What Linux can do to take over the world

H

Hiltonizer

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
1,202
RedHat, Canonical, Novell or some other company with a ton of money needs to throw a ton of money at developing games/a gaming platform based on Linux. It's the only thing that it needs.

Honestly, how can Mac succeed when its locked to overpriced hardware and doesnt really offer any killer features?

With console gaming slowly killing PC gaming, there isn't going to be much of a chance of getting game publishers to make the games cross platform. That is why some company needs to step up and create there own Linux based gaming console. Instead of Xbox, i suppose you could call it LXBox... I'm sure there are more creative people than me than can make up something catchy.

The idea that games made for the Linux console, can also run on regular Linux desktops. This would get an entirely new crowd in front of a Linux machine, as well as make it easier for the many of us who use windows just for our favorite games to convert completely.

Having a core technology like this would create a snowball effect, consequently improving driver support and lord knows what else.

Redhat is probably the only Linux company with the resources to pull this off, and so redhat, I implore you. Develop a Linux based gaming console and throw some many at game development.
 
You mean like microsoft did with DirectX? Microsoft with shitloads more money on hand?

There already are technologies for free operating systems that do that, like SDL.

Hiltonizer said:
RedHat, Canonical, Novell or some other company with a ton of money needs to throw a ton of money at developing games/a gaming platform based on Linux. It's the only thing that it needs.
Click to expand...
 
What do you want linux to take over? I like having choice. I use Mac, Windows, and Linux. I agree that Linux needs more games but a Linux based console is not the answer. Modern development tools are aiding in the creation of cross platform apps. I use Blender( An open source, free 3d modeling app) on Linux, Win and Mac. I'd like to see a major game come out for all three.

Be careful for what you wish for, you may not like it when you get it.
 
I read something either on here or overclock.net that Steam was rumored to go cross platform (Win/Lin) a while back. Don't know if anything ever happened with it.
 
It's impossible for Linux to become anything more than it is, because every single distribution thinks it's the best, and they all do things differently, and they all act differently, "A game" for one distribution may not run, or may run differently than it does under another.
 
SuperSubZero said:
It's impossible for Linux to become anything more than it is, because every single distribution thinks it's the best, and they all do things differently, and they all act differently, "A game" for one distribution may not run, or may run differently than it does under another.
Click to expand...


While I don't think it's the primary thing holding Linux back, It's a very good point. One of the largest complaints Windows Vista has against it is the number of SKUs. People complain about how there are to many. If people find 4 versions of Windows confusing, I can't see how they are going to cope with the various distributions. Then they have to figure KDE or Gnome...
 
Gaming is not what's holding Linux back. [H]ard is not a representative of the real-world demographic. If Linux wants to take over the world, it must take over the business world and the old grandmother who thinks a mouse is something in her wall world. If those happen, gaming will follow.
 
SuperSubZero said:
It's impossible for Linux to become anything more than it is, because every single distribution thinks it's the best, and they all do things differently, and they all act differently, "A game" for one distribution may not run, or may run differently than it does under another.
Click to expand...
Not entirely accurate. While I will admit the fractioning of linux distros is problematic for those wanting deeper penetration ( perv sense tingling! ), I also see it as a benefit. We still have a lot of bright minds trying to figure out the best way to do things.

Anyway, it's a funny turn of phrase. "What linux can do to take over the world". As if it's not showing up in damn near everything already. In it's current state, it's more than adequate for uses ranging from embedded devices to huge data sets. We see it showing up on cell phones and running stock rooms. It's really only a matter of time before a variant of linux shows up on a satellite.
 
SuperSubZero said:
It's impossible for Linux to become anything more than it is, because every single distribution thinks it's the best, and they all do things differently, and they all act differently, "A game" for one distribution may not run, or may run differently than it does under another.
Click to expand...

not true. With the kernel going to 2.6.x being a working copy it ment that all distro's are faily close to each other.

glibc also stabalised its API a loooong time ago... like alot of the core libs. The desktop interface (GNOME,KDE,Openbox...) doesn't have any influence on whether a game run ONLY its runtime libs

