Complain All You Want, Linux is Not For the Average User
October 6th 2007 05:00
"They Hate Us For Our Freedom"
Free is good, it's brilliant, but usablity is important too. There is no use beating around the bush pretending eveyrone is just like you, because, to put it quite bluntly, Linux users are in a very small minority.
What really pisses me off is when one of these grade A morons decides to rant and rave about how 'Linux wants to be free' and blame end uers who don't give two bits that they have access to their operating systems source code for not switching over.
Yes, I'm looking at you, eHomeUpgrade and you're stupid and short sited article about why Analysts just dont get it (and neither do the hundreds of millions of people who don't use Linux).
To begin,
But for some reason many analysts, like the ones mentioned, take their Windows and Mac experience and want to replicate it with Linux. That's the problem... Linux is NOT the same, Linux is different – and proudly so. Linux doesn't want to be shackled, restricted, monitored, or told how to behave. It just wants to be free to do what it does.
See, the thing is, Analysts look at it from the perspective of consumers, if OS X and Windows can do something then it would be reasonable to assume that Linux would be able to do the same. If it can't then it isn't a viable alternative, reading such things as 'download such and such update to do such and such thing' that can be done out of the box on virtually all OS X and Windows systems is not a good thing for typical users.
Put simply, freedom does not equal usability and most users don't give a damn about 'freedom'.
On the fact the MP3 codec is not provided for in Linux,
Hello. Windows and Mac PCs don't have those codecs “built-in” to their operating systems either. They're licensed and bundled with the OS.
Once again, the sorry little apologist is missing the point, it isn't that it's built in or not, a non-technical user doesn't care, such a user just wants to play the latest song by Madonna. This is a massive edge prebuilt Windows powered computers have. If you care to think about it you'll understand the obviousness of it all, doesn't matter if it's a part of the operating system or not, it's part of the system, I pay $1000 for a computer that can play MP3s out of the box or I pay $950 for one that can't which will give me an obscure error about missing codecs.
On the topic of Linux Dell computers cost only $50 less than ones with Vista,
Excuse me? “User would still have to pay for the operating system.” Sounds like a misunderstanding to me. Ubuntu is free to download and distribute – it costs the company nothing to acquire it, ever.
Yeah it might be free, but Dells offering is, what? $50 less than the one with Vista which has a price difference (on retail shelves) of about $200? Anyone interested in Linux with half a brain would buy the system with Vista in it for $50 more and download a free copy of Ubuntu, but of course only those who are tech savvy would do such a thing.
On unavailable software,
Oh, boo-hoo. No iTunes on Linux. You can keep that DRM-inspired mess on your Mac. Linux users don't want it.
If Linux users don't want a 'DRM-inspired mess' called iTunes then Mac OS X/Windows users don't want Linux. As much as these 'freedom fighters' might love their percieved freedom most people just want, what we call, usability.
Usability does not involve fiddling around here and there, I buy an iPod, comes with a CD, it installs iTunes.
In the Linux world, I buy an iPod, comes with a CD, doesn't install on Linux, I go online, download an alternative, realize the new iPods don't work with anything but friggin iTunes, so I go to google, and look for a hack way of making it work, maybe I'll find a solution, maybe I won't. Yes, Linux is being bullied, but it isn't a third party developers obligation to make its software work on Linux, so sorry, no sale.
| 70 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Damo
Lets look at why.
CPM went the way of the dinos
Win 3.1 went the way of the dinos
Win95 is gone
Win98 is gone
Win ME is going, going, gone
Win NT not supported even after SP6
Win 2000 where is it now
Win XP Going
Win Vista so many bugs that people are reluctant to install it. (Microsoft have extended the life of XP to cover the problems)
Backward compatibilty to hard ware no way.
Apple if you want to be locked into Apple hardware fine.
Less issues than Windows. (Unix based OS)
Linux and other UNIX based OS's still exist despite Unix being born in the 1970's. Why is that so?
For Business needs Linux makes better and more reliable servers at a fraction of the lisencing costs of Windows.
Linux is much more stable: The average linux box can run for years with out a reboot. Windows accumulates errors and is often in need of a reboot.
Linux Files system and privilages are Unix structured and can permissions can be edited file by file.
