People like to publish top-10 lists of all sorts. And "reasons to switch to Linux" is no exception. Many of those have been published, and the latest entry is here. However, I think the author completely forgot a very important point. Also, some of the points he makes should be examined a bit more closely and critically. The comments on the original article reflect some valid and some unfounded criticism. Let me just run through those points (italics are quotes from the original 10-point list, my comments are directly below each point) and provide my own take on those:
“And yet it continues to not be adopted as a desktop OS.”
That’s because so called computer professionals tell their scary stories of how they can’t even get a video card to operate properly on it.
Now you know, and I know, that had to be a few years ago, ‘cause the 6800 was released in early ‘04.
So, if you’re going to post your “professional” experiences, please, at least, make sure your stories are somewhat up to date.
Try downloading a recent distribution, such as Ubuntu 8.10-Intrepid, and install ANY modern graphics card and see what happens.
Go ahead, I dare you!. LOL
LOL.
How many major software projects have you completed in your life time?
I don't profess to be a professional. That said, I have created 4 applications that have brought me considerable income. I say created, not developed, because I am not a "coder". I created database applications from off the shelf database applications, such as Filemaker.
At one time, I was a "professional" network administrator (NT3.5x, NT4.0, NetWare), Holding an MCSE, and a CNA. I also taught many courses, such as Networking +, A+, MOUS, Basic, Int., and Adv. MS Office, and OS Prep, at a local College, Clayton State College & University in Morrow, Ga. Of course I held the same certifications in those courses, and MCT, CTT certs as well.
After the dot com bust, I started a little company called WeekendPC dot com, where I offered subscriptions for self help, local PC services, and sold cheap websites, starting at $199.99 for four pages, using MS Publisher. This was at a time when many others were charging thousands to give a company an internet "presence". I sold that company in 2001 for $80k to a company in California who really just wanted my customer list, which held over 1500 customers, and to take me off the market. As I had other ongoing business interests that could use an infusion of cash, I was very happy to oblige.
Your specialty, it seems, is in coding, where mine was in hardware and training. Which explains why your card was a problem, and I could never actually "develop" an application. LOL
Linux isn't being adopted as a desktop OS because it's a piss poor choice as a desktop OS
I disagree, and could say in all seriousness, that Windows has become a piss poor desktop OS. Not to mention that I personally feel MS is a master of scam and it's business is not one of innovating or enabling innovation any longer, but one of smoke and mirrors designed to trap the user into a dumbed down state of servitude to the MS revenue stream.
When your product is free and it can't defeat a product that costs quite a lot of money, then you know that something is seriously wrong with your product. That's just the free market making its judgment.
Again, I have to disagree. MS is tops due to it's enormous cash position and the ability to outmarket everyone else. From strong arming OEM/ODM's, to bribing and scamming retailers, to giving away crappy "loss leader" products, MS has managed to screw the pooch that is innovation and advancement in the PC world.
This is not personal, please don't take it that way, I was just teasing with my first post, but the subject raises my neck hair. After years of being a devoted MS-fanboy, I just feel like Monica Lewinsky after leaving the Oval Office, with an odd, nasty, taste in my mouth.
From CNET It is possible that the Linux desktop will never be anything more than a fad among geeky enthusiasts. If so, a growing swell of people appear to be much more faddish of late, as numbers from W3Counter.com appear to indicate.
Looking at the data, Linux clearly has a ways to go. But consider just how far it has come:
Linux went from 1.25 percent in May of 2007 to 2.02 percent in March of 2008. That is 61.6 percent increase in market share in nine months. [Put another way,] that is 82 percent annual growth in installed computers.
And this without the benefit of a multi billion dollar, Global Conglomerate, 24X7, marketing campaign. In fact, MS is known for spending marketing dollars against Linux.
Canonical has made huge strides in improving Linux with their Debian based Ubuntu product. And, installing it at a small company, with no licensing to worry about, far fewer security risks, the ability to "move" the installation to another machine very easily, no activation requirements, a plethora of free software which is easily installed, and painless user migration, is making a difference.
The numbers are misleading, as the user base is increasing among micro and small business, the type of companies that don't get polled by Gartner and others who track such things, and many, if not most, of these companies don't allow local machines internet access, so no "counter" hits to add up. Being a free download, there aren't any sales histories on which to base a reliable number of installations, either.
I say all this, as I type away on my XP box. LOLOLOLOL
peace.