Slashdot Mirror
Why Free Software is a Hard Sell
jeffro writes "Dont know if this has been submitted yet, but the Independent news UK has a rather newbiesh article on the ups and down of Linux software as a free alternative to Windows.
"Perhaps Linux shouldn't be regarded as an operating system at all, but more as a sophisticated multi-player game with a large number of enthusiastic players. You can lose yourself in Linux for hours, tweaking here, updating there. It's great fun if you like that sort of thing. But if you need to produce a document, spreadsheet or presentation, you're still likely to be able to do it faster and better by sticking with the Microsoft devil you know.""
A prime ingredient of "selling" software is the price. How can you sell something that's free?
> Perhaps Linux shouldn't be regarded as an operating system at all
.. well, that certainly puts it on equal terms with Windows.
"Old man yells at systemd"
And if you've never touched a computer before, you can probably write that document faster on a piece of paper. Same old story about people not wanting a new learning curve, just written with different words...
Excel is very efficient compared to Gnumeric. I've looked up the keyboard shortcuts in gnumeric, but Gnumeric and many of the Linux Office/Productivity offerings have more sharp edges than the MS Office/Corel Office alternatives.
As I said, I still try use them if at all possible, but they have a ways to go before they offer the same amount of productivity as the finely honed Windows alternatives.
The products, however, have come a long ways and after a few more versions, I could see them becoming just as efficient for the power-user as the MS offerings. If they go the way that the Web Browsers have, they shall become *more* efficient than the MS offerings.
Bringing irony to the Slash-masses
At the end of the day, it comes down to what you're used to, really. If you've never used any OS before, you could probably learn Mandrake 8.1 just as fast as Windows XP. If you're used to Windows, Linux is obviously going to seem more difficult. And vice versa.
I think a lot of people still believe in the old saying You get what you pay for. While the /. crowd knows this doesn't always apply, the average user is what any *nix desktop OS has yet to convince is worth the trouble of upgrading.
Linux will appeal to anyone that is well versed in computer OSes for many different reasons.. but then again, they aren't the ones that need Linux -sold- to them.
visit my free wallpaper collection, wp.erasei.com
While Linux is gradually making in-roads on the desktop, that is not were the present strength lies. It is best suited in the server arena, where spiffy user interfaces and good spreadsheet programs mean much less than stability, speed and ease of remote administration.
The article looks to be oriented from the desktop user's perspective, where it's the applications that matter, not the OS.
If you can't beat them, embrace and extend them.
As a once-was computer reseller I'll tell you. It is really easy to blame things on microsoft, you can get 900 different windows for dummies, morons, complete idiots, treestumps type books out there and Linux has to fight an uphill battle against FUD.
Couple with this that best-buy employees cant tell you the difference between linux and windows let alone answer a hard question like how to change the background wallpaper on linux. The salespeople are not there to support it (they arent there to support windows, but linux is a magnitude more powerful and therefore scary.)
Gateway wants to be able to tell the user "pop-in the restore cd and reboot, yes all your data is gone now, windows does that."
All the questions asked by users back in 1980-1990 will be asked again with linux and computer sellers dont want to answer them.
Linux looks like it needs more support than windows, in reality it does not, but it's "different" and that scares companies that are used to their current cash cow.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
is name recognition. Yes, Linux is generally recognized by the public, but that's about as far as it goes. And when people hear Linux, they think "Server operating system that is constantly being worked on." I don't know of one person in my company that would even think to use Linux as a desktop OS. That's not to say there aren't any good applications for Linux for desktop work (StarOffice is great), but none of those applications have the name recognition that competing Microsoft products have.
When it comes to free software, the name recognition it gets is "You get what you pay for." Most people don't understand that "free" refers to the licensing restrictions, not to the monetary cost of acquiring the software.
Free software will eventually become more of an option to business. Microsoft will see to it by shooting itself in the foot with its XP licensing structures. Time is on our side. As more companies suffer under Office and Windows renewal fees, they will begin to explore other options. And as more employees begin to see the advantages of free software, they will begin to use it at home. In this case, Microsoft ends up being our ally. (Strange, huh?)
When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.
a sophisticated multi-player game with a large number of enthusiastic players
That explain why I'm still stuck at (run)level 2 after years of playing...
[Linux] uses an "open-source" model, so its users can suggest - or even write their own - enhancements to the operating system, which can then be incorporated in future releases
[SNIP]
Of course, the development of new versions of Linux follows exactly the same process used by Microsoft
hmm... does this mean Microsoft is opensource? Where can I get the RPM of XP?
Lets face it: Linux is not a clear choice for joe idiot consumer looking to buy a PC to put under the xmas tree.
At the same time, it's come a _long_ way in just a few years. I'd bet my job (well, actually I just about have) that Linux is a better business desktop than Windows. For a business, Linux makes a lot of sense. It gets you off the Microsoft-upgrade-churn cycle, most everything you'd want is freely available, and the simplicity of administration and the excellent security make it a great choice.
Yes, KDE/Koffice, Gnome/'Gnome office', and StarOffice are not MS-Office. So what? As more businesses adopt Linux as their desktop, manufacturers will take note and start offering it, ISVs will take note and start selling more software, and consumers will take note and start buying linux for home since they want to be compatible with what's at the office. Same sort of cycle that made the IBM PC more popular than the Mac back in the late 80's/early 90's.
This might not be the year of linux for the consumer, but it's getting close for linux on corporate desktops.
"But actually trying to use m4 as a general-purpose langage would be deeply perverse" --ESR
"...if you need to produce a document, spreadsheet or presentation, you're still likely to be able to do it faster and better by sticking with the Microsoft devil you know."
In the same spirit as touch typing vs. two fingering it, do the windows solutions really produce better output than TeX and your favorite external utils to make figures (gnuplot).
People go on and on about how great Word or it's Linux clones are. They are admitidly as easy to get started on as two fingering it, but I don't think they can touch LaTeX for quality and speed, once you get the hang of it.
I just passed in my independent study paper (saved in winword/2000) using Staroffice and I didn't have a single problem.
I don't need microsoft to get my job done... and never will.
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
I liked this part:
"For while Linux has a large presence in the server marketplace, it doesn't cut it as a desktop operating system. That's not through any technical shortcomings of the product itself, but rather the technical shortcomings of users"
It's funny because it's true.
Article is already slashdotted, but coming for experience, it is hard to sell OSS to PHBs that are used to paying serious cash for something as simple as email.
Recently I convinced a client to use Linux/Apache over Win/IIS. He couldn't believe that you can setup a webserver without paying for the software. He would have spent alot more money on the close source solution.
The only way he would agree to my solution was if I set up both a Lin and Win box, show that the Linux box could do all of the same things as the Windows server. Once I did that then he sprung for the total Linux solution.
Of course, the kicker would be,
"You know, we saved you about $100,000 in software costs, why don't you donate 10% of that cost to Debian and/or Apache."
"Um, no."
Because my Debian installs take roughly 15 to 20 minutes from start to finish, and any Windows installs I've done take at least a couple hours.
If SUSE took 12 hours to install, you are doing something very seriously wrong.
Linux isn't an operating system. Linux is a kernel. RedHat, Mandrake, SUSE, etc. are operating systems.
Kernel + Userland = Operating system.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
In any case, I think its been fairly well concluded and beaten to death that Linux is unlikely to ever give Microsoft any real competition in desktop business apps, and everyone seems to be at peace with this, so it really is a dead issue.
Uh, currently XP is only sold in workstation mode. You can run DNS, web server and a bunch of other servers with .net server when it ships. Some things like firewall are separate products from MS.
Most linux distros sold in stores include a firewall and other apps as part of the distro. MS could do the same thing and include ISA as part of Windows just like they started bundling IE and some other software. Maybe Red Hat is breaking the law by bundling all these apps with their linux distro?
One flaw in that article that jumped right out at me is the claim that Intel has shown no software support for Linux.
Intel has put software support behind Linux where it counts: device drivers.
For most Linux device drivers, I scour the web or my distribution media for third-party written drivers. When I need Intel networking or graphics drivers for Linux, I go to support.intel.com.
The Microsoft devil you know
Key word - "know". I'm sure it would be possible to produce open source versions of stuff like Office which had the same UI etc. so users could pick them up and use them quickly. Possible, yes but you'd be drowned in lawsuits before you could say frost pist.
This is interesting. Imagine if, in the early days of motoring, someone had copyrighted having the gas pedal on the right, the brake in the middle, the clutch on the left, the steering wheel etc. Basically, the user-interface for a car. All the UIs for all the different makes would have to be different. How would that work? Eventually, the car with the most popular UI would become a default monopoly. Either that, or they'd be a lot of wrecks when people changed brands.
People are comfortable with what they know. It's not legally possible to produce something which they can operate in the same way to get the same result - even if, under the hood, it's completely different.