Code: 
jrb@Fluid ~ $ ldd /opt/etqw/etqw.x86 
    linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xffffe000)
    libSDL-1.2.so.0 => /usr/lib32/libSDL-1.2.so.0 (0xf7ea8000)
    libpthread.so.0 => /lib32/libpthread.so.0 (0x4d1e7000)
    libz.so.1 => /lib32/libz.so.1 (0x4d4ec000)
    libjpeg.so.62 => /usr/lib32/libjpeg.so.62 (0xf7e88000)
    libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib32/libX11.so.6 (0x4d30a000)
    libXext.so.6 => /usr/lib32/libXext.so.6 (0x4d4db000)
    libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.2.2/32/libstdc++.so.6 (0xf7d9f000)
    libm.so.6 => /lib32/libm.so.6 (0x4d201000)
    libgcc_s.so.1 => /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.2.2/32/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x4cbc5000)
    libc.so.6 => /lib32/libc.so.6 (0x4d0aa000)
    libdl.so.2 => /lib32/libdl.so.2 (0x4d1e1000)
    /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4ca69000)
    libXau.so.6 => /usr/lib32/libXau.so.6 (0x4d3f8000)
    libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/lib32/libXdmcp.so.6 (0x4d302000)
AS long as that is satified it will run. ASSUMING that there is a pig of a game and it was VERY bad and linked against a certain lib directly... just put that lib in the working directory \o/
ASSUMING the distro that the game developer on has some patches such that when the game is run on other distro's it dont work... apply the patches to the other distro source (gooo gpl \o/)
ASSUMING that the game uses an {older,newer} libary then the default system-wide lib... slot the lib \o/

it REALLY isn't that hard from a distro/OS p.o.v to get this to work, many a game is written for linux and they work. Sure specific distro tweaks may arrise BUT they run!

what is more of an issue is the chicken & the egg.. developers won't code for linux cause not enough use it and users wont use it because developers don't code for it

with hte like of Ubuntu making it easier and eeePC pushing linux as well market penetration is starting to ramp up on the users front (not just from enthusiast). YES valve did put out a recrutment for linux coders for steam stuff, it will take some time for any possible ports to appear

as far as linux in businesses, it is already there in the backend,
 
The problem is with business apps and ActiveX. At the school I work with we have about 15 apps that are Windows only. All of our users are trained on how to use them and are efficient at using them. Many of the programs are also already paid for. For us to switch to Linux we would need to change all of those programs to a different solution. That would mean retraining all of our staff, not only on using the program but also the OS. We would also have to purchase the new programs. So a linux switch actually represents a huge cost and time investment. With our education and volume licensing discounts, using MS isn't that expensive.

On top of that, we have a lot of devices that require ActiveX, and many of them require a certain version of IE. We have a security system that cost in the 6 digit range on campus, that requires IE. Switching to Linux would require scrapping that system and buying a new on, not an option.

This causes a ripple effect, because I found that people want to have the same thing at home as they do at work. When I updated everyone to Office 2007, many people started asking to purchase Office 2007 for home. Same thing happened 5 years ago when we switched everyone from Mac to PC. (the faculty, not the staff for the reasons posted above. They have always been Windows) Everyone started to ask who I thought was the best PC manufacturer, etc.

As others have said, it is a Chicken and egg problem. Businesses can't switch to Linux until all of their programs work in it. The software companies won't make a Linux version until many of the businesses start using Linux.

Linux is taking over the embedded/specialized world. Cell phones, network hardware, vehicles, on and on. Linux has found its sweet spot, it is running everything behind the scenes.
 
Linux on the desktop will probably never be a real force. It’s not that it’s not capable, it’s simply of matter of cost, licensing, and potential market.

First off, commercial OS’s like Windows and OS X have to license technology for this such as media playback. While Linux distros get around it in various ways, manufacturers of pre-built PC with Linux have get licensing to package these features legally, which can still be a little cheaper than a version of Windows, and it can make a lower end machine somewhat cheaper, but it’s usually not a lot more than $50 or so. As you approach higher cost machines upwards of $1000, Windows doesn’t add a lot to the cost of the machine.

Moreover, what really is the demand for commercial apps and software for Linux on the desktop? Very low I would think. The great mantra of Linux is about free and open source. Even when it comes to games, I don’t think you’ll ever see millions of Linux desktop users spending $50 for a game; it’s just not the culture.

Linux, Macs and Windows are going to be part of the desktop ecosystem for years to come, with Windows dominate for the foreseeable future. What will to more to undermine Windows isn’t other desktop OS’s, it will be web based apps and services like Google Apps that render the desktop OS irrelevant. That said, it won’t be easy to achieve as people have worked on web based and Java apps like this for about a decade, and while they are useful, they lack a ton of capability. It’s much easier to graft networking and web awareness into a rich client. An example is this is Office Live, which is pretty slick. It gives Office and other client apps a web store with versioning and collaboration capabilities.
 
