Linux is not hard, it's ignored - Column

[w1z4rd]

Sure, it has many advantages over Windows - but its biggest downfall is that it cannot run all the software out there like windows does.

The exact same can be said about Windows. Does it run Bootcamp? Does it run Adium? Does it run Jumpcut? No.. why? Those are Mac products. So your statement is false and therefore your point falls aways.

Over 95% of the worlds fastest computers run Linux Guess Windows can not cut it there.

 

[Tassidar]

EDIT @ Tassidar: that sounds like a snippet from a David Attenborough Linux documentary. Insightful and oddly peotic, but definitely attenborough-ish

Thanks, if that is meant as a compliment, though I'm not quite sure.

 

[porchrat]

Thanks, if that is meant as a compliment, though I'm not quite sure.

Oh it is most definitely a compliment... Attenborough ROCKS!

I wonder if Attenborough would consider doing a Linux documentary. I would watch that. I already enjoy Stephen Fry discussing GNU Linux. He had a little cake on the 25th birthday and everything.

 

[Tassidar]

Oh it is most definitely a compliment... Attenborough ROCKS!

Then, thanks for the compliment.

 

[TBlaar]

I think we should have MORE distros!!!!!

Look at the healthy competition happening in the ADSL market nowadays, with there being many providers... same can be said for Linux...

A while back, Redhat got so big, they had plans of making a new release a proprietary release, ie. you had to pay for it!!! The competition between the distros keep things free, updated and maintained!

 

[Tassidar]

I think this year is going to be an interesting year for Linux:

Netbooks may no longer be vogue, with the IPad stealing the spotlight, but at the CES at the beginning of the year, Linux was pretty prominent. It will be interesting to see how well smartbooks do, as this will have a big impact on the mainstream success of Linux.

While new Atom-based Windows netbooks did show up at CES 2010, the Wintel mobile PC platform so omnipresent only a year ago, got way overshadowed this time around in a blitz of announcements around Linux-based smartbooks, e-readers, and tablets running on ARM processors.

With Android showing up on more and more devices, combined with ChromeOS (uses Linux kernel, I think), UNR and Moblin, there is a large degree of scope for custom OSs based on Linux, though perhaps not in the form that we expect.

There is a lot that remains to be seen, but in many ways this year looks to be very positive for Linux.

 

[Rouxenator]

All of the software out there is made to run on windows. If you walk into Game or Makro or any other store and buy software it will run in windows. Sure you can cry and w(h)ine about it but at the end of the day windows is everywhere because it is easy and it works. Hardware will either come with drivers for Windows or it will already be inside windows. The ability for windows to run universal binaries is what makes it so successful.

Linux was late to join the game and in some cases it is still not the "run any binary" OS that people have become used to. Now it has to fight an uphill battle, but if it gains the ability to be like windows in the sense where I can buy any software or hardware and use it like I would on any other computer (read windows) then I am sure Linux will get more users.

 

[porchrat]

I think this year is going to be an interesting year for Linux:

Netbooks may no longer be vogue, with the IPad stealing the spotlight, but at the CES at the beginning of the year, Linux was pretty prominent. It will be interesting to see how well smartbooks do, as this will have a big impact on the mainstream success of Linux.

http://www.betanews.com/article/CES...y-armies-of-ARMbased-Linux-gadgets/1263160224

With Android showing up on more and more devices, combined with ChromeOS (uses Linux kernel, I think), UNR and Moblin, there is a large degree of scope for custom OSs based on Linux, though perhaps not in the form that we expect.

There is a lot that remains to be seen, but in many ways this year looks to be very positive for Linux.

It may not be the way we all expected it to happen. In fact I didn't think Linux would become as present in media as it is now. I still laugh at the guys talking about "this is the year of the Linux Desktop!". However ChromeOS, Android etc. are making the average Joe aware that there is an alternative to Windows and that it is called Linux, something that the Linux community has always battled with.

Once it is on mobiles and netbooks it is not difficult to move to a desktop machine. However I don't necessarily think that all this attention is good for Linux. I mean look at what happened to Android, the things comes with a phone that is locked down more watertight than a mermaid's brassier (AFAIK... I actually have very little knowledge of Android phones, but as I recall most come with a special unlocked version or a normal locked version...something that Linux should never need). If the future of Linux is one dominated by large corporations trying to tie it into devices in a manner that leaves it largely closed off to the user then you can count me out.

