Slashdot Mirror
Vista Launch Good for Desktop Linux?
Sensible Clod writes "XYZ Computing has an article hypothesizing that the arrival of Windows Vista may be a big opportunity for Linux to make headway on the desktop. Massive feature cutbacks for Vista as well as huge hardware requirements are cited as major factors. From the article: 'As the time gets closer and closer to the public debut of Vista the operating system seems to be constantly losing the luster which was associated with Longhorn...Whether it's the lack of a new file system or the Monad scripting shell, the absence of innovation in this operating system is giving it a black eye'. The article then shows the need for action to be taken to get Linux onto the computers in stores (display models!), and pinpoints a few important improvements Linux distros in general need to make. Very interesting read, and timely."
hasta la vista
Vista is not going to decrease the amount of people purchasing new computers with whatever current version of windows is pre-loaded. This is the majority of windows purchases. As for those who are going to be holding onto their current computers and using them most of them will probably not upgrade to the newest (most expensive) operating system available and will probably stick with windows xp or 2000 until they get a new computer that does come with vista.
The same people who bought windows XP at full retail will probably go ahead and buy Vista at full retail while most of us that use linux now will just keep using linux whether or not some new version of windows comes along.
I think the whole impact will be negligible.
Out of all the features meant to be in vista some since 1992, almost all of them have been dropped. Microsoft a large gigantic corporation couldn't get them in their system working.
What's funny is that every one of those features is available today in a Linux distro near you. Yet still nobody listens and switches to linux in droves, but many wait for vista
I think sometimes everyone is a sheep
People don't care about Monad or new file systems - they want nice GUIs with RSS integrated - IE with tabs etc... Vista is everything the average user wants.
As for hardware requirements - most people will get vista with their shiny new hardware from dell or whatever. It will meet the requirements and look great with lots of eye-candy.
Linux doesn't just need to be better than Vista - it needs to be MUCH better to get an average user to switch.
This story was posted in 1995, 1998, 2000 and 2003. It is a dupe. Nothing to see here.
XYZ Computing has an article hypothesizing that the arrival of Windows Vista may be a big opportunity for Linux to make headway on the desktop.
.NET hysteria, the C#... Meanwhile, GNU/Linux is already on my desktop and I couldn't really care less what Micro$oft does. I just use it because it is the best tool for my job. Period.
A decade ago it was Windows 95 that was going to be a big opportunity for Linux to make headway on the desktop, then it was Windows 98, 2000, XP, the DRM in Media Player, Internet Explorer, the license of MS SQL Server, the flaws in ASP security model, the nonsense of
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
XP offered very little beyond Windows 2000 with a new skinning engine, especially as far as most people were concerned. So long as Longhorn looks a little prettier and the pressure eventually is pushed to corporations/people to upgrade for compatibility, people will move to it.
Linux will find a way to people's desktops eventually, when it's more ready and the market in general is more ready to support it. Linux won't make inroads because of anything Microsoft does, for better or worse.
-N
I've nothing to say here...
how many people earnestly think it is about usability and security that most people choose their software?
i agree, some of the more sophisticated desktop users might be willing to switch, but much more powerful forces for not switching are: a lot of people don't like serious changes. they know windows (though it might suck), not necessarily the OS, but the brand, so they stick with it.
a lot of companies are either bound by contracts or - more importantly - by internal applications that are broken enough only to work with windows (in that case, to be more specific, mostly word, excel and access).
these are, i think, compelling reasons why a large percentage - mark, percentage, not single individuals - will not want to switch to linux because of what the article states.
If you don't learn from history,
then you are an idiot by definition.
--- Vadim Yasinovsky
Unless you mean to say that the lower new feature count will make it easier to clone those features into the Linux GUIs. Or maybe you mean that people who upgrade to new PCs will then have their older PCs available to load Linux on. I'm not sure how the next release of Windows will help Linux in the least.
People buy Microsoft because that's what they expect when they buy a computer. Some people think they want more, so they buy a Mac. Other people are happy with Linux, and they don't even have to spend a dime to get the OS software.
When Microsoft releases their next version, I don't think it will have the massive uptake that Windows 95 did, or even Windows 2000 did. Even Windows XP had a slower takeup than the real quantum leaps in Windows history (Win95, Win2K). People are just satisfied with what they've got.
How are you going to convince satisfied people to run Linux? It doesn't really offer them anything that they don't already have or need. If it were that important to them, they would be running it already.
So why would Windows Vista help Linux?
