamant about everything being open source. I mean, we must respect that the hardware manufacturers have only the hardware and drivers to make money... I don’t see a sound card builder making money from support...
Okay, I know that some people really are paranoid about viruses, which is fair enough as you’re "supposed" to be -- although I like to take a walk on the wild side due to the fact that I don’t even have a virus scanner running on WinXP at all; SpyBot scans and a bit of common sense prevent most disasters.
But hearing someone mention how they tried to install Norton AV software on Ubuntu just made me laugh... That’s not what you use WINE for, mate. If you really must have a virus scanner on Linux, there are alternatives like ClamVM etc. Not really sure about them though, as I’ve never bothered.
But hearing someone mention how they tried to install Norton AV software on Ubuntu just made me laugh... That’s not what you use WINE for, mate. If you really must have a virus scanner on Linux, there are alternatives like ClamVM etc. Not really sure about them though, as I’ve never bothered.
"All these people who say "but Linux is still too hard" are full of it or they haven’t tried Mandriva 2008 ONE (GNOME) yet! It offers hassle-free computing Windows can only dream of, and its free!"
Another reason why linux isn’t winning, there are to many versions available. A big selection of choices isn’t always a good thing
Another reason why linux isn’t winning, there are to many versions available. A big selection of choices isn’t always a good thing
stolen,
I agree. Linux is far too tied to the command line. I want to preface all this by saying that I’ve been diving into Linux for about 2 years now and it’s been quite an educational adventure and I’m excited about where things are headed. Progress is happening and it’s great to dig my nails deep into it at whatever pace.
That being said, Linux will not be a viable option for the average desktop user until things "just work"... right out of the box. The average desktop user could care less about what a kernel or terminal are, and would dread trying to tinker with config files to get a display working right, for example. (Think GUI for everything.) I’m fine with tweaking files until the A.M to get my perfect system, but let’s think about the average Joe. Surfing on the web with on your laptop with a Broadcom 4311 should be effortless, but it isn’t for many. Discouraging? Yes. Do you think the average user wants to spend time on Google to figure out why they can’t play a DVD on their brand new distro? I think not. I can give many examples here, but most of us (even after a year or so like me) are well-versed in this area. This isn’t the fault of Linux developers, of course, but we can accept that Linux has a way to to crawl before mass-adoption by your typical lazy Average Joe.
Let’s get real. The bottom line is that until Linux "just works" it will *never* be the year of Linux. Period. I will always enjoy my journey into the land of penguins, but let’s take a step back and remember what *newbie-land* feels like. Compile from source? Yeah, I wish I could reproduce the expression my Grandma made when I mentioned that. Dependencies? Wine? Please. (You’re talking about the beverage, right?) Why does my cursor disappear? (Again the list goes on, depending on the hardware hosting the install.)
Just why would a typical Mac or PC user ever switch over, even with extensive marketing and vendor’s opening up availability? At this stage for the masses, Macs and PCs are just "easier."
(Please excuse my over-use of parenthesis, quotes, asterisks, and other embellishments.)
I agree. Linux is far too tied to the command line. I want to preface all this by saying that I’ve been diving into Linux for about 2 years now and it’s been quite an educational adventure and I’m excited about where things are headed. Progress is happening and it’s great to dig my nails deep into it at whatever pace.
That being said, Linux will not be a viable option for the average desktop user until things "just work"... right out of the box. The average desktop user could care less about what a kernel or terminal are, and would dread trying to tinker with config files to get a display working right, for example. (Think GUI for everything.) I’m fine with tweaking files until the A.M to get my perfect system, but let’s think about the average Joe. Surfing on the web with on your laptop with a Broadcom 4311 should be effortless, but it isn’t for many. Discouraging? Yes. Do you think the average user wants to spend time on Google to figure out why they can’t play a DVD on their brand new distro? I think not. I can give many examples here, but most of us (even after a year or so like me) are well-versed in this area. This isn’t the fault of Linux developers, of course, but we can accept that Linux has a way to to crawl before mass-adoption by your typical lazy Average Joe.
Let’s get real. The bottom line is that until Linux "just works" it will *never* be the year of Linux. Period. I will always enjoy my journey into the land of penguins, but let’s take a step back and remember what *newbie-land* feels like. Compile from source? Yeah, I wish I could reproduce the expression my Grandma made when I mentioned that. Dependencies? Wine? Please. (You’re talking about the beverage, right?) Why does my cursor disappear? (Again the list goes on, depending on the hardware hosting the install.)
Just why would a typical Mac or PC user ever switch over, even with extensive marketing and vendor’s opening up availability? At this stage for the masses, Macs and PCs are just "easier."
(Please excuse my over-use of parenthesis, quotes, asterisks, and other embellishments.)
stolen,
I agree. Linux is far too tied to the command line. I want to preface all this by saying that I’ve been diving into Linux for about 2 years now and it’s been quite an educational adventure and I’m excited about where things are headed. Progress is happening and it’s great to dig my nails deep into it at whatever pace.
That being said, Linux will not be a viable option for the average desktop user until things "just work"... right out of the box. The average desktop user could care less about what a kernel or terminal are, and would dread trying to tinker with config files to get a display working right, for example. (Think GUI for everything.) I’m fine with tweaking files until the A.M to get my perfect system, but let’s think about the average Joe. Surfing on the web with on your laptop with a Broadcom 4311 should be effortless, but it isn’t for many. Discouraging? Yes. Do you think the average user wants to spend time on Google to figure out why they can’t play a DVD on their brand new distro? I think not. I can give many examples here, but most of us (even after a year or so like me) are well-versed in this area. This isn’t the fault of Linux developers, of course, but we can accept that Linux has a way to to crawl before mass-adoption by your typical lazy Average Joe.
