Windows: Linux Can't Touch This

[HardOCP News]

While many people feel Linux is making great progress in the war against Windows, Information week says different. Whether or not you think this guy is on to something or just on something, you have to admit that it sure seems like a free operating system would be doing much better against an OS that isn't.

So in 2009, we're unlikely to see a real change in market share for Windows versus Linux. The Linux-based mobile platforms like Apple iPhone and Google Android will continue to kick Microsoft's butt in the handheld OS area, and Linux will still be the force it's always been on servers. But consumers seem to be unwilling to part with Windows on either desktop or portable PCs; as long as that's the case, Microsoft doesn't have much to fear from Linux.

 

[AtkinS]

expect more goverment, libearies, and community computers running it.

Its great for productive work, but when it comes to us gamers there isnt very much alternative, if game developers had been making games in open gl, it would be easier to port.
And if games where ported, we would see a big kick in things.


Expect it to rise slightly, it will start gaining ground mid 2009-2010.
Reason:
Ati cards will work out of the box. open source driver and prioritary driver.
Nvidia cards is good enough supported from nvidia them self.

If you havnt tried it, grab an old disk, and try it out, download ubuntu, and test it for some days, i bet you dont switch, but try it out, its fun, educative and you will start to just play some hours around with compiz.

Remember
www.ubuntuguide.org
www.ubuntuforums.org
www.google.com

Is ALL you need to do servers, client setups, fix any issues you might come across, the community is great.

For those of you dont have an desperate need for windows only applications, there might be a big chance that you guys switch.

 

[eeyrjmr]

The Linux-based mobile platforms like Apple

Ooookay, like they know what they are talking about...

 

[PMildren]

I dont see the federal government in the US going to linux on a large scale any time soon. Mostly because I am sure someone is getting large kickbacks for getting us to use Windows.

 

[Gorankar]

As long as a Windows OS is what is shipped on the majority of new consumer grade systems, Nix will remain a niche in home desktop use. It is really that simple.

The professional side of the coin is a different matter. MS still is holding the vast majority of business workstations as well, but that could change. In the server and embedded world however, Nix is doing quite well against MS. But I don't see Nix taking a commanding lead over MS in those markets this year either.

 

[S-B]

The Linux-based mobile platforms like Apple iPhone

Huh? iPhone is based on Mac OS X. Mac OS X is based on Unix. Unix != Linux. As the saying goes, Linux is not Unix.

Microsoft's Windows Mobile platform was until recently the absolute best handheld operating system. It's still the best for mobile productivity and media playback. Android's main problem lies in Java. iPhone's problem lies in the fact that it is not as open as the other two for developers to make free software.

With regards to desktop operating systems, Linux's primary issue is the lack of a proper UI in comparison to Windows. There are some excellent things in the works, but they only started them because Windows' recent advances in user interface styling forced them to, it was just falling way behind the times. Other than that, WINE just needs to improve 3D performance and catch up with Windows Vista. Granted, these are not small problems, but it is not that far behind Windows, and definitely excels in certain areas, such as the ease of downloading and updating some applications from within the OS itself.

 

[Cannydog]

I would gladly switch to using a Non-Microsoft OS, if it would allow me to play games. But as it is, you can't readily do this... Yes I know there are programs like Wine, still that's not like other software that's programed for, or even ported to, a platform. Modern games are demanding enough without running them in some form of emulation.

Now if, according to recent rumors, Microsoft ever decides to go with a "pay per use" scheme I will definitely be abandoning their platform. I guess I just hope Sony stays in the console market so I can have some platform on which I can play games. Because I doubt if any games will ever be on Linux.

 

[kac77]

Eh I think from a market perspective it will come down to the locking down of IRC/torrents if the MPAA, etc have their way. Lets be honest, most of us, even me got our start from downloading products / receiving a copied version from our friends in order to learn windows. That's how I learned DOS, and Windows 3.0 to XP. Once I became older I started buying the products, but came away with the feeling that I shouldn't have to pay tons of money to learn about networking, computers, programming, etc when it was public knowledge to begin with.

Once I got fed up with spending money on unfinished software, namely Vista, I moved to Linux and haven't really looked back. The greedier the software makers become the more they push the average consumer to look for something cheaper.

 

[PMildren]

Eh I think from a market perspective it will come down to the locking down of IRC/torrents if the MPAA, etc have their way. Lets be honest, most of us, even me got our start from downloading products / receiving a copied version from our friends in order to learn windows. That's how I learned DOS, and Windows 3.0 to XP. Once I became older I started buying the products, but came away with the feeling that I shouldn't have to pay tons of money to learn about networking, computers, programming, etc when it was public knowledge to begin with.