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
Well, I recently took a good long look at all three desktop operating systems for a personal shootout, and I must say that out of Windows XP, Ubuntu Linux with KDE or Gnome, and OSX Tiger, OSX was the only one that stood out from the crowd as being anywhere near innovative or 'new'. I didnt see anything in Linux that I havent enjoyed using elsewhere for years, although its security strengths are a positive, Windows had the games plus point, but its much of a muchness desktop wise, but OSX takes integration and ease of use to a new level, especially for developers.
What am I trying to say? Well, before you complain about Vista not being 'innovative', take a look at the alternatives first, they arent much different in many aspects.
What desktop am I posting this from? OSX of course!
I completely agree. Vista, which (as Longhorn in its initial announcement stages) looked actually quite good, has now become what is basically XP SP3. Features that would have made it worthwhile, such as WinFS, have all been stripped from the final product: while Linux continues to accelerate ahead in terms of stability, compatibility and features. The fact that it is becoming easier to use, more recognised and therefore attracts more coders, also is a great plus for Linux and means that it is increasing in value exponentially. As well, Vista's crazy system requirements are in stark contrast to those of many Linux distributions, despite the fact that these distributions have most if not all of Vista's featurs (and many more on top. And plus - the price difference.
Microsoft has enough money to "perfectionize" Windows. Just look at the GUI investments they did. Almost EVERY Linux GUI is copying the Windows GUI and layout. If the Linux community will not show some more innovation I am sure Linux will be slaughtered. People will buy new PCs, it's getting as hyped as the cell phone hype. The online hardwareshops have never been so busy.
Vista will implement DRM deep into the OS and when apps start "taking advantage" of that, you will notice that it's not negligible any more.
My reason for staying away from Vosta, hardware requirements aside, is DRM and DRM only. Because there are a few neat features under the hood I'd really like to have. For instance the vector-graphics GPU-accelerated desktop.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
There's nothing wrong with MS being ambitious in aiming to get new features into Vista, and even if some don't make it - there have been 4 1/2 years since the last release that should improve the usability of the widest deployed desktop OS in the world today.
You can't sledge MS for taking longer than expected to release Vista, then in the next comment complain about the lack of features.
__Funny videos, pics, flash & flesh
There is no absence of innovation or new features. Avalon, the new graphics subsystem, and the developer tools that will allow you to develop for it, have leapfrogged everything I have ever seen. While Linux will still be using the 2D capabilities of a graphics card (sucks!) Microsoft Vista will be using all that tremendous 3D technology already present in our machines to render your desktop. 3rd party apps will be using it too. Yes, at first it feels like it will need ebtter equipment, but when you finally get that equipment and your pathetic X-Window or other Linux windowing system looks ridiculously passé when compared to Windows Vista, you'll realize Microsoft is no longer trying to catch up to OS X, which is already a much more polished OS than any Linux flavor.
Desktop linux will break out next year!
Just like the year before that and the year before that, hang on.. i'm noticing a trend.. next year is always the year of desktop linux..
The majority of people out there still haven't even heard of Linux. The people who just use their computers for email and think that AOL is the internet. Have there ever even been any TV ads for any of the commercial linux distros? What the linux community needs to do is make a real ad campain. I realize it costs money, but with all the people out there that love linux with a furvor, there shouldn't be that much of a problem raising funds.
Technoli
...is KDE 3.x's new "hopping" mouse pointer. Get rid of that, and we're all set.
-
RTFM Asshat!
Am I the only one that thinks that article doesn't make too much sense?
I fail to see how vista, even if it weren't very convincing, will help linux getting on the desktop. All a bad windows release will lead to in the short tearm is not many people buying Vist, but staying with their curren OS, which is some kind of Windows in most cases.
And people who really care about monad not being included are people who would consider running linux anyway, but they only make a small percentage of the market.
Further, I'm convinced that Linux will not make large inroads into the private desktop in the near future, not because Linux isn't good enough, but simply because Windows is much to entrenched in this market.
Corporate and gouvernment desktops are an other story though and we'll see a lot of things happening there in the future, I'm sure.
This comment was posted in 1998, 2000, 2003 and 2005. It is a dupe. Nothing to see here.
"Year of the Linux desktop" or whatever. Isn't that a dupe and troll in itself? It's been repeated over and over again, and yet never happened.
Honestly, I don't think Linux (as it is now anyway) is ready for the desktop. Why? Sure, you got aptitude and lot of neat stuff. Gnome may be bloated as hell, but it looks good, and that's what most consumers want.
You got lots of good stuff, but when your average linux-distro starts to break down, when stuff doesn't work automagicly, when hardware detetction fails and so on... Most users (and by most users I also mean powerusers) will have a really hard time fixing stuff, if they even manage to fix it at all. Not all of us are geeks who grew up with a keyboard.
