[asiafish]

Okay, well, I wrote a longish piece on why people love to hate or love to love Apple (but are rarely indifferent), and then another on why I think Windows just doesn't get the same amount of love/hate. Now for the last and hardest of the three platforms, Linux.

Linux is a strange beast, which I have played with on and off since about 2001. Its gone from hard to use an incompatible with the whole world to easy to use and incompatible with some of the world. It has always been marvelously stable and versatile. It has always been prevented from "just working" by its mandate of having no commercial stuff built-in. Its users are, if anything, even more passionate than Apple's, and its detractors are somehow polite and sympathetic, rather than angry as Apple's detractor's are. Somehow, die-hard Windows and Mac users always start or end a complaint about Linux with a "... but I like it" or "I like Linux, but.." rather than a cut-throat attack as Apple and Windows usually receive.

Here is my take. I think Linux will continue to gobble up much of the server side, and will remain an insignificant hobby-toy on the desktop side.

Server systems, unlike desktop systems, are VERY expensive, and are often quite difficult to manage even with all of the fancy GUI tools. I've been using Windows Server since NT 4 and my business is on its second install of Small Business Server (SBS 2003 in 2005, and moved to SBS 2008 in 2009). In 2007 I tried to move to Apples Leopard Server for cost reasons and in the hopes that Apple's GUI configuration and administration tools would be easier than Microsoft's. I struggled with it for three weeks tinkering after-hours to make it host email and shared calendar with the email addresses my business had used for years, and in the end, went back to Mircrosoft. Leopard Server was much cheaper than SBS, but SBS was far more powerful and easier to use.

Linux is the future here. SBS is extremely expensive, and the full Windows Server versions are even more so. The hardware was actually much cheaper than the OS and the end-user support agreement from Dell (outstanding server support, by the way). Could Linux do what I do with SBS? Possibly. I use Exchange for email and calendar and there is no open source Exchange server as that is a proprietary technology, but I am sure that there are plenty of great open source mail and calendar servers out there. The problem is, they just aren't easy to use. I couldn't install a Linux server distro and get it up and running on a Sunday so that my email and calendars are all working again Monday morning. A serious Linux geek could, but I cannot.

That is where Linux will triumph, in the big shops. The small businesses, with no IT budget and just a business owner who also runs the backoffice, will likely stay with either no server at all (peer-to-peer network and online apps) or use an Apple or Microsoft solution. The giant corporations, however, with the large IT budgets, are a natural for Linux, with its scalability, stability and absolutely zero licensing fees, which on a per-user basis, can be in the millions of dollars for Microsoft.

On the desktop, however, there are far bigger obstacles. Linux can and likely already has made great strides onto terminals, kiosks and purely web-based or non-collaborative business uses. A cash register, a newsletter that is published on the web, are great examples of business uses where Linux can and does work extremely well. I think Linux is great for older people on recycled computers due to the scalability of Linux and its ability to run well on computer too old or limited for Windows 7 or Snow Leopard. An old G3 Mac or Pentium II PC will soon be left behind in terms of browser technology supported by older Windows and Mac operating systems, but with Linux those systems can remain current with web standards for many, many years to come.

Where Linux will never make it is with the regular business or personal user who wants more than a limited cloud-based experience. The problem with Linux is the lack of proprietary software. Of course that is also the strength of Linux in the enterprise, but on the desktop it is definitely a weakness. For better or worse, the business world uses Microsoft Word, and while OpenOffice Writer might be just as good a program, just as good is not identical. Business needs absolute compatibility. When a document moves between multiple workers and is modified, annotated and otherwise worked with, nobody can or should be willing to correct broken formatting or figure out what changes, annotations, markings, revisions etc. were lost in the import/export process. Simply, everyone in the project needs to use the same program, and often, the same version of the program. This is an obstacle Macs face too, but at least Word for Mac uses the identical file format and won't lose formatting or revisions going to and from Windows. I work with legal pleadings, documents that are shared and moved between numerous lawyers, court clerks and one or more judges, and whatever program the court uses, is the program everyone MUST use.