Arainach said:
Gaming is not what's holding Linux back. [H]ard is not a representative of the real-world demographic. If Linux wants to take over the world, it must take over the business world and the old grandmother who thinks a mouse is something in her wall world. If those happen, gaming will follow.
Click to expand...

I think everyone is missing my point. Linux is already got a good hold on the business world. Any decent size server room most likely has its fair share of Linux boxes in it.

Expanding it to entertainment platforms can create the synergy it needs to stop people from complaining about the lack of application support. If it's already in peoples houses for entertainment, software companies will have a more legitimate cause for creating cross platform applications.

Businesses arent going to adopt linux workstations if there users have no idea what they're looking at. That's why it needs to be in the home first.
 
It wont ever happen. Until it becomes as ridiculously easy as Windows to use for the lay person.


There is no compelling reason for the mass home consumer base to ever adopt Linux over what they use now. I dont see anyway to change that unless it happens very very slowly over a very very long period of time.
 
I believe you're flawed in thinking that gamers will "win the war." Gaming on Linux isn't the real issue that's holding it back. In all honesty the main thing that's holding it back is a large reliance on the <ominous voice> COMMAND LINE!!!!! </ominous voice>. For the power users, Linux is great. For those that want something that works the first time (read: average user) the command line is scary as hell. Ubuntu and some of the other newer distros are becoming more idiot proof, but they have a ways to go to match Windows!

I agree with others, Linux will never be dominate in the home setting. It will however be more popular than the Mac OS :p. Linux does practically run the server world now, but Windows is rapidly gaining ground in that area.
 
Hurdler said:
I believe you're flawed in thinking that gamers will "win the war." Gaming on Linux isn't the real issue that's holding it back. In all honesty the main thing that's holding it back is a large reliance on the <ominous voice> COMMAND LINE!!!!! </ominous voice>. For the power users, Linux is great. For those that want something that works the first time (read: average user) the command line is scary as hell. Ubuntu and some of the other newer distros are becoming more idiot proof, but they have a ways to go to match Windows!

I agree with others, Linux will never be dominate in the home setting. It will however be more popular than the Mac OS :p. Linux does practically run the server world now, but Windows is rapidly gaining ground in that area.
Click to expand...

The command line argument is total bunk. The only people that would be afraid of the command line aren't going to ever need it, and haven't had to for years now. It's been so long since I've needed to use the command line to surf the web, check my email, work on a spreadsheet and listen to music.
 
I was scared of the command line at first as well. It took me only 2 weeks to realise that it was such a powerful tool, much better than any GUI. Right now, I almost solely run commandline based apps.
 
Gigamo said:
I was scared of the command line at first as well. It took me only 2 weeks to realise that it was such a powerful tool, much better than any GUI. Right now, I almost solely run commandline based apps.
Click to expand...

I think most people are a little intimidated at first. Those who choose to stick it out and learn it won't be disappointed though. The problem is that most people don't want to take the time!
 
This post is simply some kids wish list that Linux does not support (most) commercial games and has no choice but to stay on Windows. There is so much more dedication and time well spent beyond hovering Cheeto stained fingers over the w, a, d, s keys... I promise.

Try compiling kernels from source, try a Linux based Firewall and mess with iptables, build your own email server...Hell - install Gentoo if you have a month so spare. Play games on a console.
 
Carloswill said:
This post is simply some kids wish list that Linux does not support (most) commercial games and has no choice but to stay on Windows. There is so much more dedication and time well spent beyond hovering Cheeto stained fingers over the w, a, d, s keys... I promise.

Try compiling kernels from source, try a Linux based Firewall and mess with iptables, build your own email server...Hell - install Gentoo if you have a month so spare. Play games on a console.
Click to expand...

Your partially right, it is my personal desire to drop windows completely. However, I hate console play; thumb paddles and split screen play is for idiots.... I wouldn't be recommending a Linux console for personal satisfaction. I have a legitimate reason to believe that its develeopment will make for the betterment of Linux in general.

Oh... and since i'm a net admin working in a mixed environment, and run a dedicated server company part time, i've done all of the above with the exception of building Gentoo. Get over yourself... no one is impressed you can name drop iptables.

PS: I hate cheeto's... mmk?
 