Plus, I don't really care if linux hits the mainstream or not. I use what works for me, I'll let others use what works for them. To me, open standards are a lot more important than whatever OS people are running to get their work done.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
Quite a few people see the OS as ineluctably linked with the hardware.
I think using a seemingly less polished, cheaper (or free) operating system will take much of the enjoyment out of a new computer purchase - after all, most copies of Windows are bundled with the latest hardware, and the high specifications required for Vista aren't going to bother the majority of users who will overhaul their whole system when confronted by the marketing blitz.
This reply was posted in 2000, 2003 and 2005. It is a dupe. Nothing to see here.
Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
Really. Vista is the deathknell for Linux and Mac desktops. Read it again if it hasn't sunk in as yet.
.NET (yeah !!), Sun, the HTML World Wide Web (replaced with XAML World Wide Web), Firefox, etc. This is their nuclear bomb !
Which OS would provide a combination of an XML language for UI, mapped tightly to an extensive and powerful API like WinFX ? Windows Vista (with XAML, Avalon, Indigo). And almost all these are already being back ported to Windows XP. So, hundreds of millions of users will have a 'Vista lite' type of a thing. That is a pretty big user base to develop for. Put simply, Vista applications would look stunning, be more powerful (strong support for web services on the desktop) and at the same time will be relatively easier to build.
Add to the above - 999 out of every 1000 new desktop computers will ship with Vista pre-installed when it is released. The deals have been in place for a long time. This is even before Microsoft spends $1 on Vista marketing.
Don't fool yourself - developers will abandon Linux and Mac (unless these platforms provide a similar development approach). Developers abandoning means users would abandon. People don't buy a computer because of the OS, they buy it because of what they can DO with it (applications)
As a developer, I can feel where the market is headed and that this is Microsoft's attempt to kill off Linux, Mac, PDF, Flash, Java,
So, there is only one response for this: build a cross-platform, open, 'thing' (a XUL-Java combination maybe).
People wake up !!!
won't the lack of features cut back on the hardware requirements? i don't follow windows stuff, but that is the impression i got from my housemate. i know they cut a lot of things in general, but i thought some of the things missing would lessen the number of current machines that would not handle the new OS.
if the current machine can run XP, then i bet a lot of people run it as long as they can. i would like to see them switch over to Linux, but let's be realistic. a lot of people never really upgrade the OS on their machine. those are also the people that are generally behind on security patches.... but who knows how long Microsoft will kept patching XP after Vista ships.
Hmm...so I scroll down, and what do I see?
2 7/0630252&tid=191&tid=14
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/
Now, if they could just link and embed the anti-aging gene object into windows vulnerabilities...
Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
This reply was posted in 2003 and 2005. It is a dupe. Nothing to see here.
somehow I cannot beleive for somebody (xyzcomputing) who do screenshots with a digital camera.
This reply has never been posted before. Check that out!
Microsoft isn't trying to lock out competing technologies (free software) or lock us out of the hardware for the benefit of intellectual property "rightsholders." Oh no, those are accidents. They're just trying to protect us from viruses. You know, like for our own good and stuff.
Want to see Microsoft's vision of the PC? Take a look at the Xbox. Of course it will be possible to run Linux on newer TPM enabled systems, but then a lot of digital content won't work. And ordinary people won't have the energy or know-how to get unapproved software running.
It doesn't matter much that geeky features like WinFS or Monad are getting dumped. They were never the main point anyway.
Very interesting read, and timely
Actually, no.
The idea is more wishful thinking and what the author would LIKE to see happen.
The reality is Open Source is going to be torpedoed with software patents. Eventually, there will be a 'common' process that can only be done with the Microsoft tool suite. Without changes in the law, they only way you'll be able to participate in that process is to licence Microsoft.
The only way the 'vision' the author will come to pass is if software patents are not complete and Microsoft raises its prices beyond what companies are willing to pay.
A more likely future for the Microsoft/Open Source balance to change is a recession/depression. Business will still want to use computers/software but won't have excess money to PAY for software. And in a battlefield of $0, Microsoft can't win.
So....how many "Open Source must win" people are wanting a recession/depression?
Could you provide us some examples of the innovations in OSX?
Thanks.
My company didn't use Windows 98 (or ME) at all. They stuck with 95 until the obvious benefits of Windows 2000 (and now XP) were mainstream. I haven't read about one feature in Vista that would compell them to upgrade a thousand or more PCs. They won't do it to give us more eye candy, or to raise the minimum system requirements.
tl:dr
Really. Vista is the deathknell for Linux and Mac desktops. Read it again if it hasn't sunk in as yet.