Photoshop is another proprietary application that is now an industry standard. No matter whether The Gimp has as many features or costs less (free), if the industry uses Photoshop, insisting on using The Gimp will only cause you to not get the job.

For home users, more important is the inability to just buy an application and run it, or to use regular media without tinkering. I know, understand and appreciate why you can't pop a commercial DVD into a Linux machine and have the movie just play, but until either it can, or until commercial DVDs lack DRM, Linux will make a lousy OS for the computer user who wants to watch movie. Most folks are just not going to hunt down codecs and try to figure out how to install CSS-decryption, they want to just watch the movie, play the game, etc.

So what is the answer?

For Linux to take off, it needs to embrace commercial software and to standardize within the Linux community. Only then will it even have the numbers to entice developers to write the commercial apps Linux needs. Here is an example, tax time is coming and I want to do my taxes on my computer. With Windows or Mac, I spend my $30 or $40 (or free with Windows and Turbotax online) and do my taxes. With Linux I can fumble with WINE and hope it works perfectly, or I, well, there are no other options.

The OpenSource answer is that someone will write an app if people want it, and distribute that app for free. Why would anyone do that? The tax code is a monstrosity that changes from year-to-year, so making a program that tracks all of the US tax code and automates it is no small weekend project. Lets say a talented developer could write such an application in three weeks full-time and then debug it in another week. Who is willing to work unpaid for a month? After that work, who is willing to give away the result for free? If I was a developer and wrote such an application, I'd want to sell it, which is the way commercial software works.

What about DVD playbacK? A non-geek might be very happy with the stability of a Linux system if only she or he could spend $20 and buy a commercial DVD player instead of fumbling with codecs and decoders. A small business might be happy to spend $100 for Microsoft Word for Linux or $400 for Microsoft Office for Linux. Were such products available, I'd very likely be using Linux right now on many of my systems, as would many other small businesses looking to manage their technology budgets.

So why isn't there an Office for Linux? Two simple reasons. Not enough people would want MS Office are using Linux, and it would be too expensive to develop it based on low sales projections and the need to develop for more than one Linux distribution. Is Linux unified enough that one installer could work on all distros? I doubt "Office for Ubuntu" or "Office for Suse" could sell enough, but if there were hard rules in place standardizing where files were written, then a unified "Office for Linux" and "Photoshop for Linux" just might make commercial sense for Microsoft and Adobe to develop them.

[waldojim]

Office apps have been taken care of (in the business world) with citrix. A windows box that users cannot jack up. Remember me mentioning a method a while back, whereabouts the it found a way to make sure the windows boxes could not be hurt??? yeah, citrix does that. And of course, with citrix, we get to have the stability of the Unix/Linux host (depending on what you work), with the functionality of windows, and no worries about security.

For the record, we have 2 proprietary apps we use citrix for - Outlook, and Cisco Desktop Agent (for the ip phones).

ALL the rest of our proprietary apps are Unix/Linux based.

The point is simply, no need to say that it will fail a given market because you don't see the market. Sometimes the market is there, just not obvious.

As to Linux in the home... Linux will continue to fail in the home while MS maintains dominance in the average workplace. As more companies take on Linux, Linux becomes more understood, and better known. I believe most people use windows for 2 reasons. 1. because the already know it (or think they do) 2. because the use it at work. (you could even use a third one - the neighbor can only help you with windows... but that is not the point)

In the business world, Linux is almost ideal. It can do anything you want it to for a minimal cost. Its more stable than windows. It can be adapted to nearly any scenario. And you can Virtualize damn near anything under Linux.