Once I got fed up with spending money on unfinished software, namely Vista, I moved to Linux and haven't really looked back. The greedier the software makers become the more they push the average consumer to look for something cheaper.

While I agree with your statement about not wanting to pay for unfinished software, arent almost all OS unfinished? Thats the reason for patching. Its been said way too many times and I doubt it will ever stick, that Vistas major downfall wasnt really the OS, it was third party support and drivers that made Vista look worse than it actually is/was. Some may argue, if MS had given them more time or hadnt changed the OS so many times before release or not just sprung the OS on them. I am still not real clear on all of that.

 

[Gavv]

While I agree with your statement about not wanting to pay for unfinished software, arent almost all OS unfinished? Thats the reason for patching. Its been said way too many times and I doubt it will ever stick, that Vistas major downfall wasnt really the OS, it was third party support and drivers that made Vista look worse than it actually is/was. Some may argue, if MS had given them more time or hadnt changed the OS so many times before release or not just sprung the OS on them. I am still not real clear on all of that.

But they should be finished, or at least enough to be better than the OS they are replacing. And not a service pack later.

 

[Saist]

kinda wanted to take issue with this comment :

you have to admit that it sure seems like a free operating system would be doing much better against an OS that isn't.

First, there is the issue of the use of the term free, as in the aspect of without cost For many people who buy computers, Windows is free to them. Microsoft Windows comes with the computer and that's it. The idea that Microsoft Windows is without cost is strengthened by Vendors such as Asus, Dell, and MSI, whose various Linux based systems generally cost almost the same as their Windows based systems. There's no significant cost savings for the average consumer out shopping for a computer system.

The fact is, many supported versions of Linux, such as Red Hat and Suse, come with a fixed cost. Other distributions such as Mepis rely on users to buy subscriptions to help fund development.

**

Second, there is the issue on the use of the term free, as in the aspect of freedom. Open-Source Licensed software is just that, open-licensed. To the average consumer though, what exactly does that mean? What's to stop the average consumer from installing Print-Shop, Microsoft Office, Adobe Acrobat, (insert program name here) on any computer they want to install it on? Aside from Product-Registration and Product-Activation, which can be overcome with a simple phone call, very little.

For many consumers, the aspect of software that is without restriction in usage is a foreign concept. Many consumers simply only use software one way, and can't imagine using it in any other. I believe there is also empirical evidence that consumers don't read the EULA for software products they purchase. The expressed case is given that consumers who purchase a software for a purpose, bought the software for that purpose. The EULA is pretty much meaningless then, because if the consumer doesn't agree... then what else are they going to use? What else is out there?

**

Which brings up the third issue. Marketing, or lack there-of. If you want to call it a fault, most open-source products don't have an advertising budget. Sun Microsystem and Mozilla Foundation aside, KDE and Gnome aren't known for taking out full page adverts in the New York times.

Microsoft, by comparison, spends a tremendous amount on advertising, too much in some cases. Case in point : Microsoft is a federally convicted criminal for using brute-force tactics to force business's to use Microsoft software alone, and has been convicted multiple times at state and national levels since the original DOJ lawsuit for less than legal trade practices. As it stands, Microsoft is the only entity that I'm aware of that's a convicted criminal at a federal level on 5 out of the 7 continents. I'm not aware of any convictions on the continent / country of Australia, or any convictions on the continent of Antarctica.

***

Then there is the forth concern that Linux is different... and constantly changing. Consumers trained on Microsoft Windows or Macintosh operating systems have the expectation of changes every 2 or 3 years, with incremental service packs that do nothing to change the experience of the computer usage. For example, the user interface on Vista isn't that far removed from the user interface on Windows 95... and that whole sidebar thing isn't exactly new... it's been around since Windows 95 as well.

On the other hand, Linux has XFCE, KDE 3.5, KDE 4.x, Gnome, IceWM, BlackBox, FluxBox, LXDE, FVWM, and Enlightenment... just to name a few of the available window managers / desktop enviroments. While some of them share similar attributes, the user-interface experience can change drastically from one Linux distribution to another. Combined with rapid development, such as the case of KDE 4.x which went from a completion of the application libraries and underlying programs to a usable desktop in just about a year (KDE 4.0 to KDE 4.2), and changes to Linux seem to happen literally overnight.