.NET, Internet Explorer, Sun, the HTML World Wide Web (replaced with XAML World Wide Web), Firefox, etc. This is their grand strategy and a nuclear bomb on the whole software-internet industry !
Which OS would provide a combination of an XML language for UI, mapped tightly to an extensive and powerful API like WinFX ? Windows Vista (with XAML, Avalon, Indigo). And almost all these are already being back ported to Windows XP. So, hundreds of millions of users will have a 'Vista lite' type of a thing. That is a pretty big user base to develop for. Put simply, Vista applications would look stunning, be more powerful (strong support for web services on the desktop) and at the same time will be relatively easier to build.
Add to the above - 998 out of every 1000 new desktop computers will ship with Vista pre-installed when it is released. The deals have been in place for a long time. This is even before Microsoft spends $1 on Vista marketing.
Don't fool yourself - developers will abandon Linux and Mac almost completely or at least new app development would be severely stunted on these platforms. Developers abandoning means users would abandon. People don't buy a computer because of the OS, they buy it because of what they can DO with it (applications) !
As a developer, I can feel where the market is headed and that this is Microsoft's attempt to kill off Linux, Mac, PDF, Flash, Java,
I am very surprised at the lack of alarm about this amongst Microsoft's rivals.
Building a cross-platform, open 'thing' (a XUL-Java combination maybe) seems like a viable response. Just open source individual efforts perhaps won't be enough. It would require corporate backing (IBM, Sun, etc). This is the 'Extinguish' phase of 'Extend, Embrace, Extinguish'.
Remember, it's not only 'survival of the fittest', in the human world it is also 'Survival of the Smartest'.
People wake up !!!
- varun mathur
No dupe dude, Vista comes out in 2006; nobody's said 2006 will be the year of the Linux desktop... yet!
Every year is "linux on the desktop" year. It's interesting to see when the whole idea will eventually fade. 5 years? 10 years ? hell give it 20 years, windows is here to stay.
I'm not going to dispute the problems you had, linux's been a PITA for me sometimes as well, but it does seem you don't understand the philosophy behind GNU. It's not just free labour for big companies, theres more to it like the sharing of code with the entire community.
Despite Linux's increasing share of the server room, can anyone remember the "Year of the Linux server"? People keep looking for the "Year of the Linux Desktop" and to a certain extent they're right: each year, events occur that could help increase desktop share. There's just no decisive flip to Linux.
Linux is already desktop ready for large segments of users - for others it's nowhere close. Growing marketshare takes time and is self-reinforcing - the process is just going to take a while.
Since when thechnical merits have anything to do with market dominance?
As others posters have pointed out, the situation has not changed much, and will not.
Personally, I don't care that much. Maybe Windows is good for the average ignorant (normal non-computer-geek people) because, unlike Linux, it's focused on doing the tasks they way, having to think the least possible.
Maybe someday a big company --- whith enough power to fitht Microsoft, and whose name the public already respect (Google?) --- will make a successful Linux distro with this same focus.
Many tech people are talking about the increase in notebook sales.
;o)
We have to admit, Windows XP is very much superior to Linux and *BSD on notebooks for ease of use of Infrared, PCMCIA stuff, Bluetooth and USB. There's no reason to think that Windows Vista will diminish the usability of this hardware.
I love my FreeBSD and Ubuntu, but XP is on my notebook. Maybe Vista will be too one day, if there is a compelling reason for me to try it... and the hardware can run it.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
Companies and most consumers do not enjoy the multitude of desktop choices the linux provides. It was predicted years ago in the KDE/GNOME world that one would emerge clearly superior to the other and the other would disapear. This hasn't happened.
/research . I would note that the more copies of linux that are out there, the more each one is worth, as it becomes more likely software you want will be ported to the platform
Clearly linux on the desktop for the general population would be better served putting all the effort into one consistant desktop. It would not please all the tweakers who like to configure every little thing. Sure KDE/GNOMR are similar, but not the same.
There are some that would argue that linux isn't for the masses and should require some knowledge
Recompile the kernel to install a driver? Not likely. Most Linux drivers distributed outside the kernel are set up with a Makefile that builds a kernel module for just that driver. All you have to do is "./configure && make && su -c 'make install'", and then possibly insert the module. Unless you're using some incredibly screwy custom-built kernel, you shouldn't even need to reboot, let alone recompile the kernel. (You do, however, need the kernel source installed.)