This sig made only from recycled ASCII
This article is pretty much a glorified troll, complete with reasonably-stated FUD. You can tell the difference though because you get that weird gut feeling that something is wrong. Let's analyze just the quote:
Wow, this is a good one. Linux isn't really an OS---just a game. Read: it may be good for entertainment value, but is not something a business would use. This sounds like something out of a Microsoft spin factory.
Read: it takes forever to configure the thing, it's not just point and click.
Read: I'm too dumb to figure out StarOffice, because it doesn't say "Microsoft" on the side of the box. (Or one of the countless alternatives. I'm preaching to the choir here, of course, and you know what's out there already.)
Just a product of your typical FUD factory. Some of these might have been valid concerns 5-10 years ago, but come on. Quit trolling. Even the "popular" news rags don't spout this stuff anymore.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
...isnt selling as well as expected either. Average users, unlike corporations arent as willing or likely to change ANYTHING, be it over to Linux, or "up" to XP.
The article was on MSNBC, but has mysteriously vanished...
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
I run Linux (Mandrake) and have run RedHat, Slackware and other variants in the past. I also run Windows, Solaris, etc.
This article has a point - my parents can't use Linux. And I don't have the time to support them, even if I wanted to.
It's just like cars- people used to look and be afraid of those "new-fangled" beasts. And at first they were a pain. You had to hand start them with a crank. They didn't have windshields, so you had to wear goggles and get dirty. Then, the innovation started- windshields, steering wheels (instead of yokes), electric starters, automatic transmissions, a/c, power everything. Today, you can buy a car and if it's not a Yugo, it will probably run for a few hundred thousand miles. And it comes loaded with all kinds of neat toys.
Until the system [linux] can run without having to use a shell, manual tweeks, etc. it won't fly in the consumer world. Each release gets better, but it's still not there.
The other problem, as many have mentioned, is the amount of software available for Linux (and the means of installing it) is still a bit clumsy. Most [l]users want a GUI installation that does everything for them. And there isn't anything wrong with that. Does everyone who drives a car know exactly how that internal combustion (or electric) engine works? No...
-My $.02Although I read through the whole article, the headline was enough to comment on:
Linux has comparable programs and it's free. So why does nobody offer it on PCs?
What the article fails to address is that fact that OEMs CAN'T bundle Linux with Windows, or else it violates their Agreement with Microsoft.
Most OEMs are afraid to even offer anything but Windows, for fear that MS will cut them off, which would immediately cripple their business. It's not that Linux is a hard sell, its that it just isn't sold by OEMs for standard desktops, period.
excuse me? please correct your statement.
I have a linux box that has been running for over 4 years now without reboots and is lightning fast. XP cannot claim that as it hasnt even been out that long.
you are talking about a configuration and packaging of linux and OSS software. Linux is more stable and faster than XP can ever be. Want to prove me wrong? Play back an MPEG on a Pentium 200 without frame drops. I can do it under linux, XP wont even install on a machine that small.
in your expierience XP was better than that version of SuSE. and that is the extent of it.
using your comparison method, Os/2 is better than XP because windows CE crashes and is slow.
Linux does not equal SusE, Mandrake or Redhat please remember that.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
...as the saying goes. I use Linux in several areas of my consulting, but I would not attempt to make my users work in it as a desktop operating system. In the future more advances may be made in the ease of use area, but the fact is most users are not willing to learn Unix-like quirks. That isn't an argument against the Unix model, just the fact that most desktop users are more focused on the presentation that is due in 2 hours than learning a new language for interaction with the computer. Yes there are productivity applications, but they are not as smooth as Office (for those not versed in Unixisms), especially to the novice user who can't get the informal support of coworkers on "how do I center mail merge this spreadsheet of names with this word processing document".
That said, there is a lot of productivity found for me to use it in server roles where the users could care less how the interactions are performed. I can save the user money and set up a low end box as a file server (compatible with Windows) and never have to worry about needing to reset again until upgrade time. Cost savings in hardware/software and my time.
The realization needs to be that technical people see the merits of Linux (cheap, malliable and crashproof) but those merits mean little to a non technical user, who can barely remember how to cut and paste.
Sig under construction since 1998.
As the article states: . It's a real achievement, in fact XP could be the first Microsoft operating system that people don't talk about, simply because the user doesn't have to worry about it - it's like a TV, you turn it on and it works. All the time.
To most users, this is how an os should be. A necessary thing which does what is does when it should do it wihtout the user having to wonder how or why.
If you are the type who screws open the vacuum cleaner to find out how it works, then you are likely to install linux and have fun fiddling with it. The hours spend are hobby and learning time. The fact that all the software to play with is free is a nice add-on.
If you are the type who couldn't care less how stuff works, but just wants it to work to play games, to make a presentation or whatever turns you on, then every minute spend learning stuff and fiddling with an os to get things to work feels like eternity. The fact that all the software is free only confirms your feeling that there *has* to be a reason why it is free.
So it isn't that free software is a hard sell, it is hard to sell because a lot of people do not see their time as being free too.
I intend to live forever, so far so good.
- Some of the default settings make it all too easy to destroy the existing contents of your hard disk. [?!]
But, I also happened to come across this article at The Register that actually provides for a more balanced look at the install process:- As for other hardware detection, Mandrake was infallible. The drives; the wheel-mouse, the keyboard, the monitor, the video card (nVidia Ge-Force AGP 64 MB), the sound card (SoundBlaster Live), all of it. All I had to do was confirm its choices every now and then.
So, Mandrake 8.1 looks like a good choice for a beginner, and I definitely look forward to Mandrake 9.xAlex Bischoff
HTML/CSS coder for hire
Find me three business executives who use nroff to format documents on a regular basis.
And (although they do) no business should EVER be using spreadsheets for day-to-day information gathering, storage, and retrieval
The point of the spreadsheet is data analysis and presentation.
I've sold both Windows and Linux based tools for awhile, after after a lot of soul-searching (and checkbook-balancing), I've decided I prefer selling Windows solutions. Four reasons --
I still prefer Linux for *my* stuff -- I just like Windows for *other people's* stuff.
Despite all the linux hype, it is still harder to install, maintain, and use than windows is. It is supposedly more reliable, but I've had applications fail in linux time after time because of faulty support, while windows BSOD's occasionally. In my experience, very occasionally. I can't remember the last time windows crashed independant of my tinkering. (i.e., not windows' fault. Even macs crash more frequently when I do think I know I shouldn't)
All that aside, I'd still use linux if it were more supported. For the most part though, nearly ever driver and application has a windows version. Although more and more are supported under linux everyday, or can be emultaed under programs such as wine, its still a long way from being supported even as much as mac's are.
My point, though, is that although it may be just as easy to learn a particular linux bundle as it is to learn windows, until I can do all the things I do under windows, I won't get rid of it, neither will I advise anyone else to.
-Space for rent
I have seen Mandrake 8.1 to install flawlessly in about 2 hours (note: 45minutes was selecting components to have, what was needed and what was not). A friend have terrible experience with installing Windows XP, he had to reinstall them after their complete failure again before getting them to work.
The point is that both systems have their problems sometimes, but one cost much more.
-- Wanna textmode user interface for ruby? http://freshmeat.net/projects/jttui/
I see this is a two-pronged issue. On one side we have the familiar /. argument that M$' dominance is simply a self-fulfilling prophecy based on its existing monopoly. Of course people are more familiar with it because it's ubiquitous.
The other issue is whether hackers WANT to make Linux as easy and straightforward as Windows. I think the reality has to be faced that _choice_ means a certain level of complexity, and complexity is a burden to ease-of-use. I would argue that the very advantage Windows has for the common user is diametrically opposed to the goal of Linux hackers everywhere which is to make the system as robust as possible.
That said, I don't think it's impossible for Linux to break into the desktop market. All that is needed is for GUI developers to start emphasizing Windows-like functionality that makes it easy for newbies to pick up the OS. I think that the current problem is that these goals have only come to be emphasized recently.
I think the reason M$ is so scared of Linux recently has to do with the fact that Linux isn't dependent on winning this battle anytime soon. It doesn't have earnings report deadlines or any other interest in profitability. It can simply keep chugging along until one day it is suddenly winning...
BZZZT. Dell offered it. Very few people bought it.