 

[Rouxenator]

Oh, and don't try say "Linux is not windows" - because that is not what people want. They want the comfort of buying anything and being able to run it on their computer. If windows enables them to do that, then windows it is. If something free and open source like ReactOS or Linux enables them to do that, then they will go for the free option.

 

[Tassidar]

It may not be the way we all expected it to happen. In fact I didn't think Linux would become as present in media as it is now. I still laugh at the guys talking about "this is the year of the Linux Desktop!". However ChromeOS, Android etc. are making the average Joe aware that there is an alternative to Windows and that it is called Linux, something that the Linux community has always battled with.

Once it is on mobiles and netbooks it is not difficult to move to a desktop machine. However I don't necessarily think that all this attention is good for Linux. I mean look at what happened to Android, the things comes with a phone that is locked down more watertight than a mermaid's brassier. If the future of Linux is one dominated by large corporations trying to tie it into devices in a manner that leaves it largely closed off to the user then you can count me out.

Agreed.

I don't think the average consumer will be aware in most cases that they are running Linux at all.

Still, anyone who uses Linux has to use the GPL, don't they? Which means that at the very least, clones can be made. Or am I wrong?

Secondly, it might at least ensure Linux the hardware support it needs. With a move to cloud computing, desktop apps also might become more insignificant, allowing greater mobility between OSs.

 

[Taqyon]

Give me as many distros as possible please! I dont want to be limited in choice like the Windows kiddies.

So rather 100 less effective OS'es than 1 very effective OS.

 

[Rouxenator]

They need more distros because if something does not come pre-installed you are gonna have one hell of a time installing it.
While the rest of the world lives by the universal binary executable, linux people fear it because it is just to convenient.

 

[porchrat]

All of the software out there is made to run on windows. If you walk into Game or Makro or any other store and buy software it will run in windows. Sure you can cry and w(h)ine about it but at the end of the day windows is everywhere because it is easy and it works. Hardware will either come with drivers for Windows or it will already be inside windows. The ability for windows to run universal binaries is what makes it so successful.

Linux was late to join the game and in some cases it is still not the "run any binary" OS that people have become used to. Now it has to fight an uphill battle, but if it gains the ability to be like windows in the sense where I can buy any software or hardware and use it like I would on any other computer (read windows) then I am sure Linux will get more users.

So what now you are too lazy to go and download OpenOffice for free? You would prefer to go to Makro and buy MS Office at what is in my opinion a ridiculous sum of money?

There are alternatives out there. As I said I run Linux and I don't need a single Windows program. If you are too lazy or inept to Google "MS Office Linux alternatives" then you honestly shouldn't be running a computer let alone discussing Windows vs. Linux.

Unless you are doing something like Graphic Design and need access to Photoshop or something of that nature I really don't understand why people use Windows.

 

[Tassidar]

On the contrary, the disaster that was Vista was released at a time when MS had very little competition. IE6 was also released around that time.

Competition keeps organisations innovating. Lack of competition leads to stagnation. Nicht war?

 

[porchrat]

Still, anyone who uses Linux has to use the GPL, don't they? Which means that at the very least, clones can be made. Or am I wrong?

Not necessarily, not all code that runs on Linux is GPL. Anything proprietary is the property of it's owners and that can potentially include the pieces of the OS that interface with the actual hardware of the phone. (for example ATI provides proprietary drivers to the Linux community for use within Linux, that does not mean you can decompile that driver and replicate it's functionality in a clone, that driver belongs to ATI and ATI alone)

I mean if Google produces an entirely new GUI it isn't necessarily obliged to release it as an open source project under the GPL. It depends on what code it uses and doesn't use.

Having said that though you are correct in that the actual Linux code that already exists under the GPL can be cloned provided you give credit where credit is due. (As far as I understand the GPL) As to how much of that is contained within Android, and how much is proprietary I honestly don't know.

 

[superfly]

All of the software out there is made to run on windows.