I call BS. Even under Mandrake Linux, building and using a driver for my wireless card (ndiswrapper) was easy. Incidentally, is there any distro that doesn't automatically create desktop icons for CD-ROMs these days? Apart from Gentoo, though even that probably would if I set it up right...
Admittedly, I don't entirely trust the commercial distros not to try and extract mucho cash (which is part of the reason I use Gentoo), but still.
Your skepticism is misplaced.
What "starter" version of Linux are you talking about? I've been a RedHat and now Fedora user and have only paid for maybe two boxes... I wanted to get the stickers and stuff. I have only made ONE support call (mostly to see what it was like) only to be told they only support one NIC installation on a machine. Disappointing to say the least... it was years ago so maybe support has gotten better since then, I don't know, but I see almost no advantage to buying a support agreement. You're simply better off having a support PERSON on site or available on short notice and that goes for Linux or Windows or any OS.
Mozilla incorporating has nothing to do with making a version to be paid for. This is ALL open-source. The moment someone even thinks they will take it closed-source for profit, a fork will happen and someone else will drive the project as open source. There are many examples of this to cite... do I really need to?
"Good busines woman" or not, you don't know what you're talking about -- you're just unaccustomed to the way things work in the OS world. Salesmen are out to make money and I don't blame you for being suspicious of their intentions. But the OS community as a whole are more likely to do it for free just for the fun and challenge involved.
Open Source has too long a history to be a gimmick or a bait-n-switch. I still can't decide if you're a troll or not. If not, then I wonder what an experienced business woman would be doing here on Slashdot in the first place.
And finally, you need to re-think what computing does for your business. It's a tool, not a religion. Determine what tools you need to run your business and I heartily recommend you start with the applications you need to run and base your choice of OS secondarily. To make the choice of OS first would be a decision not on the OS as a tool, but for other reasons such as a bas experience with a BSA audit, or some reason that involves emotional drive of some sort. Think business tools and test a lot of stuff before settling on something. And if you select something that runs well under Linux, then consider your support options. (1) learn how to do it yourself (2) find someone who knows this stuff. I don't think it's any different under Windows really -- I have rarely had a support experience with Windows that was helpful.
P.S. Closed-minds and Open-source do not work well together.
as well as huge hardware requirements
*cough* GNOME, KDE *cough*
The advantage of Windows over Linux is software compatibility. I am not looking forward to Windows Vista because of the hundreds of computers we maintain at work, few, if any, will be ready for Vista because of hardware compatibility. We have ten percent Macintoshes and they suffer from both software and hardware incompatibility. At least where I work, the momentum is behind Windows XP & Office 2003. It's not a choice, but a fact of reality. Getting Macs and Linux boxes to work on the same playing field requires a lot of effort. I fear that Vista might add extra work to our load and have no plans to move to it.
Linux entices on the server side, but not the desktop side. My newest interest is Plone. The potential there is to provide useful services for hundreds of my users. Internet applications is where the creativity is at.
now, most all add on hardware says XP READY! Then it will say VISTA READY! And it will still be the same dismal state of affairs with plug in stuff and hope it works. That is a major issue that will turn people off unless they have a tame linux geek handy and many hours of patience.
Most of that article is an absolute joke. The argument that people will switch to linux to avoid the cost of upgrading their hardware is absolutely floorled. Cos we all know that all new games will only need the current day spec'd machines to run. Furthermore Linux will only enter mainstream desktop computing after a distro(s) partners up with a packaging vendor like Dell HP and have linux pre-installed. If Jo blogs novice computer user buys a computer that has windows pre-installed paid for in the price, why would they want to swap to linux. Also, do you think someone buying a packaged system would be technically competent to do so? Possibly not. Until we see more prebuilt systems with linux and better games under linux, MS will contain their significant market share in the desktop market.
Does everyone forget that the bulk of the computing public wants more shiney blinkey and purdy?
joe Q dont care that vista has no monads. joe Q does not even know WHAT a filesystem is.
Joe Q will buy a new PC with vista on it, joe Q proved this with XP, he did not run out and buy XP he got it on his next machine.
the ONLY way linux will get on the desktop is DELL offering it at a $150.00 discount
the FUD about useability, installer, GUI and all the other crap I see flung about here has nothing to do with it.
getting it pre-installed is the ONLY way it will get there, and that will not happen until MSFT is forced to stop their illegal behaivoir of "you pay full retail for the OEM version unless we are the only OS in the house... oh and then you have to pay us for every machine no matter if it has MS on it or not."
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Get back in the kitchen BITCH!!!