Do these people even read the GNU? Do they even know what Open Source means? Its not about selling the software. Its not about selling the information. Its about selling the services. Someone has to write the code, charge for the code to be written instead of for the packaged product and you have a business. Redhat sells services for free software and is making alot of money. They continue to profit without selling software. RedHat Profits surpass expectations again Now enough about redhat, lets talk about the ways to sell services and the purpose of the GNU. The GNU is here so that people will be able to freely share source code / information with each other. The GNU and GPL states information should be shared not sold. So why are some corperations complaining if they cant sell GNU software to people who support the GNU which specifically is against the sale of the software itself? Selling GNU software is basically asking people to donate to your company. Instead of wasting your time pressing a CD, charge for access to the actual ftp site or dont let them download at all forcing them to buy the CD from you. This can work but only in the corperate world. How do you sell to the user? Its simple. You dont. You charge the user for the service of actually writing the code. You have surveys asking the users what software they need. you make a demo version which is VERY VERY stripped down, and tell the user if they want this software to be completed they have to subscribe for $1-5 a month until development is complete. Development is completed. User gets software, Developers got paid. Company then earns profit by selling updates via CD. Its easy to get a person to buy an update to software they already use, but its impossible to get a person to buy software they've never used. So yes its possible to make money on open source software, but you arent going to do it using the closed source business model.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
So what was this guy's point again?
That the players of the Linux game are FAR too enthusiastic.
-- Dr. Eldarion --
For while Linux has a large presence in the server marketplace, it doesn't cut it as a desktop operating system. That's not through any technical shortcomings of the product itself, but rather the technical shortcomings of users.
I take issue with that statement. It is not the users' fault that Linux GUIs use X windows and as a result the GUIs are more slugish in Linux that in Windows. No amount of reasonable configuring by a user can change that.
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
Oh ya, that sounds great, spoken like a true techie and linux lover. However, your average person just wants to run excel, they don't want to deal with setting up all this stuff. Granted, getting star office to run isn't that bad, but if it isn't as easy as an office install then most ppl aren't willing to deal with it.
:) you *can't* have the market, it's a simple truth. Once you accept that things get much more clear.
I think this is the problem with a lot of tech ppl, you don't even *try* to think like a layman. Think, did it take you 20 minutes to set this up? Well that could take a casual user several hours, simple solutions for you are not so simple for the audience you are trying to capture.
Untill hardware is plug 'n play and the software is click 'nstall (I like that one
mkay?
http://monkeyserver.com --- weeeeee
Perhaps Linux shouldn't be regarded as an operating system at all, but more as a sophisticated multi-player game with a large number of enthusiastic players
...That's when he suddenly realized he wasn't running Linux at all, but playing Unreal Tournament after a long night of binge drinking and hallucination inducing drugs.
I Heart Sorting Networks
reliable huh? Do some tech support and log the # of calls you get from dissatisfied XP buyers...
I do all my writing on Linux in WP. Works just fine.
I don't playu around w/Linux much at all. It isn't a game for me. I have a PS1 and 2 for those... I use it to stay MS and crash free not to play around w/.
I agree that some people would use it for that. I hear a lot of "I would love to install Linux and learn it." But for most Linux users it is for the reasons I listed above.
They are working to make Linux easier, someday it will get to the point where it will be a viable competitor but for now the goal is not to do that.
The author of the article is Andrew Thomas, formerly of The Register and now (occasionally) of The Inquirer . He knows what he's on about wrt computers, but he's pretty new to Linux.
You can lose yourself in Linux for hours, tweaking here, updating there. It's great fun if you like that sort of thing. But if you need to produce a document, spreadsheet or presentation
Don't get me started.
No one force you to tweak it if you don't want to. There's always stable version of Linux for production use. The fact that people don't like doing document, spreadsheet or presentation in Linux is the reluctance to learn different ways of doing same things. A Mac user wouldn't like do that in Windows, for example. Your arguement is very misleading.
I must admit MS offers best of the line office suite, but it doesn't mean other office suite is too inferior in comparison.
If you say it's a massive multi-players game, many people are doing serious game playing here.
Sometime I really feel like there's a need to mod some posters as troll or flamebait.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Hey tell me :
I want to install Nvidia drivers on a Dual PIII.
Mandrake 8.1
X 4.1 something.
Ok now you go and install just with the Widgets.
Try.
Hard.
Then write me tomorrow and tell me about the exhilirating experience.
I lost a nice 2 hours before getting back to Make.
Yes Mandrake is Way easy to install.
But not yet as polished as windows.
Sometimes it can be complicated to install something on Windows.
Sometimes it's just impossible under X on Linux.
And Johnny Lawnmover WON'T have the same patience as me and will install a Bootleg Windows within 30 minutes.
It's not only a learning curve problem. It's just you cannot yet compete with Windows on "Dummy Mode PC User".
Or have EVERYTHING available through Widgets. Including the Make command, with Make Dep, Make World, every option, but on a nice GUI. Not just "special graphical widgets" that often propose the same configuration options as the one you just tried with different names and colors.
I'm used to Windows (since V2.0 8| at the time I was looking for apps on REM, the concurrent, but didn't find any...)
I'm installing Linux since Redhat 4.x
And it's still not my day to day OS.
I come, install (better and better), play for 3-4 hours, then want to duplicate my favorite app from Windows (Quake 8) and ends up 5 hours with Nvidia drivers / Open GL and others just to hear that "Quake won't install, Open GL not recognized" and other swearwords.
Windows is "Dummy Mode Friendly"
I want Linux to be the same.
Just like MacOSX. 2 modes. 2 worlds. Together. And let the hacker take hane and let the luser use shiny GUI
Now flame me. I want to use Linux. It has come a lloooonnngggg way. But not yet versatile enough ? possibly.
I want an OS where I don't have to engage my brain to work. caus I don't have 5 hours to solve a problem.
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
Charge the man $15,000 for your Linux support (still saving him at least $85,000) and donate $10,000 of that.
~ now you know
Linux is missing an important element compared to other OSes: Design. It hasn't got a coherent set of features that are based on a sober evulation of the average user's needs. It has various packages that do this very well for specific solutions, but if you're going to write a user OS, you need careful design. And this is a big task, mainly becuase it requires standardisation of (programming, user) interfaces and behaviour across all aspects of the OS. Users need consistancy and predictability and Linux just dosn't have it. It does have an enormous, possibly endless, feature set, but many of those features are inaccessible to anyone who isn't interested in fiddling endlessly.
And what underlies this is the programmer mentalilty. Most free software is designed by programmers who, on the whole, have little empathy for the average user. They are technology focused. This may be good for the technology, but not good for the user.
The Linux development community should focus on developing and sticking to some technical design standards and working (and innovating) within those contraints. This may provide a platform for someone to fairly easily come up with a really easy to use system.
Reliable, Great Value Hosting: $7.95/mo 2.4G/120G
Why does everyone say that OSS office suites are not up to par with MS Office? Just because the user interfaces aren't layed out in the same way?
It's the mentality that "I'm lazy... I don't want to learn a different way..." that keeps linux off of business desktops and makes silly software reviewers say that MS has the one and only usable office suite.
If bad puns were like deli meat, this would be the wurst
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love Linux I own and use about 15 Linux machines everyday. It is perfect for me in nearly every way. I love the applications, the feel, the price, the stability, the configurability, and the ability to alter the software that runs under it.
However, does that necessary mean that my mom has to like it and use it as well? She doesn't program, in fact she can barely type up an email, much less work some "|grep" magic from the command line. She, and most other people I know could care less about daemons and altering cron jobs. They just want to type up an email, surf the web, and create a document here and there.
The more software the better I guess when it comes to Linux, but if the price of getting more software for our OS is changing and dumbing down it down, then I vote to keep Linux just the way it is: For geeks, by geeks.
--It's Pimptastic!--
I see this time and time again. You give away software or development time (via low rate, etc), and it is perceived as not being worth as much. We tried to sell some software a few years back that took a couple weeks to pound out and we tried to sell it for $500, no takers - priced at the "enterprise" level of $15,000 (per CPU), it sold. Baffling....
That is not to say free software is worth nothing. The reverse it true - for my own personal use, I would not ever consider putting a Windows box on the other side of the firewall, even with the software in hand. Linux was an easy choise for my CS server - though I might run Solaris if that were an option.... Double that for even more important things like my development box!
Folks can be dumb, however.... expecially managment. When you shoot for the lowest common denominator, some times you prey on the divide by zero errors...
+++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
Yes, it's a newbie-ish article concerning Linux, but do you remember the first time you ever ran linux?
./"file" everytime to get it running. yes I know this does work, but very few default this way without having to change them. Again, we want to make it easy for newbies.....
I definately do... I took me three days to figure out that I needed to type "startx" to get the desktop up.....
Hey, it was all new to me, I definately had no clue where to start or what commands to use. Nevermind write and print a text file or spread sheet. And this is what the article refers to.
You initally need to spend time playing with it, and learning the system before you can do what most people naturally do with Windows.
IMHO, I believe that Linux needs high consumer use-ability for it to really get into mainstream.
First off, Linux needs a few windowish things to happen.
One
First boot always goes to the desktop... (allow logging in and command line access to be optional for users concerned about security or command line freaks like me). This will give Windows users a nice warm fuzzy feeling at first.