Let’s get real. The bottom line is that until Linux "just works" it will *never* be the year of Linux. Period. I will always enjoy my journey into the land of penguins, but let’s take a step back and remember what *newbie-land* feels like. Compile from source? Yeah, I wish I could reproduce the expression my Grandma made when I mentioned that. Dependencies? Wine? Please. (You’re talking about the beverage, right?) Why does my cursor disappear? (Again the list goes on, depending on the hardware hosting the install.)
Just why would a typical Mac or PC user ever switch over, even with extensive marketing and vendor’s opening up availability? At this stage for the masses, Macs and PCs are just "easier."
(Please excuse my over-use of parenthesis, quotes, asterisks, and other embellishments.)
I agree. Linux is far too tied to the command line. I want to preface all this by saying that I’ve been diving into Linux for about 2 years now and it’s been quite an educational adventure and I’m excited about where things are headed. Progress is happening and it’s great to dig my nails deep into it at whatever pace.
That being said, Linux will not be a viable option for the average desktop user until things "just work"... right out of the box. The average desktop user could care less about what a kernel or terminal are, and would dread trying to tinker with config files to get a display working right, for example. (Think GUI for everything.) I’m fine with tweaking files until the A.M to get my perfect system, but let’s think about the average Joe. Surfing on the web with on your laptop with a Broadcom 4311 should be effortless, but it isn’t for many. Discouraging? Yes. Do you think the average user wants to spend time on Google to figure out why they can’t play a DVD on their brand new distro? I think not. I can give many examples here, but most of us (even after a year or so like me) are well-versed in this area. This isn’t the fault of Linux developers, of course, but we can accept that Linux has a way to to crawl before mass-adoption by your typical lazy Average Joe.
Let’s get real. The bottom line is that until Linux "just works" it will *never* be the year of Linux. Period. I will always enjoy my journey into the land of penguins, but let’s take a step back and remember what *newbie-land* feels like. Compile from source? Yeah, I wish I could reproduce the expression my Grandma made when I mentioned that. Dependencies? Wine? Please. (You’re talking about the beverage, right?) Why does my cursor disappear? (Again the list goes on, depending on the hardware hosting the install.)
Just why would a typical Mac or PC user ever switch over, even with extensive marketing and vendor’s opening up availability? At this stage for the masses, Macs and PCs are just "easier."
(Please excuse my over-use of parenthesis, quotes, asterisks, and other embellishments.)
I think "year of the linux OS" is every year that the user can choose from the variety of good linux distributions and free software. Additionally I think that it is not a matter of linux running windows programs but a matter of people asking for software they need in a linux environment. Linux is NOT windows. It doesn´t want to copy or even be placed in the footsteps of windows. It is completely different in it´s approach and philosophy and therefor will never be windows or its replacement.
For offering something like windows Linux would need ONE standard. That would include the distribution, the windows manager, and the standard tools shipped with it.
It would need to cut choices from the beginning and tell the user that this is what he/she gets and that he/she has to live with it. The basis would be completely and strictly dictated. But that is what Linux isn´t doing and I am glad that it is "our" way. Of course it is a pitty that you can´t run all windows games on linux, but hey, you can´t run all playstation, xbox or nintendo games on linux either.
A lot in the mainstream market is shifting. GOS, Ubuntu and SUSE are spreading the linux OS onto mainstream computers like the ones from Dell, Asus and so on.
People will get used to the different way of linux and maybe that will motivate more closed source developers to support linux but thruthfully I would rather like more variety from open-source sources.
In the beginning I was comparing "our" software with microsoft´s software too, but with time I stopped doing so and only looked at the usefulness of software for my needs and hey, I can live with what I found pretty well. Maybe the best step for now would be better information pools for people searching for specific software because out there is a lot going on.
Sorry for my spelling, I am not a native speaker (german).
Have fun!
For offering something like windows Linux would need ONE standard. That would include the distribution, the windows manager, and the standard tools shipped with it.
It would need to cut choices from the beginning and tell the user that this is what he/she gets and that he/she has to live with it. The basis would be completely and strictly dictated. But that is what Linux isn´t doing and I am glad that it is "our" way. Of course it is a pitty that you can´t run all windows games on linux, but hey, you can´t run all playstation, xbox or nintendo games on linux either.
A lot in the mainstream market is shifting. GOS, Ubuntu and SUSE are spreading the linux OS onto mainstream computers like the ones from Dell, Asus and so on.
People will get used to the different way of linux and maybe that will motivate more closed source developers to support linux but thruthfully I would rather like more variety from open-source sources.
In the beginning I was comparing "our" software with microsoft´s software too, but with time I stopped doing so and only looked at the usefulness of software for my needs and hey, I can live with what I found pretty well. Maybe the best step for now would be better information pools for people searching for specific software because out there is a lot going on.
Sorry for my spelling, I am not a native speaker (german).
Have fun!
Ive been a long time windows user. I remember the old days of Atari 800’s and not being about to buy the ’cool’ games because it was on the commador 64 system. I was ’kinda’ happy when more and more programs were on the windows 3.1 system that i can buy and use.
The other day i put Ubuntu on my old laptop to play around with it to see what Linux was all about. Kinda of a cool OS until I tried to download and install the norton anti-virus program I get free from the military. I had no bloody idea how to install this program. I looked and googled alot of information and after an hour, gave up trying to install the program.