Not to say its perfect, far from it. There is the setup itself - Linux is still very rough in some places, making the initial setup a PITA. There are still too few Techs that actually understand Linux at a deep enough level to be useful with it. And there are occasional growing pains (such as a nasty file system problem with Reiserfs as I recall)

to address another issue you brought up. Linux did not make itself. It is not stolen code. And it did not make itself overnight. People, many people wrote the code over very long periods of time to create what they have. Many go unpaid, many others get paid quite well. Novel, Red Hat, and Conical pay their people well, and contribute a LOT of code back to the people. They do everyone a service by GIVING the code back. They are not the only examples, just the largest ones.

as to dvd support:
http://shop.canonica...products_id=243

and lastly why is there no MS office for Linux? Because 90% of the Linux users are MORE THAN SATISFIED with OpenOffice. Any more, just because they know to leave certain things well enough alone. Like the menu bar.

I won't say Linux is perfect - it is FAR FROM perfection.
But name a PERFECT os...
there is no such thing as perfect, because you and the next person may have very different views of perfection.

I would like better hardware (namely printer) support in Linux. Blame Linux or the hardware manufacturer? In a windows world - blame the manufacturer. In the Linux world - Blame Linux. This double standard has existed for some time.

I would like to see more software for Linux. I have paid for a lot of software for Linux. this is a BIG misconception (that you repeated btw), JUST because you make software for Linux, does NOT mean it has to be open source. you can sell software for Linux just as easily as Vmware, Nero, Cyberlink, and many others do.

I DON'T want to see the standardization MANY people want. Things like the desktop, the behavior of Linux, included software, etc. This is where Linux shines. you DON'T have to use the same desktop interface as your neighbor, and you don't have to hack windows to change it! You can use any desktop manager you want, and then customize it any way you want. Why LIMIT people? And for the software loads, I happen to like that SuSE shipps with 10GB in software, it gives me a LOT to poke through, and learn. Some people like Ubuntu's method, keep it stripped, let people add what they want. But its a matter of choice.

Linux is about freedom. Freedom to exchange software. Freedom to do what you please.

In this case the freedom comes at a very large price for now. Limited commercial interest, and limited hardware support.

[asiafish]

Satisfied with OpenOffice does nothing to open documents with complex formatting or preserve annotations and revisions.

A link for some codec to make DVD players play DVDs, my point exactly. Normal non-geeks won't do it.

Citrix? Again, non-geeks won't do it.

Linux will remain a hobby on the home desktop and in small business too, precisely because it does take IT to make things work. Normal folks have no IT department, and are unwilling or unable to become their own.

[waldojim]

asiafish, on 04 March 2010 - 08:11 PM, said:

Satisfied with OpenOffice does nothing to open documents with complex formatting or preserve annotations and revisions.

A link for some codec to make DVD players play DVDs, my point exactly. Normal non-geeks won't do it.

Citrix? Again, non-geeks won't do it.

Linux will remain a hobby on the home desktop and in small business too, precisely because it does take IT to make things work. Normal folks have no IT department, and are unwilling or unable to become their own.

That was no link to a codec - That was Cyberlinks Power DVD for Linux. Please at least pretend to look.

As to citrix, I was referring to the corporate workplace. Again pretend to look.

[asiafish]

Corporate is precisely where I said Linux has a place, where large IT departments can make it work.

Your PowerDVD link has another fault though, it only runs on Ubuntu, highlighting yet another problem with Linux.

[waldojim]

that it does... but the nice part is that it does exist. I am sure Powerdvd will expand to others later, as it determines which distros need it first... and for the most part, it should not be a difficult setup, getting it working on other distros. But as you said, it highlights another fault. And I will not even try to claim fault free.

I only point out solutions, where solutions exist.

[asiafish]

waldojim, on 04 March 2010 - 08:50 PM, said:

that it does... but the nice part is that it does exist. I am sure Powerdvd will expand to others later, as it determines which distros need it first... and for the most part, it should not be a difficult setup, getting it working on other distros. But as you said, it highlights another fault. And I will not even try to claim fault free.

I only point out solutions, where solutions exist.

I sure wouldn't bet on it spreading. PowerDVD is an old product that I used to use on Windows in the mid 1990s. They had a Red Hat version in 2001 when I first started playing with Linux, but I was using SUSE and was out of luck. Now they have Ubuntu only. Now if other distros would just mandate absolute compatibility with Ubuntu, or whatever else everyone agreed on, it wouldn't be an issue, but for now the only solution is to compile your own, which casual users simply won't do.