Second
Allow double clicking to execute files in desktop mode. Therefore the user does not have to open up the command line and type
I feel that by making Linux extrmemly easy for new people, many will flock. By allowing users to take to "newbie" usability features away, people like us will still be happy.
www.slightlycrewed.com - Because aren't we all?
When I went from MAC to PC about 100 years ago the one thing I miss most was the close all windows keystroke. IIRC crtl-shift-w ? Anyway MS bugging me when I delete a file is about as annoying as...well its all offtopic anyway. This story wsa just another blood boiler for linux preachers/users/wanna-be-users-stuck-in-a-MS-only- shop
"Get them before they get....
as a java professional i chuckle when I read that kind of story...
it is obvious that linux + java is the "tip of the sword" against XP dominance on the server.
You kids still wonder why you are fighting the wrong war ? it's like netscape vs microsoft and all the press was focusing on the *browser*, while apache was taking over the server side. GAME OVER, who gives a flying FUCK that IE owns the desktop, the server side is where the game is at and that is what real-men are fighting on these days.
Focus on the strenght, drop the kiddy idealism, make the vision work on the server and Open Source software will become the defacto monopoly.
marcf
The real mnf999 always posts as anonymous coward
I had to laugh when I read the remark:
I see so-o-o many Windows users doing exactly the same thing. Tweaking fonts, adjusting colors, downloading more screensavers than you can shake a stick at. It's not just a Linux phenomena and I see more UNIX users grow out of this more than I see Windows users getting tired of this tweaking. (I wonder why...)
Remember the Apple ad with the two guys futzing with the PC for hours/days on end when the secretary asks when is that thing going to be ready to use. Their response ``We're tweaking it.'' followed by ``To make it easier to use.'' still cracks me up and is as applicable today as it was then.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
I don't know, but the bottled water industry seems to be doing pretty well...
It's all Hood
I'm sick and tired of listening to shit spouted as fact from all the popular PC periodicals, such as PC Weekly and Wired. The world is listening, and they write these bogus bullshit articles with the slightest hint of fact. Why can't you see that this isn't about what's popular or not? Its not your fucking duty to make ideas popular; its your duty to make sound ideas popular. Is the Microsoft giant a good thing? Is a company that runs a monopoly and has no competition(which equates to no progress) something that we as consumers of computer software want? Then what's the alternative and how can we better it. Don't worry about shit like tech support(or lack thereof) or IT undergrad's opinions. When fire was discovered man didn't know much about it. But they kept using it and it became more refined.
When journalists like you take a shit on a piece of paper that shows up in a magazine, or web forum, or newspaper, people take notice and gobble it up. Take some responsibility for your actions and at least attempt to tell these people the truth.
-The key to successful journalism isn't telling readers the facts. It's about FINDING the RIGHT facts to tell the readers.-
I have no desire to reach nirvana.
So the marketing manager for Dell says that they have to spend some money to verify that their new system works with Linux. In response, the author of this article decides that the reason Linux hasn't taken off on the desktop is because Dell isn't installing linux anymore. And Dell isn't doing that because Linux is too hard to install?
I think the author forgot that this testing has to take place for Windows, too. The testing has to take place for anything new that gets added to the Dell's systems. They have to test new CDRW drives, DVDRW drives, anything... and the only justification for that testing is if the demand for that thing will increase sales and pay for the cost of the testing. Ease of end user installation is just plain not relavant.
It's awful expensive and difficult for Ford Motor Company to install engines into their cars. But they do it because the demand for their cars would fall to the floor if they didn't. In other words, pre-installing engines increases the demand for Ford vehicles. If the demand for pre-installed linux was there, Dell would pre-install it no matter how hard it was the first time they tried to figure it out.
Key to financial independence: Spend less than you earn. Save and invest the difference. Do it for a long time.
There's a lot of things to complain about with MS, but Office is certainly not CRAP.
You're right, one day people will use something else. And that will be right around the time that MS can no longer differentiate its product from free competitors.
There are costs and benefits to a lot of different software options right now. To deny that Office offers any benefits is ignorant. If you talk to people developing competing products, I'm sure they'll tell you the respect they have for Office - and how much work it is to create such a huge, feature-rich product.
And somehow, millions of people every day manage to somehow produce documents on it. I personally don't like parts of Word, but I respect that it has been built to satisfy a broad spectrum of users, and for the most part does so.
Any OS should be happy to have an app set as strong as Office.
-
Let's not stir that bag of worms...
Selling Linux as a tool is a totally good idea.
Mystery boxes that do mystery thing to packets and nobody looks inside, Linux is perfect..
I view linux like a really cool tool, not a competive product. I don't worry about MS taking over the world, I got my copy of the linux source, I'll be good.. Worse comes to worse I'll add what I need myself..
The is one of the big holes in OSS or community based development. Apple, IBM, MS have spent billions on human Interface research to make computers easier to use. The don't let engineers alone design products because they don't understand was users really want and need. They require input and review by Marketing and users testing. Apple and MS both have lab testing users on interfaces, documentation, and anything else the typical user has to react with. This research is not cheap or even easy to do. You can't just look at Mac or Window interface similate it and say you're as easy to use. Plus IBM, Apple, and MS all have published Human Interface standards developers follow. Why because consistency makes using the platform and all the app's easy to learn and use. This doesn't fly in the OSS world everyone has a different idea of how things should be done, in this case that is a bad thing. This is why you need a central body setting requiements. this is why even if Linix is technically better, users continue to use Mac and Windows, because its easier to use in the long run. This is why Mac OS X is the best thing to happen in years. They taken as great OSS OS and put a well know interface on it. They have made Unix useable to the typical user.
It's great fun if you like that sort of thing. But if you need to produce a document, spreadsheet or presentation, you're still likely to be able to do it faster and better by sticking with the Microsoft devil you know.""
So why is Microsoft the only alternative here? What about Mac OS X? Yes I know you have to get a completely different machine to run it, but the upside is that with Mac OS X you can have your cake and eat it too. You can do on Mac OS X just about anything you can on Windows yet you have the power and stability of Linux. It may still not be as fast as it outta be (but it *is* getting better by leaps and bounds) but you can certainly have the fun of Linux with the wide range of software like you would find under windows. And, unlike Linux, you can find *tones* of commercial games for the Mac, many of which either run under classic just fine, or have OS X native updates. Some even ship that way now.
Yes, with Mac OS X you have to bow to some corporate entity, but hey if you have to rule in hell rather than serve in heaven, its better to have Apple as your satan than Microsoft.
--Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
Okay, I admit, I love using LaTeX now. It's not easy to learn, but once you do, you find that M$ Word is just nasty to work with... BUT recently, my roommate and I had to both redo our resumes. Mine had originally been in Word and I wanted to redo it in LaTeX. My roommate just needed to put a few changes and stuff on his resume. Doing a complete rewrite, I produced a resume that looks better (IMO) than his, and did it in less time. I remember laughing when he kept cursing word for putting things where he didn't want them etc etc etc... I know, I'm just biased. Wah.
Humorless sig goes here.
Those who remember the early days of DOS will recall Lotus 123.
Now when MS-DOS came out with the IBM PC, IBM did not sell MS-DOS nor did MS sell MS-DOS -- instead all that you saw on TV adds was the APPLICATIONS that came with the PC.
So if we want to get Linux on desktop, into corporations and homes, we need to find a "killer-app" and promote THAT and I belive Linus is working on such a project.
Karma stuck at 50? Add 2-5 inches.. err.. 2-5x Karmas Count to your pen1es.. err.. Karma all naturally and private
.... is that they are talking to Computer Resellers.
Frankly, when I buy a computer, I get the parts and I put it together myself. I don't want Dell, Gateway or Computer Manufacturer of the week on my box.
I've spent the time learning a bit about my computer (well, more than most of course), I've done the research and know what to expect out of it. I also know that I spent a good $1500 at least on it and want to get my money's worth.
I put together the machine, configure it, and it works. It keeps working and never has to be majorly upgraded because I use a linux distribution that I have researched and found to be suitable when it comes to small, automatic upgrades with minimal hassle (debian). I never have to buy a new piece of software to make my machine run smoother, faster, or more reliable.
When I rent a house/apartment, I research the location, size in square feet, and cost per month + utilities. I check if it uses gas or electric heating. I make sure that I have a place to park that's close to the building. I *ensure* that this place fits my needs.
When I buy a car... Well you get the point. If people are unable to research, learn, and evaulate the caveats of working with any piece of software, well, sorry to be brash, but fuck them.
Microsoft is trying to build a psychic computer. One that takes care of all of your needs, wants, and desires as a user.
The simple fact is that this does NOT exist, and will *never* be possible with out user intervention. The user that is not able to learn and make decisions regarding software/hardware choice is going to get left in the land of shoddy and expensive tech support, constant upgrades (to make the machine faster of course, instead of working to configure it to be), and a lot of cash missing from their wallet.