For someone who enjoys using the computer, linux just upset me on how difficult the commands are to use. The different .taz, .rpm, etc was just a pain to figure out.
If linux wants to be in the main stream of the average computer user, they have to make it easier to use.
Just my two cents of thought here.....
The other day i put Ubuntu on my old laptop to play around with it to see what Linux was all about. Kinda of a cool OS until I tried to download and install the norton anti-virus program I get free from the military. I had no bloody idea how to install this program. I looked and googled alot of information and after an hour, gave up trying to install the program.
For someone who enjoys using the computer, linux just upset me on how difficult the commands are to use. The different .taz, .rpm, etc was just a pain to figure out.
If linux wants to be in the main stream of the average computer user, they have to make it easier to use.
Just my two cents of thought here.....
I’m viewing this on Ubuntu right now. You lose!
Hi to everyone.
I must agree with most of the people who pointed out that there’s no special year(or ever will be) to be pointed as "Linux year".
The truth is there are a lot of things that are missing from the "linux picture" and until won’t get fulfilled we won’t see and explosion of "linux" on the desktops any time soon.
What are the things that are missing? Simple: more applications, and what’s more important the possibility to run ANY WIN application on linux.
I’m a PHP developer, I use for my coding "Eclipse", which is a very popular IDE and for the right reason;
the thing is that there’s no usable application/tool for managing VISUALLY(diagrams, etc) and creating DB schemas; so I must use a WIN app for that, which gives me a lot of pain in the as* on my Suse box.
I think, things like "installing a software" had been already resolved, OS installations also are made for dummies since at least 2 years, the only things that are missing are tools(applications) for each aspect of a PC use :
-development(too few or not as valuable as on W),
-gaming(give me an example of a game with stunning new generation graphics, I didn’t find any)
-office(openOffice makes a lot things but still can’t get to do things like MS O)
I think that the first linux distro to have answers to these 3 issues will have it’s year!
Anyways, until then WIN will still be around to run this or that.
Cheers!
I must agree with most of the people who pointed out that there’s no special year(or ever will be) to be pointed as "Linux year".
The truth is there are a lot of things that are missing from the "linux picture" and until won’t get fulfilled we won’t see and explosion of "linux" on the desktops any time soon.
What are the things that are missing? Simple: more applications, and what’s more important the possibility to run ANY WIN application on linux.
I’m a PHP developer, I use for my coding "Eclipse", which is a very popular IDE and for the right reason;
the thing is that there’s no usable application/tool for managing VISUALLY(diagrams, etc) and creating DB schemas; so I must use a WIN app for that, which gives me a lot of pain in the as* on my Suse box.
I think, things like "installing a software" had been already resolved, OS installations also are made for dummies since at least 2 years, the only things that are missing are tools(applications) for each aspect of a PC use :
-development(too few or not as valuable as on W),
-gaming(give me an example of a game with stunning new generation graphics, I didn’t find any)
-office(openOffice makes a lot things but still can’t get to do things like MS O)
I think that the first linux distro to have answers to these 3 issues will have it’s year!
Anyways, until then WIN will still be around to run this or that.
Cheers!
>If Linux can force a deal like Bill Gates did and require that ALL NEW desktops and Laptops have Linux on them
Since I dont know the guy, I figure Mr. Gates is one of those people that can work magic with people and deals - he puts the right people together and makes a deal work. This is why windows is everywhere - he got the right people and made some great deals. A couple decades ago we were that close to running an OS based on CP/M, Amiga or Atari (and the major CPU made by zilog...) Mr. Gates got some clunky DOS and made a deal with IBM - a major player. He made history that day.
And this is exactly why Linux is not going to suddenly take over. Linux is about freedom of choice. Its the intellectuals’ OS of favor. Geeks & techies like it because its secure, out performs win on *any* hardware and runs like a champ. To take over a majority of people - non technical people mind you - will have to choose linux over the default windows install (or demand it pre-installed) and learn some tech stuff.
I have dealt with non-techs for years. Learning technical computer stuff scares most them - the rest dont have the time. Some people are just lazy. As long as the thing comes with windows they will use it. Suffer maybe, but its easier, less time consuming, and simpler than moving to linux.
Computers are just complex tools. It has been possible for years to do all the computing you want on many OS and hardware platforms. Some may perform better but most kinds of shovels dig holes for those that figure out how to use them.
Windows provides an adequate platform for the majority of computing needs. Non technical users can adapt to its idiosynchrosies. (hey, I think its a word...)
For Linux to overwhelm windows - yes even 51% desktop share - it will have to be a dummy proof install. No crapped out HD partitions - all the basic stuff. Modern installers are almost there. It will have to convert windows installs painlessly. It will have to maintain the win app install base and run 90% of it - *all* games and most business apps.
The computer is a tool - I am going to play Halflife 2 and other new games, even if I have to dual boot to win xp to do it.
These simple facts keep windwos on the desktop.
Since I dont know the guy, I figure Mr. Gates is one of those people that can work magic with people and deals - he puts the right people together and makes a deal work. This is why windows is everywhere - he got the right people and made some great deals. A couple decades ago we were that close to running an OS based on CP/M, Amiga or Atari (and the major CPU made by zilog...) Mr. Gates got some clunky DOS and made a deal with IBM - a major player. He made history that day.