The other thing Desktop Linux needs is good fonts. I am yet to find a desktop Linux installation that is beautiful out of the box. Often times, one has to download M$ fonts or could use the script found here: http://vigna.dsi.unimi.it/webFonts4Linux/webFonts. sh to get good fonts for the web.
Next thing is multimedia and multimedia applications. Totem in the GNOME world and Amarok in the KDE world will not play mp3s out of the box, yet there are no licensing restrictions on these formats! These are so many other examples in the multimedia field.
There is a bug/feature I found in Linux that needs attention in relation to how devices are mounted. Remember that we in the Linux world are aiming at domination. So we should attract as many users as we can. The bug is here: http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111173. I was surprised that there was a wontfix mentioned. So how are we to attract users if there will always be confusion in how devices are mounted?
Last but not least, we need publicity - good publicity. Right now, Linux is being touted as very good or good enough for the average user. What happens is that folks then have to understand that Linux is just a KERNEL and that there are many implementations associated with this kernel. To many, understanding this is a challenge. So one says "I use Linux at home, it's freely available on the net...try it out..." (and they leave it at that)! What follows is confusion as newbies find tons of distros and incompatible packages. Folks what do you think?
Oh, looks like in KDE 3.4 you have to click on the "System" icon on the desktop, then click on "Media". How pointlessly Windows-like - I really do wish they would stop doing that. (There's probably an option somewhere, but I'm having enough trouble *finding* the KDE settings since switching to Gentoo). On the plus side, it does automatically mount media when you open them.
"Feature cutbacks" aren't a problem for anyone who didn't read the original press releases!
It seems that this new version was originally planned to be a large step forward from XP but as we learn more about it and Microsoft's plans for the future, the changes are constantly being scaled back from what was originally promised. Whether it's the lack of a new file system or the "Monad" scripting shell, the absence of innovation in this operating system is giving it a black eye, no matter how nice the GUI is or how much Internet Explorer 7 resembles FireFox.
From my perspective all thats a joke. What the hell do 99.999999% of potential customers want with "monad" and "a new file system". The vast majority of people had no idea what those things are (even in general) and certainly aren't going to miss them if they aren't in Vista at launch. Will it look prettier than XP? Apparently yes. Easier to use? Quite possibly. Thats all anyone except people already using Linux anyway cares about. Actually even suggesting they care that much is probably false, they'll take what they are given when they buy their next PC (and no, Linspire would not help, they'd just take their PCs back to the shop and scream and shout about it). This article smacks of not being able to see the wood for the trees.
Plays violent online games as: Nerfherder76
Legally downloaded audio/video file disclaimer - "Not Compatible with Freedom"
Windows Vista box sticker - "100% Freedom-free!"
*sigh...
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
if linux had better driver support, didnt ask me to go through such a rigorous process when installing, and didnt give me such hassle for something as small as getting on the internet, id make the move. Im a gamer at heart, i know it is indeed possible to play games on linux, but even then, the only linux distro i like is knoppix. pop the cd in, and it just works. no installation, no screwing around with partitions, no pissing about with compiling. all's i gotta do is set the IP numbers for my NIC and im on the internet. if vista turns out to be the DRM infested hellhole i envision it to be, then my next OS after XP will be knoppix. i kid you not.
"it has been stated that a "Vista Ready" system will have 512 megabytes or more of RAM, a dedicated graphics card with DirectX 9.0 support, and a will be "modern" Intel Pentium or AMD Athlon-based PC. An older system or one with integrated graphics will be able to run Vista but will probably have to do so in more of a legacy mode, without full use of the new Aero graphics package."
Something to keep in mind though is that if Linux distros work and look like today, they're comparable to Windows Vista will be in this legacy mode with lower requirements. The legacy mode we're talking about is a theming system similar to that of Windows XP, KDE 3.x, etc, i.e. simple 2D theming and possibly very basic transparency. The Aero mode is 3D accelerated with 3D effects, etc.
It seems like the article doesn't take this into consideration at all. A user can of course also willingly and manually disable Aero if that's their wishes and opinions about 3D effects in an operating system.
I also find it surprising that an article comparings Windows Vista with Linux distros in general doesn't try to compare Linux with Vista side-by-side by bringing up Vista's feature set. Mentioning cut backs is interesting as a curiousity, but what matters is what Vista will have in 2006/7 and what Linux distros will have in 2006/7, no?
This article outlines the current features of Vista as we know them today, at least.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
33. Your server has not had to reboot in over a year.
34. When you need to install a major piece of software, be it an office suite, a graphics tool, or a compiler, you do not have to drive to a store and shell out enormous amounts of money. Instead, you simply select the desired package from the package repository and it and its dependencies are installed automatically.35. You are able to read and write a vast array of file systems - not just a handful designed by a single company.