Linux, FreeBSD, and other mature 'free' operating systems are not going anywhere. We (those of us who use these systems) should not be worried. Nothing threatens our 'market' but users who do not opt to use the systems, which isn't really threatening at all, as long as users still exist.
Of course, some people who have researched will choose Microsoft because it suits their needs. That's fine IMHO, but the realization that you're in a cycle of relatively constant upgrades and/or possible support issues (Win95 anyone?) should be at least something to consider when you make that decision.
Basically, the point is that with any large purchase, if you're not going to spend the effort to learn about the product your purchasing, you deserve any hassle you'll get over it.
Word might be ok for tapping out a memo to the board, but if you want a truly professional looking document, LaTeX is hard to beat.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Well, I havent' installed linux in almost a year, so I don't know how easy it's gotten recently. Hopefully it is getting up there.
I've never had any problems with widnows needing reinstallation though. I've been running off the same install for about 3 years now and have yet to notice any performance degradations.
What I wanted to mention was that I've heard of a pretty good tax program for linux, 'kapitol' I believe it was called. Supposed to be as good as quicken without the bloat. From what I've heard you ought to check it out.
-Space for rent
But selling can be done for free because you are trying to sell people on the idea of Linux.
;)
But here is why it does not sell in the corporate desktop environment. I know somebody is going to label this is flamebait but it is the truth-- although Linux works VERY WELL for small desktop installations it is missing one very important thing for the corporate workplace: an enterprise-ready office suite.
The reason why MS Office has been so successful in the corporate world is that it is extremely powerful. Word is not just a word processor but an actual development platform. So is Excel and Outlook, and while Microsoft has not historically done a good job at making this a secure development platform, it has done an outstanding job of making it powerful. Last I checked, KOffice did not support the kinds of macros that MS Office does, and the only office app for Linux that does is Gnumeric (which kicks Excel's butt IMO). The office application is the primary enterprise application for businesses and it is also an important development platform for enterprise applications.
I am not saying that one has to have fully-functional programming languages associated with office applications. That is a way to get all sorts of viruses, etc. but the office applications have to support full automation from outside programs and also powerful internal scripting (though preferably sandboxed).
Do am I a Windows fan? Not at all. In fact, I have seen rapid application development on Linux go from a pipe dream to a reasonable reality in a year and a half, and I think that the office suites will do the same.
Wold domination takes time
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Realistically, anyone can make a document faster using DR-DOS and Professional Write than using MSOffice and MSwindows on the same hardware. That's simply the cold hard truth, go do the experiment and see for yourself. The DOS box would be more stable, faster, and cheaper too!
But people are marketed into believing that they need additional features, and buy into bloat. I've always suspected it'd be faster and more efficient, in the long run, for people to learn how to spell than to learn how to use spell checkers.
--Charlie
But if you need to produce a document, spreadsheet or presentation, you're still likely to be able to do it faster and better by sticking with the Microsoft devil you know
... mmm sweet networking.
First, this is a myth. Faster? How? Programs will run at the same rates[just about]. Oh, I guess he means because Microsoft Windows software is ALWAYS better than anything else?
Let me say that the fastest spreadsheet software I've used was Lotus 1-2-3 with it's menu-worksheet-insert-row style usage. That is the type of app you use when you do data entry for a living. The sucess of 1-2-3 wasn't because of M$, the demise of it's sucess may be though. Sorry guys, some software will rock on WindowsXP - but it's usually the same. And if it's better on XP or 9x or 2000 or NT or CE it is because the developer of THAT software took the time to do it right. You can't blame bad apps [or games!] on Linus or Bill Gates. [safe bet#4945: You can blame bill gates for good apps disappering from the scene]
If the author is speaking of MS Excel, he must remember that Office is middleware! It's not Windows.
As far as selling free software, it's guys like this that make it hard to sell free software. Not just the product, but the idea. Obviously this fella never used apt-get [easier than ls!] or any other type of linux software.
The software generally isn't that hard to use! Middleware products like Koffice or AbiSuite or StarOffice or etc are just as easy/fast as MS Office. They may not import files from one another nicely, but why are you using M$Office anyways?
Linux not an OS? Fine... it's not a game though. I'll just say it's the best network app ever. I've got it running on the machine that holds my keyboard up [right now] with no mouse,kb, or monitor. I can log in, stream mp3s, chat, IM, whatever... it's so nice networking
Get your Unix fortune now!
For example, a Yes/No dialog appeared on the screen so I naturally hit "Y" on the keyboard instead of clicking the button. It didn't work. I also found myself trying to hit ALT-F4 to close the current window...it didn't work either.
And this is why I do all my lightweight (non-server, non-net analysis) stuff under Windoze or Mac.
Inconsistency bugs the hell outta me, and X is inconsistent by design.
Only on X do you have hundreds of toolkits, all with different look, feel, and keyboard shortcuts.
(Strangely enough, X devotees see this as a benefit. I'll never grasp that concept.)
Gnome and KDE are pointless, because they don't fix the inherent lack of UI standards,
instead they just add one more possible UI variant, and just end up creating even more inconsistency.
Near as I can tell, the only really nice feature X has is the network capability, everything else X does is just a poor copy of windows or mac.
So, until something better comes along (Berlin?), I'll continue using win/mac on my desktop.
It does what I need it to do (I even have the excellent CLI UNIX tools, thanks to CygWin), and doesn't irritate me like X does - in fact, the only drawback is I can't be all elitist about using the same thing everyone else does.
C-X C-S
Linux is great. Love it. Use it all the time... as a server.
Since OSX has dropped into my life I haven't turned the monitor on on my Linux (RH 7.2) box since about... April.
OSX wins. And best part if I _need_ a wickedly bloated "office" application I can get one. And the one I can get is the one everyone tries to be.
OSX is all the good things about *nix and all the cool things about Apple. And it is "tweaky" enough to feel like I'm still in control (see also installing Perl.)
This
"But unless you buy a new machine from a Linux specialist like GND Systems or Penguin Computing, you'll be hard pressed to find a company that offers Linux as a pre-installed alternative to Windows on its new systems."
IBM, you may have heard of them.
However, if I want to knock off a quick letter, I think I'd want to use Windows - the thing is I don't: rephrase that last sentence as it as "You can lose yourself in Windows for hours, fiddling with fonts here, adding clip art there, it's great fun if you like that sort of thing. But if you need to do ad-hoc manipulation of large text files, you're still likely to be able to do it faster and better with cut, sort, uniq, sed and awk; and Linux is as good a place to use those tools as any."
What people need to understand is that different people use their desktop for different things. I could never be productive with the tools Windows gives you (Cygwin might help). Only yesterday sort, sed and uniq let me do in a couple of seconds what could have taken me at least an hour in Excel (and I'd have had to pay for Excel). My needs are *not* the same as those of (say) a journalist; but my needs are clearly not unique.
No, I'm telling you that it's easier to learn and remember that to change anything you right click on it and choose Properties than it is to discover, learn and remember that to change one thing is CTRL-ALT-BACKSLASH whereas to change another thing is ESC ESC ] and to change another ...
It's even worse if one has to go looking for documentation first. Just:
"if you want to change something you right click on it and choose Properties"
you learn once, and then you can work everything.
How, exactly, is it faster than
a) open Word
b) type document, using straightforward GUI tools
c) hit print
What do you mean by 'waste time on typesetting details'?
I'm not saying LyX/LaTeX are not just fine.. but saying that it's better than Word for most things is rediculous.
Has it occured to you that there are fewer problems? The software I have mostly does what I want it to, it's less confusing, easier to maintain and easier to learn.
My wife is leaning how to use Red Hat. It took her a while to unprogram years of M$ use, and that was the most difficult part. Other things like "man" for manpage, "mail" or "pine" for mail, "ls" for list, ssh user@computer -X, GNOME desktop manipulation and KDE stuff seemed to take much less effort than all the undocumented "left-click, sixth tab to the right, expert button, set refresh rate" M$ nonsense. She likes being able to use programs off different computers. She likes not getting Outlook attacks. She understands the rudiments of the file structure and has come to appreciate user accounts. All of this training took less than six months, but she was able to do most of what she wanted almost immediatly.
Can you say that about Windows? It took me much longer to get things done under M$, and the "learning" has never stoped due to needless "upgrading".
It's easier to offload Windows work to others because there are more people capable of doing basic tasks on Windows than can do it in Linux.
Windows offers better profit margins...It's easier for me to mark up $1000 software by 10% than it is for me to charge a $100 "price" for free software
If you are interested in helping your client do something, you might think differently. Why not set up a "class" of your own with free software as the coursware. $25/hr adds up quickly for you, but might be nicer on your client than the $1,100 snatch and run.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
That in contrast to M$ Word, where it is immediately apparent to anyone with a bit of knowledge in typography that it sucks, just look for poor or mostly missing ligatures, improper spaces and so on.
