Linux will never take off in the consumer world so long as they desire to chase Windows. Linux has a real chance if it would stay real simple and work well. Windows got too complex as the kitchen sink got added.
ping
There have been a few things I like and a few things I don’t. BulletproofX is pretty cool, though it threw me for a loop when I first found the xorg.conf missing. I really prefer the old init.d to the newer thing that kind of hides the scripts from you.
Gnome has gone in some directions that I don’t care for like the Indicator Applet. I was excited to hear that Ubuntu is creating their own replacement for Gnome.
I think we’re all just resistant to the changing of things that we’ve used for years and are very familiar with. I know I am anyway.
Configuration and compatability are the 2 things holding Linux down. When people can put a program disc in written for Windows and install it as easily the masses will come but not a day before. Don’t get me wrong I like Linux. Suse is my pick. With all the programs that are written to run on Mac and Windows this shouldn’t be the hurdle it is and if I owned Mac I would see helping Linux as a win for myself. Apple has a chance with Linux to correct the mistake they made when battling IBM all those years ago.
Linux wil never be a desktop competitor until two things happen:
1 - Linus Torvalds and the leadership of the Linux community unite around a common accepted list of parts for the operating system. One kernel, one window manager, one desktop. I don’t mean a weasel statement like “we prefer X or Y”, but “A, B, and C are the official components of the officially recognized and supported complete Linux OS”. They can of course allow others to use whatever desktop, window manager, etc, that they prefer, but Linux.org has to officially support only one standard.
2 - If they do that, then the second thing Linux needs will happen: commercial desktop software support. HP, Corel, etc, is not going to start writing commercial desktop software if they have to contend with 3 window managers, a dozen desktops, and God knows how many kernel configurations.
A big problem in adopting Linux is what do businesses do? Between the changing Linux environment and the immense cost of purchasing compatible software and switching data over, few businesses can afford it unless they launch with Linux in the beginning.
Not wanting to speak out of ignorance, perhaps I can be enlightened. Here’s our situation: We have fifteen desktops running XP SP3, and two servers running 2003 Server Enterprise, one with Exchange. We have a domain/client environment with static IPs using two domain controllers and full security rules implementation.
We regularly use ACT, Quickbooks, Microsoft Office (primarily Outlook, Word and Excel), Acrobat (the write version, not the reader), and Photoshop. These are used every day. QB and ACT databases are on one server and accessed by workstations.
I understand the email, spreadsheet and word processor programs are easily transferred with few problems and we can open documents created in the MS office suite. However, the licenses for our business programs would cost tens opf thousands of dollars to replace not to mention the time spent importing data.
Am I incorrect? Is such a move possible without breaking the bank?
Almost forgot. We also use Acronis Server/Workstation backup, software which cost us about 4,000.00 to implement. Backs up all workstations and servers every night to both on-site and off-site locations.