That can get very confusing to somebody trained on Microsoft Windows where the interface never changes... who updates their Linux to find a completely new background wallpaper, virtual desktop manager, or even a completely changed user interface on a specific program (Kaffiene and Amarok for example).

The problem is even further complicated with the number of distributions that are available. Everybody seems to have their favorite distro, and their favorite desktop / enviroment... which is a good thing. People who use Linux have options.

However... consumers who use computers... generally aren't interested in choice. Not when the various Vendors have spent the past 20 years or so teaching that there is no choice, there is only one way to do things, and that's the Microsoft way.

***

Given all this then, the fact that Linux keeps growing in Market share, and that more and more vendors are putting Linux systems out into the market... actually every single OEM in the US either has Linux systems out now or on the way...

it seems that Linux is doing quite well in selling itself to people who don't care about freedom, licenses, or anything else.

 

[kac77]

While I agree with your statement about not wanting to pay for unfinished software, arent almost all OS unfinished? Thats the reason for patching. Its been said way too many times and I doubt it will ever stick, that Vistas major downfall wasnt really the OS, it was third party support and drivers that made Vista look worse than it actually is/was. Some may argue, if MS had given them more time or hadnt changed the OS so many times before release or not just sprung the OS on them. I am still not real clear on all of that.

No there's a difference between not finished and experiencing some missed bug. Vista when it first launched, drivers aside, was a mess. Wireless is a atrocious, you still don't know whether you are formatting a USB drive or connecting to secured network. There's extra screens galore without any real thought given as to why they are there. Network Discovery was a mess as well. Merely changing icons on your desktop used to send UAC into a seizure. Adding network printers on older domains, again a mess.

Granted SP1 has fixed a lot of those issues, but if that's your first experience after paying anywhere from 150 - 275 for a piece of software, I would be less apt to wait for some patch which should have been built into the product from the get go.

That was my first experience with Vista, I'm not even getting into the hardware requirements. So you see while there are definitely bugs in Ubuntu. I'm not out of any money as a result of it and quite frankly my time spent learning it has been more fruitful than playing certain games.

 

[mullet]

Linux not a gaming platform.

\thread.

 

[Deviationer]

linux is great if you don't want an easy OS and you don't do any gaming. Linux just need to get more user friendly, make it easier to install drivers, and maybe see about doing virtualization with windows so you want to do gaming, you can (again making it easy and user friendly)

 

[kac77]

linux is great if you don't want an easy OS and you don't do any gaming. Linux just need to get more user friendly, make it easier to install drivers, and maybe see about doing virtualization with windows so you want to do gaming, you can (again making it easy and user friendly)

Funny I game on mine pretty well. WOW and COH seem to work just as well as they would in Windows.

What's your definition of easy? Is it getting on a different OS that's not really different than Windows, thus not learning anything new? Or is it a GUI, which can allow you to do most of the common things people do with software?

If it's the former, than there's just no hope for you at all. Mac OSX would throw you for a loop the moment you tried to eject a CD from the drive, or set 32-bit color, as if "alot of colors" tells you anything.

If it's the later than I think your definition of easy has been addressed.

 

[Nemesis999]

Linux is not free.

time = money.

For a new user Linux requires hundreds hours over the first year or two to do the same tasks as in Windows. When the average person is only paying $50 worth in licensing for Windows with their new computer this is a no-brainer.

 

[kac77]

Linux is not free.

time = money.

For a new user Linux requires hundreds hours over the first year or two to do the same tasks as in Windows. When the average person is only paying $50 worth in licensing for Windows with their new computer this is a no-brainer.

Can you list the common tasks an average user would do that would require so much more time in Linux?

 

[kllrnohj]

Linux is not free.

time = money.

For a new user Linux requires hundreds hours over the first year or two to do the same tasks as in Windows. When the average person is only paying $50 worth in licensing for Windows with their new computer this is a no-brainer.

Definitely not true. I never had to teach my grandma that to access the internet she double clicked on the desktop icon. Since she was already using Firefox, Thunderbird, and OpenOffice on Windows, the switch to Ubuntu from Windows was completely transparent. She actually figured out how to keep Ubuntu updated by herself, whereas she never did get the whole Windows update thing (Window 98 SE, btw)

There really isn't that much of a difference in daily usage between Gnome/KDE and Windows.

 

[kllrnohj]

linux is great if you don't want an easy OS and you don't do any gaming. Linux just need to get more user friendly, make it easier to install drivers, and maybe see about doing virtualization with windows so you want to do gaming, you can (again making it easy and user friendly)

"Easier to install drivers"? In ubuntu you click and check box that says "Use official drivers" and you are done. I don't think it is actually possible to make it any easier. Then again, look at the install process for drivers around here.