36. You realise that those who still have Windows on their computer "because it came with it" probably have picture frames with pictures of model families who they don't know "because it came with the frame"37. You are tired of hearing Windows users bitch about viruses and spyware as if they had not choice but to be afflicted with them.
Oh and Linux will STILL continue to suffer from dependency hell, poor hardware support, unnecessary complication, holier than thou attitude from the loonatics.
2007 the year of the Linux desktop? That'll be like 2000,2001,2002,2003,2004 and 2005 was supposed to be then? I'll not hold my breath.
Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
I have to admit that I do really enjoy my Microsoft wireless mouse, though it is connected to a PowerBook. Kudos to Microsoft for their good mice.
Yeah, You really don't don't get it. First educate yourself a little more about Linux and what the different distros offer. There is no such thing as a "starter" Linux distro. Talk to someone who runs Linux. Ask his/her advice. Rinse and repeat with other folks who run Linux. And stop using crap-ass corpspeak as "production" "business model"et al.
Linux has the potential to out-do Microsoft with ease, but still falls short of providing the general user with what he/she needs (or even a user that wants to work efficiently). I find Linux works against itself with respects to different "flavours" essentially competing against each other instead of building a product together.. it so cumbersome to add new features that would benefit the user because everyone has to wait for the other to adopt it, if it gets picked up at all. The only reason people aren't using it more, because its annoying and time consuming to use as an everyday desktop(specifically with installing things, eg: dependency hell) which can be easily fix, and I know things are out there to rectify this but why aren't they being used?! Another thing is because of the way it looks, and visuals is a huge tool in selling any product. Xwindows has been ugly since it came out..and I know it wouldn't take much effort to make it look better. It looks so plain and dull.
and I can't find this 'linux' anywhere. Can someone tell me which menu it's under? Or do I have to get it from updates?
As long as MSFT owns the distribution pipeline none of the big three are going to make waves by offering alternate operating systems. Consumers can't make a choice when they don't have a choice.
Corporate and gouvernment desktops are an other story though and we'll see a lot of things happening there in the future, I'm sure.
Already happening. I already hear grumbling from my business customers that XP is, at best, an incremental improvement over Windows 2000. There is next to zero motivation for them to upgrade 2000. I'd say the majority of my customers are still running 2K on the desktop, intending to skip XP and upgrade to Vista (which was Longhorn when we had the discussions).
Now that Vista is starting to look like another incremental improvement of XP there is very palatable annoyance. My business users will grumble when pushed into an upgrade, but if the new product is a big improvement they don't really mind that much. But push them into an upgrade that doesn't add much perceived value, it really chaps their ass and they'll never forget it.
Strange how that works.
Most home users are clueless. They turn on their PC and it works and wouldn't know the difference between Windows, OSX and Linux. If it ran WeatherBug, their IM program and iTunes I doubt they'd even care.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
how many of us here can honestly say that we bought our copy of xp/2k etc...
/. who purchase the os are biologists, programmers and engineers and to be quite honest with you - if the hardware and software techs cant pirate vista they are gonna go linux. i know that im gonna be switching and i know that many of my friends will. To top it all off - none of us are gonna be willing to deal with the strict DRM restrictions.
now lets take into consideration what percentage of those of us who pirate the OS are probably network technicians/computer technicians.
my guess is that those of us on
I understand that often times its not the techs who have to use the technology; it is the engineers and scientists, but if there are more techies out there who are not willing to deal with the hassle that is undoubtedly going to be associated with cracking vista at home and therefore switch to linux - more companies will then turn towards that now slightly more popular platform that all of their "geeks" are suggesting.
Besides, i think most programmers would support those techies. Especially the slashdot ones ^^
We seldom regret saying too little but often regret saying too much.
Viral Infection, Spyware, Trojans, and Adware = VISTA
You want a signature? You can't handle a signature!!
It's posted more often than that. Every single time Microsoft does something even slightly stupid (even if it's not related to Windows itself), some idiot will come along and be like OH BOY TIHS IS LINIXS BIG CHANCE GUYS I CAN SEE IT NOW
... But Microsoft has done something stupid every day for the past decade (at least), and Linux still isn't popular on the desk-top.
If you like Linux and want it to succeed, that's awesome. Me too. But stop kidding yourself, you look like idiots. Don't pat yourself on the back every time Microsoft screws up, because it's going to take a GIGANTIC screw-up to ever put Linux anywhere near being a popular desk-top OS. In fact, chances are that it'll never happen, unless somebody really smart does with Linux what Apple did with BSD.