Hiltonizer said:
The command line argument is total bunk. The only people that would be afraid of the command line aren't going to ever need it, and haven't had to for years now. It's been so long since I've needed to use the command line to surf the web, check my email, work on a spreadsheet and listen to music.
Click to expand...
Its not "bunk". People fail to realize that with windows all the answers lay before you, its like a multiple choice test, all the answers are in the ui somewhere, you just have to find them. Windows its very easy to find what you want to do. With the command line you have nothing, not even a hint of what to do.
 
munkle said:
Its not "bunk". People fail to realize that with windows all the answers lay before you, its like a multiple choice test, all the answers are in the ui somewhere, you just have to find them. Windows its very easy to find what you want to do. With the command line you have nothing, not even a hint of what to do.
Click to expand...
Wait, what? You're joking right?

So nevermind a piss poor application needing tweaks in the registry hive. But WAIT! Which one? HKEY_CURRENT_USER? HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE? Or the dreaded HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT? Or what about dll files that need special attention ( limited user, needing to give them special permissions to weirdly named files all over the disk ). Or better ( and yes, I've run into this on consumer grade applications ), having to register these dlls because the installer put them in a weird place and didn't actually register them with the OS.

If *you* don't have a hint of what to do, that speaks more of your skill in the use of the tool than the actual usefulness of the tool. Me? Give me all the tools you can and let me figure the problems out.
 
XOR != OR said:
Wait, what? You're joking right?

So nevermind a piss poor application needing tweaks in the registry hive. But WAIT! Which one? HKEY_CURRENT_USER? HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE? Or the dreaded HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT? Or what about dll files that need special attention ( limited user, needing to give them special permissions to weirdly named files all over the disk ). Or better ( and yes, I've run into this on consumer grade applications ), having to register these dlls because the installer put them in a weird place and didn't actually register them with the OS.

If *you* don't have a hint of what to do, that speaks more of your skill in the use of the tool than the actual usefulness of the tool. Me? Give me all the tools you can and let me figure the problems out.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should understand the point of a post before replying to it, or assuming I am talking about myself.

You have no concept why the command line keeps linux from going main stream, I am not saying it isn't a good tool (its a very good one), I am saying it offers no help to an average user. Average users do not use command prompt in windows why should they be forced to have to use terminal to do simple tasks that can be done with the ui in windows. Just because YOU know all about linux and how it works doesn't mean average people do or want to.

Ps. Never have I had to edit the registry, and if you even know about the registry in windows why are you using "piss poor" applications. I would think if you knew anything about the registry you would also know how to choose a good application.
 
munkle said:
You have no concept why the command line keeps linux from going main stream, I am not saying it isn't a good tool (its a very good one), I am saying it offers no help to an average user. Average users do not use command prompt in windows why should they be forced to have to use terminal to do simple tasks that can be done with the ui in windows. Just because YOU know all about linux and how it works doesn't mean average people do or want to.
Click to expand...
Pop quiz: Where are most of the window installations: In the home, or in the corporation?

Better question: Which installations are more lucrative? Home or corporate?

The answer is, of course, corporate. As any windows admin will tell you, administrating these beasts are painful. As any linux/windows admin will tell you, we wish they had as robust a command line interface as linux does. Go ahead, ask *any* admin who covers both linux and windows. i'll wait.
Ps. Never have I had to edit the registry, and if you even know about the registry in windows why are you using "piss poor" applications. I would think if you knew anything about the registry you would also know how to choose a good application.
Click to expand...
And your inexperience shows here. I don't care what company you administrate for, at some point some PHB is going to want a WHIZ BANG app that they found in a trade rag on their local system. This app is assuming administrative access. Being a peon to this particular PHB, you will have to choice but to attempt to install this app.

But even aside from that, how often are you included in the buying process for your extended family? I know I don't hear about the latest software app they bought until after the fact.

However, as to the original point about reliance on the command line being a hurdle for linux adoption: That's faulty. Already there are distributions out there that setup everything for the user ( some of the fedoras were getting pretty good at getting everything installed and operational for email/web surfing ). They've been around for years, and we still don't see broad home penetration of said distributions.
 
XOR != OR said:
Pop quiz: Where are most of the window installations: In the home, or in the corporation?

Better question: Which installations are more lucrative? Home or corporate?