And this is exactly why Linux is not going to suddenly take over. Linux is about freedom of choice. Its the intellectuals’ OS of favor. Geeks & techies like it because its secure, out performs win on *any* hardware and runs like a champ. To take over a majority of people - non technical people mind you - will have to choose linux over the default windows install (or demand it pre-installed) and learn some tech stuff.
I have dealt with non-techs for years. Learning technical computer stuff scares most them - the rest dont have the time. Some people are just lazy. As long as the thing comes with windows they will use it. Suffer maybe, but its easier, less time consuming, and simpler than moving to linux.
Computers are just complex tools. It has been possible for years to do all the computing you want on many OS and hardware platforms. Some may perform better but most kinds of shovels dig holes for those that figure out how to use them.
Windows provides an adequate platform for the majority of computing needs. Non technical users can adapt to its idiosynchrosies. (hey, I think its a word...)
For Linux to overwhelm windows - yes even 51% desktop share - it will have to be a dummy proof install. No crapped out HD partitions - all the basic stuff. Modern installers are almost there. It will have to convert windows installs painlessly. It will have to maintain the win app install base and run 90% of it - *all* games and most business apps.
The computer is a tool - I am going to play Halflife 2 and other new games, even if I have to dual boot to win xp to do it.
These simple facts keep windwos on the desktop.
Your claims for Linux to "take over" Windows are laughable, at best, considering how well it has been advancing (better a slow, steading march than a tiring sprint), but the comment
"I wouldn’t have been comfortable selling machines to the mainstream market with something that wasn’t bombproof."
simply made me laugh quite loudly.
The default Linux kernel is more bullet-proof than the default Windows kernel.
You can make as many questionable claims as you wish about so-called "security through obscurity" or "open source is open access to exploiters" but let me make mention of one thing:
Ignoring all other points, you do not have to be an administrator on a Linux machine to do your daily tasks as you do on Windows. That alone makes Linux much more bullet-proof than the Windows kernel.
Unless you are confusing "bullet-proof" as a different meaning than the majority of people know, kind of how most people confuse familiarity as user-friendly... In that case, there is not much I can say.
"I wouldn’t have been comfortable selling machines to the mainstream market with something that wasn’t bombproof."
simply made me laugh quite loudly.
The default Linux kernel is more bullet-proof than the default Windows kernel.
You can make as many questionable claims as you wish about so-called "security through obscurity" or "open source is open access to exploiters" but let me make mention of one thing:
Ignoring all other points, you do not have to be an administrator on a Linux machine to do your daily tasks as you do on Windows. That alone makes Linux much more bullet-proof than the Windows kernel.
Unless you are confusing "bullet-proof" as a different meaning than the majority of people know, kind of how most people confuse familiarity as user-friendly... In that case, there is not much I can say.
===There are few advances in computing that can be pointed to as a sea change of the magnitude of Windows 95. In 1994 I only knew a few people that had a computer, but by 1996, only a few people didn’t have one.=======
If Linux can force a deal like Bill Gates did and require that ALL NEW desktops and Laptops have Linux on them, Windows will be history in a couple of years....and there will be " a sea of change"
If Linux can force a deal like Bill Gates did and require that ALL NEW desktops and Laptops have Linux on them, Windows will be history in a couple of years....and there will be " a sea of change"
"Somebody asked "What features are needed to make Ubuntu mainstream"
Here is my list:"
I do not agree with MS Office compatibility. You will be running a wild goose chase as MS continues to change their protocols and file formats...keeping you from spending time developing features to rival and surpass Office.
Second as someone stated the WORST you have to do on a source install is type "configure" "make" "make install" but I don’t see the average user needing to do this. Even the applications that aren’t in the repos often have .deb files. To be honest installs are actually more dumbed down than windows as it is. You don’t have to click next, next, next or choose anything.
As for "swap" "root" "mounting" being hidden I don’t know how much more you can hide it. If you don’t know about it then you aren’t going to find any of that as it is. And hiding it any further is going to alienate your power users. I believe there is currently a great balance between accessibility for power users and shielding the daily user from ruining their system.
My neices and nephews jump onto my Ubuntu machines and have not even mentioned that I have switched from Windows. I’m not even sure if they know. All they know is that menus are now in different places. But since they know how to read they know how to navigate around without a problem. I’m sure most users could if given the chance. But instead we see article after article hypothesizing about what the average user won’t be able to do.
Here is my list:"
I do not agree with MS Office compatibility. You will be running a wild goose chase as MS continues to change their protocols and file formats...keeping you from spending time developing features to rival and surpass Office.
Second as someone stated the WORST you have to do on a source install is type "configure" "make" "make install" but I don’t see the average user needing to do this. Even the applications that aren’t in the repos often have .deb files. To be honest installs are actually more dumbed down than windows as it is. You don’t have to click next, next, next or choose anything.
As for "swap" "root" "mounting" being hidden I don’t know how much more you can hide it. If you don’t know about it then you aren’t going to find any of that as it is. And hiding it any further is going to alienate your power users. I believe there is currently a great balance between accessibility for power users and shielding the daily user from ruining their system.
My neices and nephews jump onto my Ubuntu machines and have not even mentioned that I have switched from Windows. I’m not even sure if they know. All they know is that menus are now in different places. But since they know how to read they know how to navigate around without a problem. I’m sure most users could if given the chance. But instead we see article after article hypothesizing about what the average user won’t be able to do.
The year of GNU/Linux is the year for those who adopted it to do their mainstream work. So it could even be 2000!
I have used GNU/Linux mainly since Mandrake Linux 7.2
It was the distro that made installing ’Linux’ a breeze and it was the distro release that worked with all the hardware I had without a hitch.
