Posted on 05/18/2008 9:15:42 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
As much as I bash M$ the simple fact is they will always be the dominant OS. Not because of some crooked things or getting rid of the competition. The reason M$ will always be the dominant OS is because of ease of use.
The reason Linux will never be mainstream can be summed up in three lines:
$ ./configure
$ make depend && make
$ sudo make install
No. Mainstream people do not want to go to a command line to compile and install stuff. We want to click on a happy little icon, hit next three or four times, then hit finished.
Now I've been in the command line world. I know how to do it, I've done it before. There is no reason for it any longer with today's computers. Linux has GUI available, but still gotta go to the command line to install it or run it, then gotta go to the command line to install anything onto the GUI, then gotta go to the command line to remove anything, etc etc.
Until Linux gets away from requiring the command line it will never ever be mainstream.
I have the answer to this question. After 28 years of working with average users I find the answer to be obvious.
1. The average user only learns the function he needs to get his daily tasks done. He is ignorant of 99% of the operating system.
2. The average user doesn't know if his computer has a firewall or anti-virus protection. He has no idea that virus data files must be updated and/or his update license has expired.
3. The average user will click on anything and reflexively clicks yes at every opportunity.
4. The virus writing crowd concentrates on XP because most users use XP. The same is true for malware and adware/crapware writers. There is little point in writing programs that will never run.
Linux is a good desktop if you don't want to run the thousands (millions?) of programs that are available for the PC. Linux is reasonably fast, almost free to operate, and can do most office tasks adequately. The office suite software for Linux is acceptable, but not exceptional.
Linux is ready for the desktop, but not ready for the average user who doesn't want to learn anything and wants to play Doom and Grand Theft Auto.
I use Linux, but have to switch to my PC to run Exchange. Perhaps there is a kluge for that problem, but I don't know it yet.
Technicians go to to the command line interface of XP all the time to, for instance, configure network settings. In addition, although I'm no Linux guru, I've used distributions that didn't require using the command line for the tasks I was interested in doing, Linspire comes to mind.
And although Free BSD isn't Linux, it is a UNIX look-alike, and Apple has chosen it to under gird their standard OS. So more people are using open source than realize it.
Linix may never have the market share Windows does, but the ease of use keeps increasing and the debate seems to have degraded into a mere debate over preference rather than capability.
Ubuntu? Time to patch or you’re going to be pwnd: http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/3747531
“Many eyes” missed this for two years.
I just installed OpenSolaris on my ThinkPad. No command line necessary. It installed with a few mouse clicks and found my wireless network automatically. Its the first Linux I’ve use thats really good for something. Try it at http://www.opensolaris.com.
This couldn't possibly have anything to do with the number of these systems in use relative to others.
Why must we get into these sorts of religious arguments on a Sunday?
Engineers work with the seven layer ISO networking model - physical, data link, network, transport, session, presentation and application. Each has defined functions and standards for how it communicates with other systems and with other layers.
Business has added three layers on top of these. They are not defined by any Swiss standards body and there are no RFCs that I know of that explain their functionality.
These three layers are:
Financial - How much will it cost and how does it get paid for. Linux is the superior product at this layer in terms of purchase price. In total cost of ownership terms, the jury is out. This is where the bean counters make their decisions.
Political - Who is for it and can they get it implemented. Microsoft’s marketing clout reaches for the hearts and minds of those of the top of the corporate pyramid. Linux will always be at a disadvantage here.
Religious - Is it a holy thing. This level is ruled by the technical priesthoods. Unfortunately this is where most techies (as opposed to engineers) make their decisions. The vendors strategies at this layer are to get the believers early in their careers and bind them to the order with certifications. The lesser acolytes, the CCNAs, MCDSTs etc. are trained to aspire to higher levels of certifications - MCSE, CCIE, OCM... Oooooo.
Trying to introduce Linux or Mac into an environment ruled by MCSEs can be akin to introducing the Latin Mas at a Ramadan celebration. It can result in holy war. There may be no rational reason not to support Linux in a business, it may be the most cost effective, stable server platform for your business but until the Linux priesthood overtakes the Microsoft priesthood don’t look for wide Linux acceptance in the enterprise.
Good read.
I won a Mac laptop in a lottery at work around Christmas (Sorry! around "Holiday".)
At first I didn't care for it much. The e-mail client was OK but Safari was not Firefox, or even IE. Upgrading it to Leopard was fun but I didn't really get into it until I discovered I could get to the command interpreter. There's a real operating system in there!
Need to update your knowledge,...look at Linux Mint...
Excellent comments...too damn true.
I think you meant OSI model?
The other thing you have to remember about "average" users is that, on average, they are dumber than you.
Windows has to be dumbed because - let's face it - 50% of all people are dumber than average.
Domandred: $ ./configure $ make depend && make $ sudo make install
Expecting that people who are functionally illiterate could type that string of characters without introducing typographical errors - much less that they could understand what they were typing, or why they were typing it - is ludicrous.
It's like asking the average American to get up off his fat @ss, walk over to his TV, unscrew the back panel, and begin testing resistors or capacitors for replacement.
H3ll, the average American can't even set the time on his VCR.
Define "mainstream". It's not necessarily grandma who can barely see a screen. It people who actually *use* computers who care about things like this. Those people actually can get around on the command line.
I'm getting tired of the "ready for the desktop" criterion to be that any idiot can do whatever s/he wants on a tool as complex as a computer. It was never meant to be that simple, and--as long as you want the power/ability to do whatever you want--it will never be that simple.
Point and click to do whatever you want to do will never happen--even under Windows.
Your three steps you listed above are one way to install software, but it's getting rather long in the tooth. Yum or apt-get, or any number of other package managers have been making software installation/removal even easier than it is under Windows. Graphical frontends to those programs are getting more and more popular. It's now possible to install and run Linux without ever getting into the command line.
I'll never go that route, though, because I like to actually take advantage of the power of my machines. My kids, however, never see a command line, and they prefer Linux over Windows these days.
Funny you should mention that (Linux Mint).
I just migrated my Ubuntu systems to it. I chose the 032b-Hardy (8.04) based distro.
I like the way they’ve optimized Ubuntu’s Hardy for logically gained speed improvements. It really does work.
I can’t figure out why, but VirtualBox 1.6 installed without so much as a hiccup in Mint, and choked itself breathless on Ubuntu, both being Hardy.
Canonical could take a lesson there.
OpenSolaris is great stuff but it is Unix not Linux. Hard to tell the difference until you get to the command line.
Kirby
Despite that, Linux is still the best OS for servers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.