The answer is, of course, corporate. As any windows admin will tell you, administrating these beasts are painful. As any linux/windows admin will tell you, we wish they had as robust a command line interface as linux does. Go ahead, ask *any* admin who covers both linux and windows. i'll wait.
And your inexperience shows here. I don't care what company you administrate for, at some point some PHB is going to want a WHIZ BANG app that they found in a trade rag on their local system. This app is assuming administrative access. Being a peon to this particular PHB, you will have to choice but to attempt to install this app.

But even aside from that, how often are you included in the buying process for your extended family? I know I don't hear about the latest software app they bought until after the fact.

However, as to the original point about reliance on the command line being a hurdle for linux adoption: That's faulty. Already there are distributions out there that setup everything for the user ( some of the fedoras were getting pretty good at getting everything installed and operational for email/web surfing ). They've been around for years, and we still don't see broad home penetration of said distributions.
Click to expand...
WOW ok I'm not going to argue with a person that is full of themself. This is not about linux being corporate friendly, it's about linux being mainstream friendly. Linux can still have a good command line and be more user friendly these are not exclusive things. I'm done replying to you since all you can seem to argue is that command line is the bomb and windows sucks, in essence thats all your posts say.

You need to realize that average users do not want to use or learn command line, and until linux removes its reliance on the command line for relatively simple tasks then it will never become mainstream.

Good day sir, I am done talking to you.
 
munkle said:
Good day sir, I am done talking to you.
Click to expand...
My suggestion to you is to take a break, go outside, read a book. You obviously get to caught up in what some random assholes say on the internet, which indicates a dependence on the medium for self esteem.

I hear yoga helps.
 
The single biggest thing holding back any open source project, as this thread demonstrates, are it's users and developers.

The overwhelming response from the open source community, Linux in particular, when somebody has problems using their system, is "learn to use your computer". Since the developers of Linux are doing it free in most cases, they have no real incentive to implement features they themselves wouldn't use.

The simple fact is Jon and Jane Average have absolutely no desire spending hundreds of hours in front of their computer learning how to use a CLI or how to edit config files, or compiling their kernel. They want to get on and do what they want to do, be it game, surf, chat, edit documents, whatever, while jumping thru the minimum number of hoops. And can any of you Linux users honestly list an distro you could hand to your grandmother and say "here, try this" without expecting constant requests for tech support, and not have to make several trips to her house to show her how to use it?

And when Jon, Jane, or Granny Average has a problem, they want somebody who will walk them thru their problem, and not be told "read the man file" or "L2google n00b". I'm not saying windows doesn't have it's share of assholes, really Linux and Windows probably has the same number of jerks offering support, and probably share some of the same jerks. Problem is Linux has a much smaller user base so the percentage of jerks is much higher.

What Linux can do to take over the world? Get an entirely new user and developer base who actually focus on making the OS easy to use for everybody, and who are tolerant and helpful when new people have problems.

So yeah, good luck with that.
 
the one thing that needs to be done to get Linux to be more mainstream as a desktop OS is for a major linux distro with tons of money behind them (Red Hat, Novell, etc.) to make another Mac-OS-X-type user interface for it, on top of a linux base, and write it to run on your average, run-of-the-mill PC hardware, instead of expensive proprietary B.S. hardware like Apple does. it needs to be able to allow users to control virtually every aspect of the system via the UI instead of going to the command line (although still offering the command line as a choice, for those who prefer it), and tightly integrate the functions of the command line with the UI.

as many have said, for the majority of home users who just like to hop on their computer and play games, chat online, surf the web, send/receive email, etc., etc., they don't really want to do what equates (to them) to "taking a step backward" by being forced to learn the command line in order to get things done. it's the same as if DOS still existed as a modern OS today alongside Windows.....why would they want to go through the process of learning how to run things in DOS by manually typing in commands, when they can simply point-and-click in some fancy UI?

Bill Gates knew this fact very well, far ahead of anyone else (with the exception of maybe Steve Jobs), which is why he could probably buy God right now if he wanted to. the easier you make something to use, and the more useful you make it, the more people are going to use it. plain and simple.
 
-Dragon- said:
The single biggest thing holding back any open source project, as this thread demonstrates, are it's users and developers.

The overwhelming response from the open source community, Linux in particular, when somebody has problems using their system, is "learn to use your computer". Since the developers of Linux are doing it free in most cases, they have no real incentive to implement features they themselves wouldn't use.