Windows:
1. Uninstall old drivers
2. Reboot to safe mode
3. Run driver cleaner
4. Download new drivers
5. Install new drivers
6. Reboot.

Linux:
1. Click a checkbox/button after being told that there is a new/better driver. (Depending on if you are updating or doing a fresh install)
2. Reboot.

Yup, Linux definitely needs to make that easier

I think far too often people's definitions of "user friendly" is really "make it a clone of Windows". Linux is not Windows, and is not trying to be Windows. Therefore, for some people it will never be "user friendly", and the Linux community doesn't care about those people. Linux isn't trying to take over the desktop market, and too often people think that that is the goal. The goal of Linux is to make it something that the community that is developing it wants to use, which it has, obviously, already done.

 

[kllrnohj]

Huh? iPhone is based on Mac OS X. Mac OS X is based on Unix. Unix != Linux. As the saying goes, Linux is not Unix. /QUOTE]

Its actually GNU is Not Unix Linux is just Linus with the s changed to x, doesn't mean anything.

 

[DanNeely]

expect more goverment, libearies, and community computers running it.

Don't count on it. For internal govt use there're as many legacy apps making it imposible as in the general corporate world. For libraries, etc. except at larger institutions there generally isn't any sort of real IT person. Instead all you have is someone who "knows windows" and they're on average as technically incompetant as the people who claim that skill while fubaring anything they touch. They're no more able to navigate a CLI to configure anything than Aunt Tilly.

 

[kac77]

Don't count on it. For internal govt use there're as many legacy apps making it imposible as in the general corporate world. For libraries, etc. except at larger institutions there generally isn't any sort of real IT person. Instead all you have is someone who "knows windows" and they're on average as technically incompetant as the people who claim that skill while fubaring anything they touch. They're no more able to navigate a CLI to configure anything than Aunt Tilly.

A lot of libraries are moving to Linux. What legacy applications are you talking about? Most of that stuff, as in Mainframe DB's has moved over to Hyper Terminals. All of the other stuff has moved over to ASP/PHP applications.

As for navigating CLI, they would have to call a tech in no matter if they were running Windows or Linux.

 

[burnin8r]

Linux is not free.

time = money.

For a new user Linux requires hundreds hours over the first year or two to do the same tasks as in Windows. When the average person is only paying $50 worth in licensing for Windows with their new computer this is a no-brainer.

I m going to venture to say you have never touched linux, or at least not in the last two years. there are plenty of user friendly distibutions with everything you need for day to day usage, and no shortage of customization for power users. The popularity of Windows is more a function of it being preinstalled on the majority of the pcs that the unclean masses purchase rather than a measure of superiority. Why do so many people use IE instead of firefox ? because they pushed power on their pc and there it was, not because it is a superior web browser by any stretch.

also, Steve, let me be the first to say linux = free as in freedon, not beer

 

[Manaknight]

i am not your "average" computer user. I Do plenty of stuff in both power user and developer areas on a regular basis. That being said I have used Linux. Given the choice between windows and linux for free i would take windows. Given the choice of windows for 50 bucks and linux i would take windows. Given the choice of windows at 300 and linux i would use linux to download a torrent of windows.

I'm sorry... I know my way around linux, i can use it and make it work for me. But i still do not care for it. I feel that windows is more intuitive and more efficient for most of my work. there is the matter of gaming, and while that is incredibly important to me it is not part of the scope of my decision to remain with windows (if i loved linux i would just have windows gaming box and do everything else in linux).

 

[TwentyFour]

And the pointless flame war begins. =|

 

[kac77]

i am not your "average" computer user. I Do plenty of stuff in both power user and developer areas on a regular basis. That being said I have used Linux. Given the choice between windows and linux for free i would take windows. Given the choice of windows for 50 bucks and linux i would take windows. Given the choice of windows at 300 and linux i would use linux to download a torrent of windows.

I'm sorry... I know my way around linux, i can use it and make it work for me. But i still do not care for it. I feel that windows is more intuitive and more efficient for most of my work. there is the matter of gaming, and while that is incredibly important to me it is not part of the scope of my decision to remain with windows (if i loved linux i would just have windows gaming box and do everything else in linux).

That's a personal preference statement. There's nothing wrong with that. If you don't like it because you don't like it then that's perfectly normal. However, some people have put up strawmen that really don't make sense for people like myself who use it on a day to day basis.