I am typing this on
Linux khanashr 2.6.17-5mdv #1 SMP Wed Sep 13 14:28:02 EDT 2006 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+ GNU/Linux
Listening to audio streaming from smoothjazz.com via Rhythmbox 0.9.5
It plays my all the music / movies I have. I am able to write CD/DVD’s with K3B.
I surf the net with Firefox 2.0.0.6 (update to 2.0.0.11 not done yet)
The few documents/spreadsheets/presentations I have to open are handled by OpenOffice 2.0.3
By the way my Kensington Web cam works with GNU/Linux, totally unusable with MS Windows since Windows XP.
Therefore if there was a year of GNU/Linux for me it was back then.
I still have Windows cause games (I like to play em) are made only for Windows on the PC. No choice there.
All I can say is if you want a ’stable’ and ’cheap’ OS (with a whole load of software thrown in for free) there is none to beat GNU/Linux.
Whatever OSX maybe you still have to pay and works only on Mac hardware. So it is no real competition to GNU/Linux
So my desktop is GNU/Linux
I have used GNU/Linux mainly since Mandrake Linux 7.2
It was the distro that made installing ’Linux’ a breeze and it was the distro release that worked with all the hardware I had without a hitch.
I am typing this on
Linux khanashr 2.6.17-5mdv #1 SMP Wed Sep 13 14:28:02 EDT 2006 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+ GNU/Linux
Listening to audio streaming from smoothjazz.com via Rhythmbox 0.9.5
It plays my all the music / movies I have. I am able to write CD/DVD’s with K3B.
I surf the net with Firefox 2.0.0.6 (update to 2.0.0.11 not done yet)
The few documents/spreadsheets/presentations I have to open are handled by OpenOffice 2.0.3
By the way my Kensington Web cam works with GNU/Linux, totally unusable with MS Windows since Windows XP.
Therefore if there was a year of GNU/Linux for me it was back then.
I still have Windows cause games (I like to play em) are made only for Windows on the PC. No choice there.
All I can say is if you want a ’stable’ and ’cheap’ OS (with a whole load of software thrown in for free) there is none to beat GNU/Linux.
Whatever OSX maybe you still have to pay and works only on Mac hardware. So it is no real competition to GNU/Linux
So my desktop is GNU/Linux
"2007 was not the Year of the Linux Desktop" has no more meaning than "2007 was not the The Year of the Mercedes".
I wouldn’t say the Mercedes cars are a failure, likewise Linux Desktops are not failures. They are just not used by everyone.Neither are Mercedes cars. Do I prefer a Mercedes? Yes, I do. Do I prefer the Linux Desktop? Yes, I do.
So What? If I choose something better than the next guy then it doesn’t matter that the next guy chooses something else. That’s his business, not mine. I’m happy, so is he.
I wouldn’t say the Mercedes cars are a failure, likewise Linux Desktops are not failures. They are just not used by everyone.Neither are Mercedes cars. Do I prefer a Mercedes? Yes, I do. Do I prefer the Linux Desktop? Yes, I do.
So What? If I choose something better than the next guy then it doesn’t matter that the next guy chooses something else. That’s his business, not mine. I’m happy, so is he.
You need to reach the younger generation. That means games, games games. If it doesn’t have games the kids don’t want to know. I’ve seen ’Vista only’ games in the local game shop.
And they’ve borged Mark Russinovich. He’s doing a lot of interesting stuff lately. He might even help make Windows fit for the desktop.
And they’ve borged Mark Russinovich. He’s doing a lot of interesting stuff lately. He might even help make Windows fit for the desktop.
"Somebody asked "What features are needed to make Ubuntu mainstream"
Here is my list:
Wine 1.5"
Wine isn’t even at a 1.0 release yet but it has come on leaps and bounds. I’m now using Wine to play games in my Linux environment. Sure people say that it "stops companies making Linux clients" but I looked at the Linux Client for Never Winter Nights recently, they wanted me to download over 1GB and THEN install the game. I’d rather not play the game thanks.
I do run Quake Wars though, this provides a great Linux client which wasn’t a massive download or a faff to install, and I run Doom 3 too which has a Linux client, they did a good job too. I run Steam in Wine and this works well, not as fast as Windows but with plenty of speed.
Here is my list:
Wine 1.5"
Wine isn’t even at a 1.0 release yet but it has come on leaps and bounds. I’m now using Wine to play games in my Linux environment. Sure people say that it "stops companies making Linux clients" but I looked at the Linux Client for Never Winter Nights recently, they wanted me to download over 1GB and THEN install the game. I’d rather not play the game thanks.
I do run Quake Wars though, this provides a great Linux client which wasn’t a massive download or a faff to install, and I run Doom 3 too which has a Linux client, they did a good job too. I run Steam in Wine and this works well, not as fast as Windows but with plenty of speed.
There won’t be a "Year of Linux Desktop" anytime soon.
I think it will never be. I’m already tired of hearing it year over year.
I’ve been using Linux since 2003 and I can see it’s continuous and great progress.
Instead of a waiting for a miraculous "boom", think about Firefox. It’s gaining market share year over year. It’s even almost 50% on some countries - see http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/07/firefox-takes-28-market-share-in-europe/
Expect a continuous growth!
Does those 1% Linux market share disappoints you? Firefox was just like that...
I think it will never be. I’m already tired of hearing it year over year.
I’ve been using Linux since 2003 and I can see it’s continuous and great progress.