So to the non-techie user, getting Linux is hard as it doesn't com preinstalled on many PCs and playing with ISOs is more than most folks will want to deal with. Even with a preinstall, unless its Ubuntu you are out of luck on DVDs. No matter what distro, MS Word requires either tinkering in WINE or an IT department, ditto for games.

As I said in my original piece, Linux is great where it fits, but the obstacles it faces to widespread adoption at home and in small business are simply insurmountable in its current form.

Now if the business world didn't use MS Word, if publishers didn't use Photoshop, etc., etc., it wouldn't be a problem. I'd like to see the RTF or some other open standard adopted by the world at large for all documents, but until it does, the proprietary tools being unavailable means the platform is not viable for mainstream use.

[crazy4laptops]

linux is designed for the business world, its strong, powerful, less expensive, and does a really good job

the desktop/client versions need to find something that makes them stand out instead of trying to combine the best of two worlds or make it familiar (see imitate)

KDE distros imitate the windows start menu/navigation and i don't like that... feels clunky to use

Gnome sorta combines the mac menu at the top, but adds the windows explorer-familiar navigation
(i prefer this distro)

i use linux mostly for forensic level data recovery or if i need to bypass rabid NTFS permissions

wubi is one of the most useful linux installers ever, simple, easy and it does all the work of installing ubuntu

[waldojim]

crazy4laptops, on 05 March 2010 - 09:56 AM, said:

linux is designed for the business world, its strong, powerful, less expensive, and does a really good job

the desktop/client versions need to find something that makes them stand out instead of trying to combine the best of two worlds or make it familiar (see imitate)

KDE distros imitate the windows start menu/navigation and i don't like that... feels clunky to use

Gnome sorta combines the mac menu at the top, but adds the windows explorer-familiar navigation
(i prefer this distro)

i use linux mostly for forensic level data recovery or if i need to bypass rabid NTFS permissions

wubi is one of the most useful linux installers ever, simple, easy and it does all the work of installing ubuntu

when was the last time you used KDE?
because KDE has deviated more from the windows look and feel than I ever expected out of a Linux desktop....

The current widget system you see in Windows was adopted by several years back, KDE went to the smarter start bar years before windows....

sorry, but for an advanced desktop, this time MS was playing catch up to linux, not the other way around...

[jackbency]

KDE 4.4 is a desktop environment rather than a complete Linux distribution. That means you should be able to use it with a number of popular Linux distributions including Ubuntu, Fedora, or PCLinuxOS, although the installation methods will vary by Linux distribution.

[publicmenace]

Linux is still strictly a hobby OS for me. Until Linux is as useful to me as Windows I'll continue to use Windows as my primary OS. The biggest obstruction I've run into with Linux is that it simply does not work everywhere on the internet. There are several web sites that I visit everyday that just do not work under Linux. They tell me I have the wrong version of Java or that I need to have Flash installed (I do). One site is just an ESPN message board and it won't accept my posts when I'm using Linux, no error messages or anything. Just a silent fail. I can probably fault the web developers at Disney for that but it works fine under Windows. Too often using Linux feels like a guy in a wheelchair that can get into most places because they have ramps installed but occasionally runs into stairs-only places. I'd rather not be in a wheelchair.

This post has been edited by publicmenace: 30 March 2010 - 10:28 PM

[Jamesb17]

Linux may have everything we need but today to make Linux popular like Windows it need some one like Bill Gates who can make it usable by everyone. As of now Linux is trying to struggle and the world is addicted to Windows so Linux dominating common household is not a realistic thought.

[quackadilly]

If more software companies made a "Linux version", I'd switch in a heart beat.

[Grr8008]

quackadilly, on 14 April 2010 - 03:38 AM, said:

If more software companies made a "Linux version", I'd switch in a heart beat.