Linux routing software makes windows look like a toy. Try setting OSPF, Rip and BGP4 on a windows server. Then add a firewall and access links. (Sorry can't be done)
Web servers, Mail servers, Proxy servers all work better in Linux.
Unlike Window the user can start or stop any process on the Computer with out the need to restart.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Thats actually completely inaccurate I develop software in vista and haven't come across any of these so-called 'bugs'. Therea re none, I always here 'bugs' this or 'major security flaw' that, but none of them are real, they are empty ramblings by the likes of moronic jouranlists looking to gain popularity from Linux fanboys.
Microsoft always supports its older software well into the life of its sucecssor, look at Windows 98 which only had its support stopped a few years ago. MS will also continue to support XP well into Vista's life, its business model is built around it. Count on the fanboys to try and spin it.
With your other reasons, we are going back to the point of it, you just don't get it. People don't care about these 'more stable' or 'less errors' or 'better file system', assuming it is true (which 99% of the time it actually isn't) it has very little to do with an end consumer caring.
In the end Linux exists because it fills a niche, but it really isn't the OS for average computer users.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Try explaining that to someone who just wants to watch a DVD on his laptop, does he care?
Comment by Damo
-It is the dominant player and people buy compatibility.
-It is also the most pirated software on the market.
Vista has been listed all over the technical pages as having over 65 bugs. But I won't split hairs. Only why would Microsoft delay replacing XP if it was better in every way?
However I addressed only the reason for Linux's longevity.
I won't split hairs over the stability of Linux vs Windows. There are several versions of Linux from Redhat to Caldera etc. Most are just as easy to use as Windows with 90% of the same features. The differences being like the differences between Apple OS and Windows. Different stokes for different folks.
The security issues with Windows are well documented.
Anyway people who code in Unix will try to sell all the positives of unix
and
people who code in windows will always promote the system that provides their career path.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
You're going to have to ask them that, they do it with every single piece of software line they work on. It's their business model and it's certainly better than some of their competitors. Why would they continue to support Word 2005 when Word 2007 is released? Why would they continue to support DirectX 9 even though DirectX 10 has been released? They probably have good reason to, my guess is it has something to do with market penetration.
Replacement is probably just something thats gradual, I'm not trying to say why they do it, but they do it and in the end the consumer wins most from it.
As for the 65 bugs, I honestly expected more, but said bugs are probably too obscure for anyone to actually suffer from. I develop applications using the ooooold Win32 APIs on an operating system that is trying to shed it and move to .net and I never experience any problems.
Thats empty garbage pushed by anti-virus companies and the like. With XP SP2 viruses pretty much stopped showing up, move over to Vista and Bill Gates challenge still holds up, no one has hacked it yet. We are talking about the single most valuable target amongst hackers right now, if someone can make a virus worm or trojan of near epic scale that someones going to get pretty famous.
Of course given Vista is a complete re-write, has very little in common with its predecessors and by the numbers is more secure than any other consumer level OS on the market probably has a lot to do with the lack of viruses. The worst I've seen pushed is about dragging a corrupted .ico file to the desktop and double clicking on it, which would apparently crash the computer (yikes).
and
people who code in windows will always promote the system that provides their career path.
oddly enough there is nocomparison between unix and windows, apples and oranges, as there is very little comparison between Linux and Windows.
Microsoft does a really good job with Vista, it is a lot more usable than even Ubuntu and pretty damned straight forward to.
Until the open source community can get it in its head that Microsoft (and to a lesser extend Apple) is not getting a freeride because it is a big company and start focusing on making Linux better for the non-tech savvy user they aren't going to go anywhere.
Comment by Cibbuano
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
There have been some kinks, but there have been some huge improvements over Windows. I love the printer support and the update system!
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Comment by Anonymous
Only now (as in last week) does a modern and popular version of Linux (Ubuntu) actually support the Intel wireless chipset that owns probably 90% of the laptop wireless market. Only now. Years after Windows. Oh, sure if download .ko's and recompile the kernel and then toss in dozens of command line switches, you MIGHT get the wireless recognized and perhaps even support WEP (forget about WPA/WPA2).
Oh, sure, Linux supported Altel and Orinico and other niche wireless cards/chipsets. NONE of which are used in corporate America where they buy either HP or Dell (using Intel wireless as part of the Centrino spec).