Please qualify that statement. By itself it is complete and utter rubbish. What about Mac OS X? What about BeOS/Haiku? What about AmigaOS? What about *BSD? Never mind Linux, where Ubuntu only has about 32000 packages in it's software repository.

... in some cases it is still not the "run any binary" OS that people have become used to...

What operating system are you talking about? Definitely not Windows. Can Windows run Linux binaries? No. Can Windows run *BSD binaries? No. Can Windows run Mac OS X binaries? No. Can Windows run Amiga OS binaries? No. Can Windows run BeOS/Haiku binaries? No. I could go on, but I don't have time...

BTW, last time I checked, you could also buy Mac software at Incredible Connection.

Not that I'd want to buy any Windows software anyways, I can get suitable alternatives for most of the apps you get for Windows for free on Linux. And they're not buggy and virus riddled.

 

[Tassidar]

Not necessarily, not all code that runs on Linux is GPL. Anything proprietary is the property of it's owners and that can potentially include the pieces of the OS that interface with the actual hardware of the phone. (for example ATI provides proprietary drivers to the Linux community for use within Linux, that does not mean you can decompile that driver and replicate it's functionality in a clone, that driver belongs to ATI and ATI alone)

Point taken, thanks.

 

[superfly]

They need more distros because if something does not come pre-installed you are gonna have one hell of a time installing it.
While the rest of the world lives by the universal binary executable, linux people fear it because it is just to convenient.

Where do you come up with this stuff? You should be writing novels, not spending your time writing nonsense about an operating system you clearly have no experience with!

 

[Rouxenator]

Open Office does not even offer a patch of the functionality you get from Microsoft office. You should read up on what is coming in Office 2010 and how it integrates with MOSS and more.

Sure, if you are a cheap home user that checks your email and types up a few documents then you can use linux and open office. Anything more than that and you will need Windows. Want to play that game you bought from the R25 bargain bin at Pick'n'Pay ? Yep - you guess it - you need windows. Bought a new webcam/joystick? It will work in Windows. Want to upgrade the firmware on your phone? You'll need to be in Windows. Doing some accounting for people in Pastel? Oh, thats right, it runs on Windows.

So unless it is the most basic of tasks you want to do and you are not in a corporate environment - then you can linux. But thats where it ends.

 

[Taqyon]

Which is exactly what I believe the article's intention was concerning hardware manufacturers and their policies concerning Linux drivers. The reason you're spending so much time getting all your hardware to work is because the hardware manufacturers aren't releasing proper Linux drivers.

Agreed, but because there are so many distros to take into account.

The cornerstone of linux distros is the wide variety, imho. Choice is what attracted me to Linux in the first place. I was sick and tired of the "one-size-fits-all" mentality of Windows. Lock-in by Microsoft is a major issue also. Microsoft has frequently dramatically changed key components of their software that change the way the user interacts with the OS and/or software - take for instance the jump in UI to Office 2007, which completely ignored the traditional menu layout. And of course they get away with it, because their users let them. I have even heard some people saying that "Once (they'd) gotten used to the new UI, it does actually make more sense". The point is still that people who allow themselves to be bound like that have to inevitably change every time their glorious masters decide to mix things up. The combination of modularity and choice in Linux is what makes it impossible to get locked in. If you disagree with the direction a particular project or application is going into, simply revert to the old version or choose another one.

There is in fact so much choice that it may be what deters people from using Linux in the first place, not necessarily marketing. I doubt there are many computer users out there that haven't at least heard of Ubuntu. I have, however, heard of many people that have tried ubuntu, but reverted to Windows for numerous reasons. One of the more common reasons is that they couldn't get all their hardware to work - which is strangely more of a chore in Ubuntu (unless it works out-of-the-box). Another common reason is that they didn't like the desktop environment or the default applications, media players for instance, and never bothered to try installing a different one.

I hear you about lock in etc, but I see it as a decision on which platform to commit. Same argument goes for linux lock-in, even within distros.

The problem with opensource for me is it's rarely backwards compatible, one can not just upgrade and assume everything will work. That's why I stopped using Linux for my servers.

Either way, this thread is degrading into a "windows can do this and linux can do this" thing again. So I'm climbing out