Sure, an M$ Word document looks awfully professional to somebody not knowledgeable in the profession, but equally bad to a real professional.
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
Our firm sells "solutions" to small businesses and smaller government agencies and rural school districts. We are agressively pushing Linux in roles of file servers, routers, web servers and mail servers and, where we can, as desktop workstations.
The servers work well... in fact they work so well we are wondering whether our push in that direction has been a good idea from an economic standpoint. Clients who called us weekly with MS servers now call us maybe 4 times a year; usually for problems unassociated with the servers but the workstations. I actually called on a client to ask them if they still liked us since we hadn't heard from them for months. "There wasn't anything wrong", was the response.
Workstations are more problematic. We find, over and over, that clients are using some critical application that only runs on MS. This is seldom MS Office, but more often specialized software aimed at, for instance, attorneys, mortgage companies, real estate assessors, agricultural businesses, etc. We can almost always put common files on a Linux box, but it's much more difficult to run these critical applications on Linux desktops.
We are now looking at Citrix for a solution to this problem but it doesn't come cheap and can, in fact, negate much of the advantages of using Linux on the desktop in the first place.
So, from our point of view, it's not MS Office or any lack of support (our clients rely on us for support for all their platforms anyway) but it's the individual job-specific applications that present the biggest hurdle to putting Linux on the business desk.
No one ever had to evacuate a city because the solar panels broke!
ACME bolt makers have no consideration for the average user! They worry about holding things together instead of making it easier to do things with a penny.
ACME needs to be constrained to these standarsd. Boycot hex heads, torx, phillips, and anything else that can not be opperated with a peenny. I just don't see whay anyone would use them. Everything should be a user friendly as a Simple Dolt.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
I've had Word documents that were hundreds of pages. I've worked in Word for years. I have _never_ lost a document - although several times I've had to go back to the convenient backup file because of a power outage. There's my anecdote, and it bears just as much weight as yours.
Are these bugs repeatable, demonstrable behavior? I'll bet they aren't. Do you have statistics, or are you just going to point me to more anecdotes?
I'm sorry that you had problems with Word - but actual testing, benchmarking, and the experiences of millions of users fail to suggest that this is common Word behavior.
Let's not stir that bag of worms...
I know what the killer app for Linux as a server is (Apache, with high reliability and scalability at low cost) but what's the killer app for Linux on the desktop? GIMP and StarOffice, clones of leading products, don't qualify. What desktop application can I run best on Linux? Someone needs to come up with an answer here that everyone agrees to.
If it weren't for iTunes/iPod, I might say MP3. (Or Ogg, for the cantankerous.) But Mac supports that with no DRM bullshit. What else?
sulli
RTFJ.
Try Lyx. It is awesome. I wish that I had known about it when I prepared my thesis. It would have saved me a world of trouble (mostly from beating word into conforming to my thesis standards).
The middle mind speaks!
"it is hard to sell OSS to PHBs that are used to paying serious cash for something as simple as email."
Funny, isn't it? I've always wondered, though, if the PHB would still be so willing to spend that cash if it were coming out of his salary, instead of his company's accounts.
A reminder: /. readers. The free software purists out don't use free software because it's more user friendly or technically superior, they use it because it is free (as in liberty).
It's apparent that the original goals of the free software movement are lost on the vast majority of
Free software is first and foremost a political movement. It's a backlash against proprietary software and the restrictions it places on users. By arguing whether or not the Linux is technically superior to Windows, you are arguing a point that free software was not originally designed to address. A "true" free software advocate would shrug their shoulders at this article and wouldn't care if was is right.
I'm a neutral party to the "free" vs. "open" software debate but I just thought I'd bring this point to light because it is highly relevant.
<a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>
GUI applications don't differ all that much, and their learning curve is far less than you infer. StarOffice handles much like MS office, even uses similar formulas in Excel, and it even loads *.DOC files. If set up correctly, there really isn't much re-learning for end-users on a linux desktop as opposed to a windows desktop.
Go Lakers!
Here's a scenario: You are a system integrator. You sell support contracts and are responsible to make sure that your clients' networks are running reliably, day-in and day-out. If something goes seriously wrong, you are there, and much of your labor is delivered at 100% loss.
You want to set something up that just WORKS, day in and day out - 'cause then you get the support checks and no hassles, and pure profit.
You don't sell computers, you don't sell networking, you don't sell software. You sell the whole banana, essentially an out-sourced tech department.
In that environment, are you going to tell me that Windows is your best bet?
Every morning, I get up, and read a few emails that give me a summary of the health and status of my clients' (Linux based) networks.
They work for long periods of time with NO ATTENTION AT ALL from me other than reading these summary emails. Backups are done automatically, off-site. (thank scp!) Their web sites and applications work smoothly (thanks Apache!), they get their email (thanks sendmail!) and they can access their files and applications from any of their Windows-based clients, (thanks samba!) and have clean, secure, reliable access to the Internet. (thanks ipchains!)
By moving all the applications to the server, I don't care if the customer chooses Windows, Mac, Linux, BeOS, whatever clients, nor is it a big thing if it crashes. (Pull out the restore CD, put it in the drive, re-boot the computer..)
The important thing is: They all know that their business runs on Linux, depends on Linux, and they know that they are free to confidently run their business because of me and my good friend, Linux.
And they are happy to cut me that check every month because of it.
Would I want it any other way?
NO WAY!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Command-line autocompletion under 2k:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Command Processor\CompletionChar = 9
This sig is xenon coated, and will glow red when in the presence of aliens
True enough! Neither is a CD with a distribution on it. Neither is a broadband connection to download a distro without giving the developers a little something for their trouble.
It's all Hood
"Document, spreadsheet or presentation..." isn't about what OS you're running, it's about what office suite you're running. This, of course, is the classic example of Microsoft trying to cross-leverage their Windows and Office monopolies (the latter which was developed by leveraging the former.)
This is ground zero of the M$ empire strength, but there are a lot more productive computer uses than producing office documents. Unfortunately it's what managers (and journalists) understand.
This is a perfect example of how the mindsets between the users of the platforms differ.
Technology isn't just technical; it's cultural. Ask any real perl monger.
Now let's ask ourselves which set of technologies better matches the societies in which they typically resides?
What can you do to change that? By porting open source tools to Windows. Bring them around to your way of thinking in a more subtle way, and you won't have to convince them anymore. They'll be in the choir beside you.
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
Only gamers and the occasional hobbyist coder or graphics person or whatever really wants a fast computer in their house. For most people, Word, Excel, IE and Outhouse Exposed run just fine on a slow computer, despite all the bloat in them.
You might have a point with security, though. I do always feel like I'm in a glass outhouse when I use M$ Windows. If everyone felt that way the switch could probably be motivated pretty easily.
Even Slashdot wants to hide some things
This is true, but writing said document with a computer offers substantial benefits over writing it on a piece of paper. You get a permanent copy, you can print it multiple times, you can change it if you don't like it as many times as you want, etc. I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here.
The difference in this situation is that Linux does not offer the end user substantially more in the way of functionality, and in many times, offers less to the average user, those who don't like the command line interface.
I read someone here who wrote "Linux is only free if you don't value your time." Linux's benefit is that there is no cost. You can download it for free, and get a stable, reliable system. However, its very difficult to get it to do what you want, especially if you haven't done it before.
Microsoft costs money, and now with XP, is fairly stable. For the most part, when you want to do something, you can find it easily and straight forward.
What reasons would a secretary who uses her computer for email and internet at home have for using linux instead of Windows? Personal growth isn't going to cut it for the average user who doesn't like his / her computer. For these users, paying for the MS license is worth it. With the extra time, they can go outside and go for a walk.
Captain_Frisk
They do...Redmond Linux.
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
The person using Linux produces the same document as the Windows person but had to have more training and specialized knowledge
How do you figure? Maybe if you mean "knowledge that the person doesn't already possess" when you say "more specialized knowledge". Both systems require the "special pen, eraser, etc". Let me turn your argument around on you. With linux the "special pen, eraser, etc" come in the box, but with Windows you have to go out and buy it on your own in a seperate box for more money. After that, with Windows, when the "special pen" runs out (New version of office comes out and you can't read other peoples documents anymore) you have to go get another one.
You say corporate America doesn;t get it only because you DO! The only area that Corporate America will get it is when it affect their pocketbook. As soon as they can't spend the cash for the new version they will consider alternatives.
However I would suggest that YOU do not get it. Being a Windows user since 3.1 days, I can say when I attempted to close my life from the MS Juggernaught, I was stuck for days. I was reading and re-reading things to get them to work.
IBM endorsement means nothing. IBM is a technical company. Would one of these users replace Access with Oracle? You are comparing Apples to pears. Alot alike but not the same thing.