The simple fact is Jon and Jane Average have absolutely no desire spending hundreds of hours in front of their computer learning how to use a CLI or how to edit config files, or compiling their kernel. They want to get on and do what they want to do, be it game, surf, chat, edit documents, whatever, while jumping thru the minimum number of hoops. And can any of you Linux users honestly list an distro you could hand to your grandmother and say "here, try this" without expecting constant requests for tech support, and not have to make several trips to her house to show her how to use it?

And when Jon, Jane, or Granny Average has a problem, they want somebody who will walk them thru their problem, and not be told "read the man file" or "L2google n00b". I'm not saying windows doesn't have it's share of assholes, really Linux and Windows probably has the same number of jerks offering support, and probably share some of the same jerks. Problem is Linux has a much smaller user base so the percentage of jerks is much higher.

What Linux can do to take over the world? Get an entirely new user and developer base who actually focus on making the OS easy to use for everybody, and who are tolerant and helpful when new people have problems.

So yeah, good luck with that.
Click to expand...

Somebody who actually understands the problem.
 
Threads like this one are the reason I stopped posting here a while ago. I decided to check how this forum was doing a few minutes ago and realized that some things will never change.

What would Linux users have to feel smug or superior about if everyone ran Linux? :D
 
This is an actual question I'm curious about: Why do you people care are about Linux's marketshare?

It makes no difference to me if my neighbour is using it.


edit: I should add, I'm apparently one of the "assholes" that tells people to go read the man page. On the other hand I never go around pushing the OS, and when asked for OS recommendations I almost never recommend Linux. I think refocusing the OS on "average-joe" usability would detract from its "power-user" usability, so it something I don't really care about; I know how to the use the OS, and I don't care if other people can't figure it out.
 
jimmyb said:
This is an actual question I'm curious about: Why do you people care are about Linux's marketshare?
Click to expand...

For me it's not a crusade or anything I really push. Yes, I do suggest Linux to some people for something to try out as a test or secondary OS. I've burned a number of CDs and DVDs for people so they didn't have to download and burn the image on their own.

I would like to see Linux gain a respectable amount of marketshare to keep MS honest a bit. The overall stranglehold MS has on the desktop market is a little stifling in my opinion. With some real competition, I think MS would shape Windows up a hell of a lot better which would benefit everyone in the long run. Innovation and refinement pushed through by competition. This would also push Linux developers the same way.

More Linux ports of Windows based software. Sure, I love open source apps and use many of them. However, many open source apps don't have the functionality, user friendliness or other advantages of closed source Windows apps. It's just a fact of life. It can also work the other way. You might see more open source apps which are basically *nix only which would be ported to Windows.

Frankly, I'm bored of fixing problems with Windows. It would be a refreshing change of pace if someone brought in a Linux system for me to fix. Linux isn't bulletproof by any means so it would happen.

I don't expect or really want Linux to overtake the market share lead from MS. I do want it to compete in the desktop space in order to bring more quality software to everyone.

Linux isn't the best choice for every use and Windows isn't the best choice for every use. Each one has their own strengths and weaknesses and I believe serious competition between the two would strengthen both OSes.

I also believe that Linux is a hell of a lot better and easier to use than most people think. Many people who do nothing more than basic tasks such as web browsing, email and everyday computer tasks would be perfectly happy with Linux if they gave it a chance. I hate seeing a good product ignored or pushed to the side due to misinformation.

 
So when people have problems with Windows where do they go...


And w.r.t. "linux not going mainstream due to the terminal"
Like windows doesn't come with one

great FUD guys
 
eeyrjmr said:
And w.r.t. "linux not going mainstream due to the terminal"
Like windows doesn't come with one

great FUD guys
Click to expand...

As I said to somebody on here a while back...there's a key difference between the CLI/GUI balance in Windows and Linux - Windows is designed so that you can do everything from the GUI, and (by default) you have a second-rate, strangled CLI for some limited stuff you want to do.

However, Linux was originally a CLI-based system, so everything can be done from there, and GUIfication of the full functionality is probably around 95% there in Gnome and KDE (and, following close behind, XFCE).

However, for all those people bitching about learning the CLI being a requirement for using Linux, it's absolute bull. I'm a developer and Linux administrator, and I only find myself using the terminal for stuff that's quicker that way compared to the GUI (except on some of our servers, where there's no GUI installed). Sure, you often have to do stuff like recompiling the kernel from the terminal...but I'll only accept the point if you show me exactly how a Windows user could do that to the Windows kernel. Using package management software, you rarely (if ever) have to resort to that unless you have specific requirements way outside the norm; usually, somebody's already done it for you, and anything you want to install which requires an updated kernel will have it already registered as a dependency.