Instead of a waiting for a miraculous "boom", think about Firefox. It’s gaining market share year over year. It’s even almost 50% on some countries - see http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/07/firefox-takes-28-market-share-in-europe/
Expect a continuous growth!
Does those 1% Linux market share disappoints you? Firefox was just like that...
Why are these ’Year of the Linux Desktop’ articles almost exclusively Ubuntu-centric? I’ll tell you why, web traffic and name recognition.
2007 WAS the year desktop Linux arrived for me (well I’ve been Linux only for years) thanks to Mandriva 2008’s superb wifi support, which JUST WORKS- EASILY! Its wifi support is far superior to Ubuntus and it also has a comprehensive control centre, comes with 3D drivers and MP3 playback etc out-of-the-box.
All these people who say "but Linux is still too hard" are full of it or they haven’t tried Mandriva 2008 ONE (GNOME) yet! It offers hassle-free computing Windows can only dream of, and its free!
Yeah, sometimes people are forced to compile from source. I’m sure someone has wrote an ’auto-compiler’ that types ’configure; make; make install’ but come on! Some people want Linux made so easy that things become totally automatic, it reads your mind and wipes yr ass.
I know that under Mandriva, PCLOS and SUSE I never need to use the command-line but I’m an experienced user and I PREFER it for certain tasks, because it is the fastest way to get certain things done. Many Windows-converts end up the same.
2007 WAS the year desktop Linux arrived for me (well I’ve been Linux only for years) thanks to Mandriva 2008’s superb wifi support, which JUST WORKS- EASILY! Its wifi support is far superior to Ubuntus and it also has a comprehensive control centre, comes with 3D drivers and MP3 playback etc out-of-the-box.
All these people who say "but Linux is still too hard" are full of it or they haven’t tried Mandriva 2008 ONE (GNOME) yet! It offers hassle-free computing Windows can only dream of, and its free!
Yeah, sometimes people are forced to compile from source. I’m sure someone has wrote an ’auto-compiler’ that types ’configure; make; make install’ but come on! Some people want Linux made so easy that things become totally automatic, it reads your mind and wipes yr ass.
I know that under Mandriva, PCLOS and SUSE I never need to use the command-line but I’m an experienced user and I PREFER it for certain tasks, because it is the fastest way to get certain things done. Many Windows-converts end up the same.
Somebody asked "What features are needed to make Ubuntu mainstream"
Here is my list:
OO 3 (MS Office 2007 compatibility, Impress made really PPP compatible and superior to it)
Gimp 3 (Downscaling fixed and everything put in one window GUI)
Wine 1.5
Gnome 3 (most needed items added to each of the context menu; "translate this application" removed)
Konqueror (For Kubuntu and KDE in general) sent to Antarctica and never seen again.
A Linux native text editor is there that matches or is better than UltraEdit or PSPad.
Application installation is made easier than in Windows or Mac. I mean not for the ones that are in repos but any available applications including development versions, virtual machines, runtime environments and so on. And again I mean "any" and the keyword is "easier".
Complete 64 bit support (which as a first step simply means 32 bit compatibility).
All Media playable (one or two additional clicks for transferring legal responsibility to the clicker are fine)
Fonts looking nice.
The most important - all flee market concepts have to be put under the hood and never shown to a user again under no circumstances: "swap", "root", "mounting", "package"...
That should do it.
P.S. HD support superior to any other will also be mandatory very soon.
Here is my list:
OO 3 (MS Office 2007 compatibility, Impress made really PPP compatible and superior to it)
Gimp 3 (Downscaling fixed and everything put in one window GUI)
Wine 1.5
Gnome 3 (most needed items added to each of the context menu; "translate this application" removed)
Konqueror (For Kubuntu and KDE in general) sent to Antarctica and never seen again.
A Linux native text editor is there that matches or is better than UltraEdit or PSPad.
Application installation is made easier than in Windows or Mac. I mean not for the ones that are in repos but any available applications including development versions, virtual machines, runtime environments and so on. And again I mean "any" and the keyword is "easier".
Complete 64 bit support (which as a first step simply means 32 bit compatibility).
All Media playable (one or two additional clicks for transferring legal responsibility to the clicker are fine)
Fonts looking nice.
The most important - all flee market concepts have to be put under the hood and never shown to a user again under no circumstances: "swap", "root", "mounting", "package"...
That should do it.
P.S. HD support superior to any other will also be mandatory very soon.
There will never be a "Year of the Linux Desktop". Why not? Well - Linux is just making a slow but steady progress. There will be no specific point in time when you can say: "bang - now Linux has taken over".
When I look around in my IT neighborhood is just see more and more people trying out and using Linux. Even complete city’s are switching to open standards, software and complete Linux desktops and servers. This was unthinkable even a few years ago..
So - just be patient. There will be no point in time when you can say: "now Linux has taken over". I think that point will never be. What WILL happen however, is that Linux slowly but steady will grow into several places. Manufacturers already are taken notice and this will increase even further.
I will be happy when Linux grows enough to not longer be neglected by some hardware- and software manufacturers. Even this won’t happen wit a big bang, but just wait and see...
When I look around in my IT neighborhood is just see more and more people trying out and using Linux. Even complete city’s are switching to open standards, software and complete Linux desktops and servers. This was unthinkable even a few years ago..
So - just be patient. There will be no point in time when you can say: "now Linux has taken over". I think that point will never be. What WILL happen however, is that Linux slowly but steady will grow into several places. Manufacturers already are taken notice and this will increase even further.