 

[kac77]

And the pointless flame war begins. =|

Isn't that why board moderators start threads like this? ...LOL

 

[King of Heroes]

linux is great if you don't want an easy OS and you don't do any gaming. Linux just need to get more user friendly, make it easier to install drivers, and maybe see about doing virtualization with windows so you want to do gaming, you can (again making it easy and user friendly)

Now, I'll first say that I use Windows. However, I have used Ubuntu before and I was very impressed with what I saw (the LiveCD concept is just really awesome).

As far as drivers and software go, if you simply use the built-in package manager and use the official, tested software available in the repositories. Its the very model of simplicity. Its literally just point and click. All the bugs and dependencies have been worked out for you. You start running into huge problems when you want to install software or drivers that haven't been tested and made available in the repositories (like Nvidia beta drivers or whatever). In THAT case you have to work out all the bugs and dependencies yourself, and this is where you usually see all the bitching from people saying Linux is too difficult to work with. If you don't need bleeding edge, beta quality software and drivers (and why would you?), Linux is easier than Windows.

Now, I personally think backwards compatibility is a bigger issue than simplicity. I know some work places (like mine) are heavily dependent on MS software suites like Microsoft Office and Outlook. OpenOffice, while sort of compatible, is not 100% friendly with it, and this can make it near impossible to jump over in certain enterprise environments.

The only reason I haven't jumped to Unbuntu yet is because, while I don't game often, I do play games on my comp. While some do work quite well in Linux, most don't, and I'm not keen on the idea of running multiple operating systems. Of course, if you have a console for gaming, this isn't an issue at all.

 

[Nerkel]

At least I can use wireless on my Window's Laptop. I spent a week and a half on the ubuntu forums, MSN with a few linux guru's, even a few phone calls. Wireless would never work, no matter what. I had to abandon it, and I reinstalled window's. Had the Wireless, all the drivers working in 2 hours.

I'll stick to Window's solely because my hardware works, at least. I'm all for the Free as in beer and free as in freedom thing, but I just need something that works.

 

[Scali2]

I think I can prove that the guy is right by pointing out that people have been saying the same thing for over 10 years now.
So basically in all this time of free linux, it hasn't managed to get a foothold in certain core Windows markets. It is as unlikely that linux will succeed there in 2009 as it was all the years before it. Linux has already proved that it failed in those areas, as far as I'm concerned, given how long they've been trying, and how little progress they've made.
Even the argument that people don't know about linux no longer holds. That may have been true 10 years ago, but you can't fall back on that forever. There's plenty of 'noise' surrounding linux on the internet, the secret is already out.

 

[kac77]

This part of your post is key.

At least I can use wireless on my Window's Laptop.

Why would you think that you would get 100% support from something that was built around another OS? Some Laptops have full Vista support, some don't. Some have full XP support some don't. Although, I'm itching to know which wireless chipset you were using. Linux driver support is actually pretty good when you think about it, but it cannot support every single device known to man.

 

[chinesepiratefood]

Linux will never be mainstream unless it becomes more user friendly.

The general computer owner will never learn or want to learn the intricacies involved with using linux

 

[kac77]

I think I can prove that the guy is right by pointing out that people have been saying the same thing for over 10 years now.
So basically in all this time of free linux, it hasn't managed to get a foothold in certain core Windows markets. It is as unlikely that linux will succeed there in 2009 as it was all the years before it. Linux has already proved that it failed in those areas, as far as I'm concerned, given how long they've been trying, and how little progress they've made.
Even the argument that people don't know about linux no longer holds. That may have been true 10 years ago, but you can't fall back on that forever. There's plenty of 'noise' surrounding linux on the internet, the secret is already out.

It's got a pretty good foot hold I would say. Look at Macs, while they have picked up some marketshare it sure as hell is no where near to over taking Windows and that's with their awesome name recognition, marketing dollars, and Apple stores all pushing the product.

In order for any OS, no matter how good it is, to overtake Windows it would take MS literally botching up every release and businesses losing massive amounts of money.

 

[AVT]

This part of your post is key.



Why would you think that you would get 100% support from something that was built around another OS? Some Laptops have full Vista support, some don't. Some have full XP support some don't. Although, I'm itching to know which wireless chipset you were using. Linux driver support is actually pretty good when you think about it, but it cannot support every single device known to man.

Linux driver support is actually pretty good, but Linux wireless support is outright horrible.