In fact, anybody who's ever struggled with MS apps requiring specific and conflicting point releases of .NET frameworks or MDAC will find the software management features of modern Linux distributions far more user-friendly than the Windows equivalent process.

I'm not saying that Linux is without fault, but it really grinds my nuts to see people trotting out the same excuses and faulty reasoning year after year, on the assumption that Linux development moves at the same glacial pace as Microsoft's. The major Linux distributions release (on average) around every 6 months or so (even more often if you go for the backports/untested software releases), so there isn't such a "big-bang" mentality where new features appear only every few years or so. Most of the problems listed in this thread went away several releases ago, so unless you've tried it lately...logic dictates that your opinions are pretty much null and void in this discussion.
 
-Dragon- said:
The single biggest thing holding back any open source project, as this thread demonstrates, are it's users and developers.

The overwhelming response from the open source community, Linux in particular, when somebody has problems using their system, is "learn to use your computer". Since the developers of Linux are doing it free in most cases, they have no real incentive to implement features they themselves wouldn't use.

The simple fact is Jon and Jane Average have absolutely no desire spending hundreds of hours in front of their computer learning how to use a CLI or how to edit config files, or compiling their kernel. They want to get on and do what they want to do, be it game, surf, chat, edit documents, whatever, while jumping thru the minimum number of hoops. And can any of you Linux users honestly list an distro you could hand to your grandmother and say "here, try this" without expecting constant requests for tech support, and not have to make several trips to her house to show her how to use it?

And when Jon, Jane, or Granny Average has a problem, they want somebody who will walk them thru their problem, and not be told "read the man file" or "L2google n00b". I'm not saying windows doesn't have it's share of assholes, really Linux and Windows probably has the same number of jerks offering support, and probably share some of the same jerks. Problem is Linux has a much smaller user base so the percentage of jerks is much higher.

What Linux can do to take over the world? Get an entirely new user and developer base who actually focus on making the OS easy to use for everybody, and who are tolerant and helpful when new people have problems.

So yeah, good luck with that.
Click to expand...


One of the better answers to the OP.
 
I just don't see lack of usability by the bulk of the population as an issue. I can use it just fine; I don't care if "Jon and Jane Average" can't. You don't really see these complaints about FreeBSD, or Solaris, etc. Clearly each OS appeals to certain market.

If your metric for success is overall desktop marketshare, then I can understand why you think there's significant room for improvement. Personally I'd use my personal productivity as the metric for success, which I think is much more sensible; not to mention that Linux does quite well under that test.
 
jimmyb said:
I just don't see lack of usability by the bulk of the population as an issue. I can use it just fine; I don't care if "Jon and Jane Average" can't. You don't really see these complaints about FreeBSD, or Solaris, etc. Clearly each OS appeals to certain market.

If your metric for success is overall desktop marketshare, then I can understand why you think there's significant room for improvement. Personally I'd use my personal productivity as the metric for success, which I think is much more sensible; not to mention that Linux does quite well under that test.
Click to expand...

better doesnt necessarily = better if it is different. Thats the main problem.
 
We all like what we like. We all have reasons for doing so. Many of us are simply complacent with what we have and don't feel an actual need to try something else, regardless of the possibility that it will improve our lives permanently. I've stopped trying to encourage people to use Linux because as far as I can tell, the people who want to make the switch know when they're ready better than I do. I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince myself that Linux is right for the world.

That being said, I just started a LUG at my school and am very happy to support those who have chosen to use Linux or other free operating systems. I am also willing to expose the curious to what they have been missing. I am very unwilling to get into a shouting match with fanboys or stoop to their level. A lot of happiness can be derived from confidence in our personal choices - instead of getting myself and everyone around be hot under the collar, I'll continue using my favorite OS and they can continue using theirs.

Linux is not right for everyone.
 
Boomslang, I agree completely with your sentiments.

I find it amusing when people assume that Linux is somehow deficient because it doesn't appeal to the technically illiterate. If that were the target audience then it might be a valid point, but Linux is targeted toward a tech savvy user who is willing to put in more time learning the nuances of the system in return for greater productivity, etc.

By this very nature, I don't think it will ever be particularly competitive in the market Windows occupies, and I don't think that's a bad thing at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top