I will be happy when Linux grows enough to not longer be neglected by some hardware- and software manufacturers. Even this won’t happen wit a big bang, but just wait and see...
I just successfully migrate my pc’s at home to the Ubuntu Family. I have to admit that winxp is still necessary in some corners to get thinks done, but Ubuntu is very much better than vista. I don’t do anything on the www with winxp anymore and because of this my year of the Linux already was there. What about the mainstream? In my opinion is it all about learning something new. Make more easy to understand howto’s and for people that this is still to much work to read, some more Videoclip are necessary. One problematic thing I have to admit is that the loss of a Internet-connection could render Ubuntu useless. I still didn’t figure out to save software which I downloaded with Synaptic and install it offline without having any Dependency problems.
I don’t care. I still Install Linux on my clients computers instead of Windows. Someone has to force the mainstream to wake up.
http://myphillynetwork.com
http://myphillynetwork.com
I think progress in some areas of Linux, especially the GUI, is not slow because of technical hurdles, lack of developer resources, or the sheer amount of code needing to be written, but rather because very few developers are really interested. Linux is far too tied to the command line. Its a University graduate / nerd / hacker operating system, written by hackers to please hackers. When the people who write it are happy to use the command line, and tend to view people who need the GUI as beneath contempt, I see little hope for progress.
Unfortunately the Linux distros backed by commercial interests are mainly tagetting Linux for servers (Red Hat, OpenSuse). Ubuntu seems to be the only distro that appears to target the desktop. Im not sure why their progress is still very slow. But I am guessing the same nerdy / hacker types are doing the development and hence we are back with the same fundamental problem.
Unfortunately the Linux distros backed by commercial interests are mainly tagetting Linux for servers (Red Hat, OpenSuse). Ubuntu seems to be the only distro that appears to target the desktop. Im not sure why their progress is still very slow. But I am guessing the same nerdy / hacker types are doing the development and hence we are back with the same fundamental problem.
Do people realize that preinstalled and configured Ubuntu or most other distros on pretested hardware would be just about as bullet proof as windows?
The majority of problems come from installing on any mix of hardware and making sure you get all of the drivers right. The so called year of linux will come when you see some major PC vendor put PC’s in Best Buy or circuit city where consumers can actually play with them. Its obvious that people would buy them because the Walmart PC has done well. its great that the quality of the linux desktop will contiinue to increase but we need to realize that its not the hold up to wide spread adoption. Linux simply needs a chance for the masses to play with it and a live cd is not quite going to do it.
The majority of problems come from installing on any mix of hardware and making sure you get all of the drivers right. The so called year of linux will come when you see some major PC vendor put PC’s in Best Buy or circuit city where consumers can actually play with them. Its obvious that people would buy them because the Walmart PC has done well. its great that the quality of the linux desktop will contiinue to increase but we need to realize that its not the hold up to wide spread adoption. Linux simply needs a chance for the masses to play with it and a live cd is not quite going to do it.
Actually, there was a year for Windows. It was 1995. Windows 95 was a monsterous leap ahead of Windows 3.1, and it blew away Apple’s Mac OS. There are few advances in computing that can be pointed to as a sea change of the magnitude of Windows 95. In 1994 I only knew a few people that had a computer, but by 1996, only a few people didn’t have one.
Like most computing advances, there will probably never be a "year of the Linux OS", but rather a gradual adoption as the OS becomes more mature. KDE 4 and QT 4.4 will help a lot in 2008.
lol - I loved your comment - "I wouldn’t have been comfortable selling machines to the mainstream market with something that wasn’t bombproof."
Obviously you meant O/S - which makes me wonder - would you sell Windows? I guess that’s why vendors sell windows with so many bloat packages to ward off viruses, phishing, po-up blockers, etc. etc. - it’s a disclaimer - "This isn’t bombproof, but we arae giving you everything to make is so, and slow...."
Good article though!
Obviously you meant O/S - which makes me wonder - would you sell Windows? I guess that’s why vendors sell windows with so many bloat packages to ward off viruses, phishing, po-up blockers, etc. etc. - it’s a disclaimer - "This isn’t bombproof, but we arae giving you everything to make is so, and slow...."
Good article though!
You may be right. but you made a lot of assertions without any detail to back them up. What features are needed to make Ubuntu mainstream, for instance.
I agree with the last post. Constant and frequent quality improvement is enough. Kernel dev, apps,drivers, interface improvements etc. Sales units is not a big worry.
5 million Asus eeePC laptops sold in 2008 at current rate of sales. 1 million or so gPCs (Walmart’s current fastest selling PC) sold in 2008 at current rates
5 million Asus eeePC laptops sold in 2008 at current rate of sales. 1 million or so gPCs (Walmart’s fastest selling PC) sold in 2008 at current rates
If Vista follows the same path as did XP then the outcome for Vista will be *much* different than it was for XP with Linux being the benefactor. Although I loathe Ubuntu, along with the Gnome desktop in general, I see its dumbed down interface actually gaining traction in years to come. Why? it is simple, Vista will take forever to get up to speed much like XP. Win2k was a major step forward for MS since it joined 9x and NT together which spurred adoption. XP was slow to gain traction since it wasn’t a huge leap forward but, rather, a refining of Win2k with some eye candy changes. Vista will suffer, not from Linux, but from XP. That hesitation will open the door for Linux because, by the time some users are looking at Vista Linux’s name shall be more prominent thus spurring an investigation by corporations. That’s how Linux will get on more peoples desktops. Make no mistake about it, unless companies adopt Linux on the desktop it isn’t going anywhere! Look at computing history, IBM & DOS in the workplace was the catalyst. The average user will run at home what they run at work. Change the desktop at work and you change the desktop everywhere, it is a simple formula.