Firstly, if your chipset is something other than Atheros, most of the features outright will not work. You may need to use stuff like ndiswrapper, and then, your card is still limited to managed mode, will pickup the signal with questionable quality, and otherwise just work fairly bad.

Second, even if your card is Atheros-based, you still have to go through their own utility to configure anything (wlanconfig), which is command line only - making any GUIs otherwise used for config, such as YaST, useless. For most people, this is unacceptable.

 

[meanmodda[H]]

PC= Personal Computer
Until Linux gets a person outthere to represent the community ( who become rich on the success of operating on Linux) , it will be nothing more then a piece of software written by a large , faceless and unkown entity. Perception is everything , even if its a hard to grasp concept .

 

[swatbat]

Huh? iPhone is based on Mac OS X. Mac OS X is based on Unix. Unix != Linux. As the saying goes, Linux is not Unix.

Microsoft's Windows Mobile platform was until recently the absolute best handheld operating system. It's still the best for mobile productivity and media playback. Android's main problem lies in Java. iPhone's problem lies in the fact that it is not as open as the other two for developers to make free software.

Yea mac os is based off freebsd with a gnu microkernal. Gotta laugh at them calling it linux.

Can you list the common tasks an average user would do that would require so much more time in Linux?

Drivers are a big issue still. Granted they have gotten a hell of a lot better in the last 2 or 3 years but they still have a long way to go. Things like wpa were a bitch and still can have some issues. Printers and smart phones can also be an issue. Same with other things like mp3 players. Other issues exist like some websites still don't work right on linux. My dad has this problem. I have his system running ubuntu and it just flat out doesn't work with some various sites he uses for looking up parts.

Linux also has an issue with apps. Sure you can do pretty much anything you can in windows but that doesn't mean the software to do it is as good. You have better cd burning apps, map software, games, etc. Some of it will work fine in wine, some will not. Good example is that newsbin works fine in wine(I have yet to find a better usenet software), on the other hand alldata does not(dad uses it).

Every year it seems we read about how it is the year for linux on the desktop. Yea it just isn't there yet. In the case of netbooks it can have its place although I remember seeing the return rates of the linux ones vs the windows ones. Phones are another place it has a chance but I think the google phones are not going to do but so well against apple, ms, and rim.

 

[Nerkel]

This part of your post is key.



Why would you think that you would get 100% support from something that was built around another OS? Some Laptops have full Vista support, some don't. Some have full XP support some don't. Although, I'm itching to know which wireless chipset you were using. Linux driver support is actually pretty good when you think about it, but it cannot support every single device known to man.

My Wireless chipset is a Broadcom 802.11b/g WLAN... I really can't find anymore detailed info than that. I blame it on my lack of sleep.

However, I think the problem with Linux is just that; I really haven't seen any machines built purely for Linux that are mass marketed and sold(Though, I remember Dell does that.) From what I've noticed, most Linux machines are either built for compatibility from scratch, or just the ones that don't have hardware restrictions. Im not going to make a $2,000 gaming rig and put Linux on it. I'm going to be the one that buys a laptop made in 2004 just for websurfing when I'm not working on a desktop.

Then again, I could just be completely oblivious to anything that is moving the Linux cause forward.. So correct me if I'm wrong, because I did not know

 

[kac77]

Second, even if your card is Atheros-based, you still have to go through their own utility to configure anything (wlanconfig), which is command line only - making any GUIs otherwise used for config, such as YaST, useless. For most people, this is unacceptable.

That depends on the distro. Ubuntu, Fedora and a few others have wireless configuration GUI's. I have a Atheros chipset and can configure it using a gui.

 

[Mav451]

I've watched my friend deal with drivers constantly getting broken. So one hand, let's just say Feature XYZ now works - sweet! OTOH, I've seen him deal with, time and again, drivers getting broken. It's either the WLAN or GPU drivers, it's either one or the other. Now, he doesn't mind living on "the burning edge" - but to expect mainstream America to tolerate this kind of nonsense?

Sorry. After watching him deal with this kind of b.s. just b/c of an update is enough to make stay FAR far away.

 

[Cerulean]

So in 2009, we're unlikely to see a real change in market share for Windows versus Linux. The Linux-based mobile platforms like Apple iPhone and Google Android will continue to kick Microsoft's butt in the handheld OS area, and Linux will still be the force it's always been on servers. But consumers seem to be unwilling to part with Windows on either desktop or portable PCs; as long as that's the case, Microsoft doesn't have much to fear from Linux.

Yup. Linux sucks ass when it comes to desktops, always will until people do it right -- like the people at Apple.