People here get all GEEKED up over the fact that someone has Linux running on a wristwatch and how it shows just how powerful it is. Yet when I tried to use Red Hat for the first time the ability to send/receive e-mail, type out a memo, or a number of other things was totally changed under the new found OS.
Don't assume because YOU HAVE IT, that they should all get it the same way you do.
Razzious Domini
I could be a GREAT KARMA WHORE if I could just shed the few morals I have left.
Thank you! Yet another person that gets it right. What the developers have done with Linux so far isn't a bad thing though -- they have a strong OS. Look at OpenBSD...it's strong and stable and very secure, but not quite as friendly. Friendly comes with time...
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
Damn! I used all of my mod points yesterday, and this statement deserves to be modded up. I have used some very intuitive CLI interfaces, and I've battled my way through far too many very stylish but utterly befuddling GUI interfaces. Widgets are nice if they add to the usability of the interface, but they're certainly not a requirement. I had a wonderful dream once where make config for a kernel would display something like "ipchains? (Y,N,M,H)" and choosing "H" would display the kernel help that can be had on a number of different web sites.
So, I'm very much with the original poster that ease of use does not rely on a pretty face, and that a pretty face does not guarantee ease of use.
Virg
They aren't perfect, but they can cruft around dependance on Microsoft products. Your point is still a good one.
In Linux, new wiz-bang devices are generally not supported in the main distributions because it takes time and public review of code to get it there. What is a company to do. Why in hell should supplying device drivers be the responsibility of the OS? Ten years ago, any add-on device you bought would come with it's own driver disk from the manufacturer -- and usually there'd be a manufacturer's BBS or FTP site where you could check for newer versions. And usually those were pretty good drivers, because they were written by someone that really understood that piece of hardware.
As far as I can tell, this notion that the drivers should come with the OS came about merely because Windows (through 98 & NT 4.0) didn't actually fill up the CD-ROM, so MS tossed in whatever other free stuff it could find. Never mind that some of those drivers are bound to be obsolete before the CD gets stamped.
That manufacturers don't feel any pressure to write Linux versions of their drivers _is_ a serious problem...
I work at a bank. We have mean excel workbooks, with 20+ worksheets, dozens of vba scripts, links to other workbooks, and OpenOffice6 just *refuses* to open them (illegal operation errors).
They work in Excel 97, Excel 2000 and Excel XP. They don't work in StarOffice6 (granted, Beta). There's no compatibility.
And I guarantee you something, everyone in accounting will have my head on a shiny platter if I cause last year's management reports to be in an incompatible format...
So, I'm not even going to mention it.
On the other hand, I'm working on a neato little program to xml-rpc excel spreadsheet data to databases... more on that later.
"Piter, too, is dead."
If graphics hous wants to use GIMP they have to retrain their employees. I'm not a graphics person, but I tried using gimp about a year ago to do some stuff. It wasn't very easy to learn to use. I ended up downloading Photoshop and figured out with a little effort how to do what I wanted with it. I then discoverd that you couldn't save or print your work in the free version, and had to download a third program which I got to work.
Profesional graphics people will ikely learn this stuff faster than me, but their time is money. It doesn't take much wasted time learning Gimp before Photoshop becomes a better bargain for them. If GIMP wants to take market share from Photoshop, they need to make their product easy for Photoshop users to learn and use. Otherwise, they're just making a product for hobbiests who have the time to learn it.
Perhaps Windows users shouldn't be regarded as users at all, but more as as Disneyesque automatons fiddling with powerpoint clipart. You can lose yourself in Windows for hours, patching here, crashing there. It's great fun if you like that sort of thing. But if you need to serve a million web pages or operate an email infrastructure you're still likely to be able to do it faster and better by sticking with the UNIX devil you know.
As to your nick, shouldn't it be spelled, "bonzoesque"? As to your point, I have seen both wonderful and awful installations for both Linux and Windows. We all must be careful not to consider only personal experience when deciding if a particular OS is easy or difficult to install and configure. There are many who say that Joe Sixpack can't handle configuring Linux, and that's true, but that same Joe would have a great deal of difficulty configuring the nuts and bolts of Windows. The difference lies only in that Microsoft has a default setup that Joe can use right out of the box. Linux needs that same setup, and once it happens (and it will; Red Hat has been working on it for a while and someday they'll have to get it right) then that difference will disappear. Also, as more computer OEMs start offering Linux preinstalled, the knowledge necessary to use Linux will drop precipitously, since it'll no longer be necessary for Joe to install his own OS.
Ease of install is important, but there's much that can be done to level that particular playing field.
Virg
If all they're doing is data entry, then they don't even need to learn a new OS! You stick a link to a data entry application on their desktop and let them get back to work! It's not that tough!
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
That's because she's dragging you to a store for people who want to look like (maybe "feel like" would be more appropriate) they are concerned about the environment, health concious, etc. (Or, if you prefer: "tree-hugging-commie-liberal-pussies")
Look in the phone book under "Food Co-Op's" and you'll find a "natural foods" store where the food is real, where the slick suited marketers fear to venture, where the prices are half, and where the closeest thing to an SUV in the parking lot is the '79 International Harvester Scout which looks like it's been to Peru and back primarily because it has.
What was that? You want I should get back on topic? Well, alright...
So much of the "business world" which Linux is accused of being unable to conquor is focused on selling. But, like in the Co-Op story above, there is much of this world where the act of "selling" is an unwanted intrusion. I'd list things like email (as opposed to SPAM), Christmas (as opposed to Christmas Shopping) as among that set. Linux was released to the free software movement because, acording it Linus, he didn't care about "selling" anyone on Linux.
To anyone trying in the business of selling, the whole concept of trying to sell free software is as much an enigma as trying to conceptualize the "weight" of the color blue.
So much of the world makes it's choice of what to buy based on what it is sold. I'm guilty. Business know this, and focus a great deal of effort on convincing people to buy what they otherwise wouldn't. That's what marketers do.
The fact that Linux isn't marketed, (at least not very well) is one of the reasons I use it. When I'm using my computer, I want to select the tool based on what's going to work best for me, not on what's going to be most profitable for some software development company. In some cases, I'd go so far as to say that the act of marketing a product should be read as an admission that the product is inferior. In any case, it's a sign of a company spending less money on development than they could have (or charging more for the product than they have to) to cover the marketing costs.
<obligatory anti-M$ rant>
It's also why I get concerned about the Microsoft Monopoly. Here we have a case where not only is the company marketing their wares to me, (through all the traditional, and in some cases illegal, marketing techniques) they're using their operating system to market their wares to me (through network effects, proprietary file formats, and bundling).
</obligatory anti-M$ rant>
To anyone who is using Linux because it's "cool", your presence is welcome; feel free to stick around for as long as you remain interested. And when you choose to move on to some other "cool" thing, you'll be missed, but your departure won't be unexpected. There are others of us who use Linux because we can, or maybe because we can't help ourselves. We will still be here using and developing Linux, in spite of what the glossy magazines say. And it's this core which Microsoft (rightly, IMHO) brands as a cancer which will (long term eventually) destroy the software (sales) industry.
Both Steve Balmer and Richard Stallman understand this; they see eye-to-eye from different sides of the window.
The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.
Something that Linux developers, like most developers, are very bad at is understanding a customer base.
Linux is very good in the server and network world because most of the developers of Linux and Linux software are themselves "customers" of that market segment. By simply developing a system to do what they want and need, they have succeeded in meeting the demands of that market.
Linux is very poor in the desktop environment because the vast majority of linux developers have no clue what a "typical user" wants or needs. They cover up this ignorance by belittling the "typical user" as being too "stupid" to really understand that Linux is so much better for them than Windows.
Until Linux developers start taking significant steps to understanding what the desktop users needs really are, Linux will be little more than an "also ran" in that category.
Moreover, until Linux meets the desktop users needs better than MS does, MS will continue to rule the roost in the business world. Cost of doing business is more than simply the cost of supporting the install base of systems. Sure, it costs more to support MS - but guess what? I, as a manager, can use anyone of a thousand local companies to outsource my desktop support to. I can leverage computer sales for breaks on training costs. And I don't have to worry about a new administrative support person not being familiar with the software environment.
I can go to any of a thousand local temp agencies to find people proficient in MS Office. Where can I find the temp staff proficient in KDE Office?
I can't.
But of course, I'm just a typical user, so I'm really just too stupid to understand how much better Linux is than Windows.
I work at a bank. We have mean excel workbooks, with 20+ worksheets, dozens of vba scripts, links to other workbooks
So, what is the name of that bank? I don't want to ever trust my money to people who are going to use Excel with vba scripts to handle them.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Whoops! Did I just call your girlfriend a "tree-hugging-commie-liberal-pussy"? ;-) Sorry about that.