I almost agree. I like my windows 7, but I would definitely dual boot. Of course, I have it running on my netbook. Jolicloud is quite good. http://www.jolicloud.com/

[taustin1382]

I picked up a dell notebook in 2007 when they first tried packaging linux with dell hardware. it had dvd support and a few other prepackaged (normally paid) apps preinstalled. it worked quite well... It got surged and at the time replaced under the extended warranty by a newer model that did not offer linux as a preinstall. I promptly wiped out vista and installed ubuntu. After 10 minutes I had dvd support working again along with the apps I used (opensource equivalents)....

I have no use for windows unless there is a paycheck associated with it.



our neighbor (late 40's and completely computer illiterate) wanted to start using an online college to get a basic degree instead of driving to the library every week. they had an older pc sitting around with windows 98 on it (virus infested and had no install disk) I had to go out of town but left them with an ubuntu install disk and advised that they could give it a try but I would be happy to set it up for them when I got back in town next week. by the time I got back he had not only installed it but installed flash (restricted extras package) and had began using it for classes. the clases used flash and basic html nothing windows specific.

this person drove a forklift all his life and had never used a computer. in his own words "I cannot figure out the self checkout at walmart." and he got ubuntu running and flash installed with ZERO help from me or any IT guy. when he went to the class site it said he needed to install flash player... he went to google and typed ubuntu install flash player and got a walk through that had him open "add/remove programs" and type "restricted extras" then check INSTALL and press OK...

yeah linux is super complicated.... you average user could not figure it out... no way... BS

[asiafish]

taustin1382, on 27 April 2010 - 10:00 AM, said:

I picked up a dell notebook in 2007 when they first tried packaging linux with dell hardware. it had dvd support and a few other prepackaged (normally paid) apps preinstalled. it worked quite well... It got surged and at the time replaced under the extended warranty by a newer model that did not offer linux as a preinstall. I promptly wiped out vista and installed ubuntu. After 10 minutes I had dvd support working again along with the apps I used (opensource equivalents)....

I have no use for windows unless there is a paycheck associated with it.



our neighbor (late 40's and completely computer illiterate) wanted to start using an online college to get a basic degree instead of driving to the library every week. they had an older pc sitting around with windows 98 on it (virus infested and had no install disk) I had to go out of town but left them with an ubuntu install disk and advised that they could give it a try but I would be happy to set it up for them when I got back in town next week. by the time I got back he had not only installed it but installed flash (restricted extras package) and had began using it for classes. the clases used flash and basic html nothing windows specific.

this person drove a forklift all his life and had never used a computer. in his own words "I cannot figure out the self checkout at walmart." and he got ubuntu running and flash installed with ZERO help from me or any IT guy. when he went to the class site it said he needed to install flash player... he went to google and typed ubuntu install flash player and got a walk through that had him open "add/remove programs" and type "restricted extras" then check INSTALL and press OK...

yeah linux is super complicated.... you average user could not figure it out... no way... BS

Linux is not necessarily complicated, but it isn't suitable for collaboration using industry-standard applications like Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop or the like. Some distros (I like OpenSuse) are very easy to configure and use, but once you need specific applications that don't exist in Linux, you either need IT support or your own geek-knowledge to make it work (Wine, Crossover, etc). No, OpenOffice and The GIMP are not direct replacements for Microsoft Office and Photoshop.

[4537256]

To bring up an old but still very relevant topic, dispite the dusty humor of the poll. There are several main scenerios as to why depending on individuals and then some.

#1> Few native, "mainstream" (retail) video game support. Depending on poll observed, roughly 63% on average, of computer users play mainstream video games on them which is less than 20% of the entire mainstream gaming population based on purchases and 89.3% of all mainstream computer games created within the last 5 years are non OpenGL API or lack Linux support (10% thanks to U3&tech3 engine). With such a high consumer base having an interest in using their computer to play video games as an additional entertainment medium and few OEM hardware including Linux, users are likely to choose the one that has the widest array of possible use.

