nonseq, on 17 April 2012 - 04:56 AM, said:
Oh good grief. Linux on the Desktop has managed 2-3% in twenty years. Get a clue. It's a great OS, copied from a terrific OS, but in it's current state, too many gatekeepers are required to make halfway useful. Get your fact straight and prove them please. Cite real sources if you don't mind.
I'm not trolling I'm a realist. Linux, with it's current development model, cute names, fragmentation, and half baked apps will never be more than a marginal influence. Deal with it and please don't force it on people who will ultimately regret it.
Isn't it hypocritical to chastise others for not proving facts or citing sources, yet then go on to make a series of completely unsupported assertions with no evidence presented to back any of them up?
Please explain why tens of millions of people find Linux a perfectly acceptable desktop yet you maintain that it simply can't be. Not isn't just for you - simply can NOT be for anyone, period.
Please explain how open source's development model - from rapid releases, community feedback, open bug trackers, "With enough eyes all bugs are shallow", etc. - is a hindrance to the Linux kernel and ecosystem, and how limiting its development to a much smaller number of developers who develop in a secret and keep the bug tracker confidential and disallow outside contributions or inspection of the code would improve its development. When answering, please answer which was was the first OS to include USB 3 and Kinect driver support.
Please explain how "cute names" hinder an operating system or software. When answering, please incorporate the words "Windows", "Apple" and "Google".
Please explain how multiple Linux distros are "fragmentation" and not "diversity". When answering, please explain which kernel all distros and run and as a side note explain in evolutionary terms whether a monolithic or diverse population is more likely to survive a virus outbreak and then apply this same reasoning to software diversity. Also please explain how one size does indeed fit all.
Please identify which essential applications are half-baked. When done, please explain why it's taken more than 10 years to (somewhat) fix the statistical functions in Excel but a small handful of unpaid volunteers were able to fix the open source spreadsheet Gnumeric's problems in a few weeks.
99% of people can get along fine with Windows... or OS X... or Linux. If you wish to promote your OS of choice, that's fine. What you're doing though is what political candidates do who decide to act as if they've already won their primary and refuse to mention their challengers by name - you're attempting to de-legitimize the competition. Microsoft adopted the same tactic recently when in response to a complaint about their secure boot intentions via a white paper by Red Hat, Microsoft refused to mention Linux by name in its reply, only referring to "alternative" operating systems. It's embarrassing for supporters of your OS of choice because it suggests you don't think it can compete on features or performance.