The year of desktop Linux happened when gnome 2 was released. That created a base for making Linux simple enough for the masses. Now we are just in a transition phase to world domination, but that will take a long time. I would guess we will have to five to ten years before we get two digit market share.
Dell selling preloaded Linux is a step on the way, so is the new mini PCs with Linux installed. What need to happen in the Dell case is that Dell need to start to sell Linux on their front page like any other OS, and we need a few other venders to join in, but that will probably happen in two or three years time. When that have happened we will se more propriatory, and higher quality free software for the desktop and that will drive more preinstalled Linux sales.
Dell selling preloaded Linux is a step on the way, so is the new mini PCs with Linux installed. What need to happen in the Dell case is that Dell need to start to sell Linux on their front page like any other OS, and we need a few other venders to join in, but that will probably happen in two or three years time. When that have happened we will se more propriatory, and higher quality free software for the desktop and that will drive more preinstalled Linux sales.
> I wouldn’t have been comfortable selling machines to the mainstream market with something that wasn’t bombproof.
Is Windows bombproof?
As far as Vista being the catalyst, I think it is, but you’re going to have to wait a little while for the people assessing it that decided to hang onto XP for some more time before you see Linux uptake. It never was going to be a "Oh shit the next version of Windows is terrible, lets quickly install Linux"; rather "Okay, so we won’t be moving to Vista, let’s plan a larger migration pattern over to Linux".
As far as I see it, Linux is pretty much guaranteed to destroy Windows. We have 3-5 years (plus slippage) without a new major Windows release and a lesser (but still significant) amount of time for the next OSX. Consider advance in the 12 months between Breezy and Gutsy and multiply that fourfold.
And 2007 marked my permanent departure from Windowsland to Ubuntopia. I’m no average user but I was a pretty enthusiastic Windows enthusiast/defender before I switched.
Linux has its require critical mass, IMO. 2008 is year of Linux apps and that’s probably what’s going to attract most people.
Is Windows bombproof?
As far as Vista being the catalyst, I think it is, but you’re going to have to wait a little while for the people assessing it that decided to hang onto XP for some more time before you see Linux uptake. It never was going to be a "Oh shit the next version of Windows is terrible, lets quickly install Linux"; rather "Okay, so we won’t be moving to Vista, let’s plan a larger migration pattern over to Linux".
As far as I see it, Linux is pretty much guaranteed to destroy Windows. We have 3-5 years (plus slippage) without a new major Windows release and a lesser (but still significant) amount of time for the next OSX. Consider advance in the 12 months between Breezy and Gutsy and multiply that fourfold.
And 2007 marked my permanent departure from Windowsland to Ubuntopia. I’m no average user but I was a pretty enthusiastic Windows enthusiast/defender before I switched.
Linux has its require critical mass, IMO. 2008 is year of Linux apps and that’s probably what’s going to attract most people.
I agree pretty much, not that my opinion is worth anything. But that ubiquitous phase was not pronounced by any Linux notables that I know of. It was the ever clueless press that kept on spewing it in hopes of more hits on their publisher\’s web site. I don\’t know why people seem to be expecting an avalanche of change. What\’s wrong with steady progress? As far as I can see, with the continual unfulfillment of \"The Year of Linux\", Microsoft will be gasping for air in about 5 to 8 years.
But isn’t the lowest common denominator for the greater good? More people using open source/free software is good, isn’t it?
Also why does it mean that things have to be "dumbed down"? Surely you can have an operating system that works well and has complicated aspects, but excellent usability.
Also why does it mean that things have to be "dumbed down"? Surely you can have an operating system that works well and has complicated aspects, but excellent usability.
I think there will be a year when it all suddenly takes off. 2007 was a fair bet because things were moving so quickly elsewhere and Vista was such an anti climax.
Maybe 2008 though, but 2010 is more likely.
Maybe 2008 though, but 2010 is more likely.
Why is it that everytime you read a commentary on Linux you hear its not idiotproof enough. Removing functionality for the sake of the lowest common denominator is not an improvement and doesnt serve the Linux cause. an example is I would never use an Ubuntu version not because I feel gnome at best should be a cell phone interface but because of the intensional lack of functionality.
Why is it, everyone who writes about Linux (bloggers and IT Journalists) believe there will be a defining year for Linux to come to the desktop? Did MS’s or Apple’s OSs become desktop solutions in a specific year?
Here’s a hint: There won’t be a pre-defined year.
It will gracefully happen over a period of 5 to 10 yrs. That is, Linux will be ready when its ready. There is no rush, schedule or pre-determined deadline that Linux MUST BE a desktop OS by 20xx. If you think that, then you don’t know opensource!
There is only constant and consistent improvement.That’s what matters.
Here’s a hint: There won’t be a pre-defined year.
It will gracefully happen over a period of 5 to 10 yrs. That is, Linux will be ready when its ready. There is no rush, schedule or pre-determined deadline that Linux MUST BE a desktop OS by 20xx. If you think that, then you don’t know opensource!
There is only constant and consistent improvement.That’s what matters.
What I don’t like is that Microsoft has a leading position in DotNet even if it’s an open standard. Implementation is done first by Microsoft for the Windows platform. It should be functional from scratch for ALL PLATFORMS. Linux is a very good platform, but developing applications to run on it should be much easier.