#2> Lack of Advertising and promotion. Getting average joe to be aware of Linux is one thing, getting them to be interested in learning more than the name or finding a need for such is a complete difference. Reason why OSX has a rising market with the mostly non gamers or as a parallel use with PC despite scenerio #1. This is more of an inability due to design rather than neglect meaning you can't really roll commercials on tv when you have no income. However OEM's like Dell could have seazed an opportunity to promote more heavily with their few Linux based computers which is a neglect on their part imo.

#3> Unfamiliarity: in adjacent to #2 is of course being familiar with both name, implications and use. To directly download and install a new OS is a learning curve of its own for some as well as navigation and tailoring a Linux distro to fullfill ones needs and desires. So many have a difficult time searching and knowing to install hardware drivers that if it does not come on a CD with the hardware, the user will think it wont work and go back to something that did work, like Windows or Mac. The old cliche is that its difficult to learn, the reality is no its not, but few want/care to learn, there is a difference there.

#4> Ultimately its about launching software that performs a service to the user. Thats all the OS is,a platform for launching software and performing tasks quickly and efficiently so the choice must not only meet personal need, but have something the user does not already have or spent good money for as it is. I always find it odd when Linux enthusiasts cop up the similar snobbish attitudes you find among Mac users discussing how much better their prefferred OS is and provide examples of not understanding why they think the old hackneyed phrases against their OS still exist even though most are just categorized and misunderstand the real, ever changing market out there.

#5> Support, when average joe, the mass likely to rather not learn too deep just to fix an issue or perform a task, asks a question and gets a response looking like this

Quote

"Before you install it, please grab these dependencies (on an apt-system):
sudo apt-get install python-gnome2 python-imaging python-gtk2. Now grab the source from here and unzip tar -xzf wallpapoz-0.4.tar.g. Install cd wallpapoz-0.4
sudo python setup.py install"

It should be easy, even as an enthusiast, to understand why the average user would shy away.

Sure you can choppily get a number of PC games to work or work enough to play in Linux, especially if you like to learn, tweak and accept sacrifices. Sure you can do most every other task in Linux like you can in Windows...but its about the users recognizing, aquainting, learning a whole new environment all of which is hard to do if your current OS already accomplishes these while Linux sits quietly in the background requiring you to look for it, rather than it look for you.

For amusement, i asked my fiance "honey, do you know what Linux is?" "yeah, its a very expensive jewlery" reffering to Lenox jewelry apparently. "how bout Apple Macs?" "huh" "iMacs, heard of them? "yeah their neat looking, i want one". Alrighty then...i'm done here.

[KingOfGeeks]

GNU/Linux is about freedom. The "industry" used to say "nobody wants a computer in the home. There's no market." Yeah, well look what happened. Now everyone has got a computer. The same could happen to free software.

Of course, every free software magazine come out every year or so with "YEAR OF LINUX" or the like. And of course, they usually turn our quite wrong. People really feel nervous about moving away from things that they've become accustomed to, even if they're better. Right now, GNU/Linux is still that little OS that only a comparatively small amount of people know about. It's that community orrientedness feel that has attracted some, and the ability to not be owned by a company that has attracted others. GNU/Linux is probably not going to overnight become the OS of choice overnight (that would only happen if some Free Messiah appeared suddenly), but it's certainly not going to die off overnight either.

[Quant]

One issue I see that holds Linux back is lack of the wide eco system that the Windows world enjoys. If you buy an HP scanner it will have windows software in the box to get it up and running.

Where's TurboTax for Linux? Where is Quicken or QuickBooks? Where is Photoshop?

When someone decides they want a particular application, it's not available for Linux. You have substitutes but that's not the point.

Perhaps when Linux has the applications people really want. Look at the XBOX360. It would not have sold so well had it not been for Halo. People wanted Halo, so they bought the XBOX. Linux needs to be in that type of a situation. They need to have some compelling software that makes people desire the switch. You can't feel like you are giving something up. Most people wont go for that.

[Dropmeoff]

I take the opposite view of everyone: I do NOT want Linux to become more popular.

I fear that more popularity would destroy it for profits.
I like being that feisty 1% out on the edge. There's more freedom there.