:> (and yes, i realize i said girlfriend earlier, and my wife will probably ask me tonight which one she is.)
as long as you don't call my wife that, it's ok
actually, now that i think about it, last time i was there, the majority of people who looked like they actually cared what they were eating and weren't in it just to be fashionable looked like they walked there i think or took the bus...that would explain the majority of cars being gas-guzzlers..
Free Webmail
The money uses SDI. the fin analysis uses excel.
And please, i'm not trolling. this is real-world application.
"Piter, too, is dead."
Like hell it did, the New York Dolls among others were around before any punks in Britain, you can have the mods but punk started here.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
I don't know why I need to reply to an AC (when will you people get logins?), but:
;)
That is because they usually do it better over there.
Uh, yeah. That's why most of the top-selling albums worldwide are by American artists? Sure, the Beatles, but one group does not superiority make (and I think they're overrated anyway).
I wouldn't boast too loudly about House and Hip-Hop.
Why not? Have you ever heard hip hop? Aside from radio crap, it has basically replaced punk as America's youth protest music. House is made for the dance floor, filling the void (yes, there was a void) left by disco. I know that was a joke, but seriously, get with the program. What would you prefer people dance to in clubs? Polka? That would be like me unilaterally dissing country (also American music, by the way). Just because P. Diddy sucks doesn't mean hip hop sucks, and just because you don't dance doesn't mean house sucks.
If you want to be picky then I'm pretty sure all music (except for Native American tribal forms) came from Europe or Africa to this country seeing as we started as immigrants
Although much of our music is influenced by international and historical sounds, it was made here in the states, by people living here in the states. That would be like saying the Specials were Jamaican, or that Jay-Z makes African tribal music. Just not true.
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
Comparing Windows to Linux with an automatic and standard(stick-shift) is not the right approach.
First off the automatic is considered an OPTION UPGRADE. You are saying the manual transmission would be the more feature oriented.
How many people today would truly buy a standard had they never seen or driven one before? Few would because what they have works for them. What you want them to use will take time to learn.
What they have now allows them to eat, drink, and talk on a cellphone with little trouble juggling the feet and hand of a clutch and stick.
They can hold their significant other's hand while driving etc.
Side not I drive a standard and will replace it soon with an automatic. Sometimes control of your gear shifting is not as important as convenience and luxury.
Razzious Domini
I could be a GREAT KARMA WHORE if I could just shed the few morals I have left.
I had a similar experience except it didn't like my network card. I spent hours trying to read and resolve.
Also anything I wanted to download and use I had to compile first. That meant finding the file libraries, many of which were NOT backward compatable. This was all a hassle and eventually I gave up.
Razzious Domini
I could be a GREAT KARMA WHORE if I could just shed the few morals I have left.
Windowshading is one of the features I miss a lot on Mac OS X; I hope Apple brings it back soon! In the mean time I have to drag windows to the side to get them out of the way, since minimizing is such a pain in the ass.
The behavior should, of course, be configurable on any platform. If you want double-clicking the title bar to maximize, you should have that option. If I want it to windowshade, I should have that option. If Steve Jobs wants it to minimize, he should have that option.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
In the days of Windows 3.1, Microsoft released a series of packs of small games, called Windows Entertainment Packs. These typically had seven or eight games about the size of solitaire, and some screen saver modules. Four of these WEP packs were released.
By the time that OS/2 v 3.0 came out, some wag had dubbed it "WEP 5", basically on the assumption that you could spend hours configuring it.
The funny thing was, I never had any problems installing or configuring OS/2 v 3, but the wep packs and Windows itself at times caused endless grief.
On another note, the latest thing about Wireless Encryption Protocol brought back memories of the older WEP. Over use of TLAs.
OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
Try WindowShade X
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
So you are saying that to get to work, and there's a problem with your car, you shouldn't call a mechanic. You should try to fix it yourself? Why does a newspaper reporter need to know how to install a kernel? Why does he need to learn how to configure the network?
I'm not saying that Windows is inherently better in all applications and I'm not saying that linux is inherently better in all applications. But Linux as it stands cannot be the panacea of all computer applications. Linux as it is is best suited for for server use.
_______________________________
"I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
While I have not had the pleasure of selling my Linux skills as such, I've worked in pleanty of Windows shops. I do networking, mostly wide area. Total reliability is what is asked of me, and it's what I expect out of a mission critical system.
.DOC and Outlook. Fine, they pay someone else for that.
When someone asks, I tell them to run anything that they want reliability from on Linux, because Linux systems are simply dead solid reliable.
For single user machines, I don't care what they want to run. I'll suggest Linux if they ask, but so far they want
My systems run ipchains, FreeSwan. Boa, not Apachie, for the same reason I don't use Sendmail: too much power. I want something direct and simple, easy to lock down and dead solid reliable.
The "Desktop Battle" is won or lost on choice and familiarity. My first Linux box in 1996 had XF86 and OpenLook window manager. From day 1 I had a "Desktop". It just wasn't pretty, or familiar to anyone else.
The greatest gift anyone could give Microsoft would be to "punish Bill" by putting yet more Microsoft systems into schools. Oh No! Don't Throw Me Into That There Briar Patch!
How many of you Linux fanatics have given away computers this year to friends with kids, with Linux+KDE already installed? How many of you have offered to donate time to your local highschools to teach CS classes, Linux based (of course)?
Just some thoughts of how to win a "familiarity" war...
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Yes, Apple's OSX may very well be all you say it is. And, having worked at Apple and knowing something about Apple developers, I fully expect you're right.
I look forward to the free ports and clones of OSX apps on Linux.
Hey, anyone whos real focus is graphics has always used Mac's. MS has been playing catchup in that market since the first Mac shipped. No one can argue with that.
"Linux", Windows, MacOS: Three converging technologies. Very interesting watching, but one has to have ones eyes open to notice.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Give someone a box with Netscape on it and they won't care what OS it has if they want to browse the web. Give someone a box with StarOffice or Wordperfect on it and they can write their docs.
Sweed, If I may make a suggestion.
You have the clout of being a "professional" with a track record. Clients have learned to trust you, and support you. This is a fantastic position to be in!
When you find such a MSWin-Only application, have you considered contacting the authors about porting it to a more reliable system than MSWin?
Why would a software company saddle themselves into having to support the "undocumented MSWin API of the week" if they believe they have a profitable choice in the matter?
We're in a closed loop. Specialized software is only offered on MSWin because the developers believe their clients want MSWin. Specialist clients are stuck using MSWin because it's the platform that the software they want to use is written for.
Killer Ap's drive OS adoption. People chose Mac's because they did graphics better. People chose MSWin because.... because.... oh heck, I'm sure there was something more than just the obvious upgrade path from DOS (right?).
The people who are now choosing Linux are doing exactly the same thing. "We" happen to be technically astute, or rebellious, or whatever, and accept the limitations of our choice as we revel in its accomplishments.
In closing, familiarity is what drives the mass market. No one is familiar at first. The first time I used a Mac, I couldn't make it work well regardless if its massively advertized "ease of use". It was totally un-intuitive just because I'd never used one before. Same with Solaris, Dos, TRS-80, Win3-2000, IBM MVS VM, HP 15C, etc, etc, etc, etc.... No one finds their two-wheeled bicycle is "intuitive" the very first time, either.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
To anyone trying in the business of selling, the whole concept of trying to sell free software is as much an enigma as trying to conceptualize the "weight" of the color blue.
The color blue has a wavelength of approximately 460nm. This gives us a value of 2pi/460nm, or 1.366e7 inverse meters, in k-space. The momentum of the electromagnetic waves is Planck's constant
(6.626e-34Js) over 2pi multiplied by k, which turns out to be 1.422e-26mkg/s. The waves are travelling around the speed of light (3e8m/s), so the mass is the momentum divided by the velocity, or 4.739e-35kg.
Weight is actually mass times gravity. So, the weight would be 9.8m/seconds^2 times 4.739e-35kg, or 4.644e-34newtons.
An unjust law is no law at all. - St. Augustine
\usepackage{times}
\usepackage{mathptm}
is all you need to fix that problem.
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
What Gnumeric? the whole idea of using a spreadsheet application for anything banking-related, other than for displaying tables prepared by other programs, is a problem. Spreadsheets are unreliable and not protected against inconsistency in their scripts, and a choice of the most common spreadsheet only confirms that people who use them have no clue.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Userbase has nothing to do with it -- StarOffice is not a financial application and must not be used for this purpose, along with MS Office and its likes. Custom-written banking software, with likely userbase of one, however, is.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
And, no, Gnumeric is nowhere near up to it. On my machine, Gnumeric takes longer to load a 3-sheet workbook than XL does to load a 50-sheet workbook where each sheet is at least twice as large. It also feels slow; XL tends to feel punchy and responsive.
Don't run it on 486, with pixmap theme, IDE hard drive with UDMA disabled, and Trident 8900 VGA. Because this is the only way to get the results you have described.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.