It's the same old story, over and over again.
./configure, make, make install...
Linux is being held back by the very geeks that create it.
Most of the uber nerds that release these distros resent making things too easy, and for that simple reason Linux will never be THE desktop OS.
If the Linux guys were that eager to take the mainstream market by storm then why are we not seeing any simplification in the installation process? Sure, if you're a Linux guy it all seems a doddle,
But to a 'n00b' this is a vastly intimidating process.
People have been weened on Windows all their life, no matter how shoddy the OS performs in certain tasks, it's still the peoples OS, and to beat the competition you've got to do what it does....just better. That means massive hardware compatibility, simple installation, huge media capabilities and standardized drivers that doe not need compiling.
Good job. Instead attempting to relate to the needs of a real world businessperson doing a real job, you insult them and berate them for being stupid. I assure you MS does not treat potential customers this way. And you wonder why linux installed base is shrinking?
Thanks for represnting the Linux community today.
http:///">Mala Vista => Bad Eyes.
http://http//">Vista Mala => Bad Eyes.
http://http//http://">Muy Mala Vista => Very Bad Eyes.
http://http//http://http://">Vista Muy Mala => Very Bad Eyes.
I totally agree. Vista is already to slow to run on most desktops available today and the more it gets delayed and the more problems it has the more people will get turned off and use Linux instead. Most people I know already use Linux. Once you use Linux you will not ever touch Windows anymore.
Other than calling the distro "Kubuntu" I have to second everything the parent said. I began downloading distros onto a sandbox machine with the goal of being able to do everything I could do on my 2K machine with as little fuss as I can do it on 2K.
So far, Ubuntu hasn't failed me. Put another way, it's the first distro I'd recommend to my mother-in-law (and I like my M-I-L.)
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
> > > I think sometimes everyone is a sheep
> > If that's what you think, then so do > I!
> ME TOO
MOOOO
:)hany
...is Vector Linux (name your distro) on the shelves with the final-version-as-in-gone-gold E17, and also on the shelves, laptops and PCs up and running flash demos of E17.
Hey, I can dream, can't I?
Linux will get absolutely nowhere as a desktop operating system until Joe Sixpack can plug in his camera, scanner, PDA, iPod, or what have you and have it just work. If you think any "average user" is going to even consider Linux over Windows while they'll still have to be messing around with the command line to get full functionality even with the most dumbed-down distros, you are sadly mistaken.
(And this is off topic, but what the hell is up with the login system? I can't get it to e-mail me my password because apparently my account doesn't exist, but I can't recreate my account because apparently it does exist. WTF?)
Well done.
Instead of attempting to relate to a real-world user with real world problems, you insult her and berate her for being stupid. You could have learned something and helped Linux in usability areas where we all know that help is badly needed. Instead, you chose to verbally abuse your potential user with an incoherent rant. I assure you that MS does not treat potential customers this way. And you wonder why the Linux installed base is shrinking?
Thanks for representing our community today, which is now just slightly smaller than it was when you got up this morning.
Vista is everything the average user wants.
Viruses
Insecurities
Spyware
Trojans
Adware
You'll be playing that before you'll see the type of linux destop your talking about here.
Cario is coming pretty soon, gnome 2.12 will include it even though it will just be to up 2D quality the first time around. Hardware accelleration isn't, ready yet.
XGL and luminocity is just testbeds, also they wont be done anytime soon (which was why one of the two main developers recently dropped out of the project, he felt it was too far from release). I saym, 3-4 years. We'll be where OSX is today, OSX (and windows) will ofcource have evolved then.
This stuff is prettycomplex, and like all type of complex development the OS model seem to have a hardtime competing against the commercial offerings(simply because they have more qualified people working full time that, for example XGL has it. Currently ONE guy does the bulk of the development. one!).
Breathe out, and realize if you want the "latest and greatest" desktop you shouldn't run linux.
OK, I've used Linux on Alphas, x86, x86-64, ia64, and mips processors.
I've used Linux from 1997 to 2004 as my primary desktop environment.
I see nothing special about Linux' desktop environment over what is available for FreeBSD, Solaris, etc, simply because they are all the same.
So how am I being a troll to say that the next version of Windows, that at worst will be no different than the current version of Windows will drive people to Linux which has no compelling end-user features over Windows?
38. You are easily trolled by a 4 year old copied-and-pasted snippet.
As a Linux developer myself, I'm rather pleased to hear that my suspicions have been confirmed. All the features that Vista's offering are already available in Linux (along with a great deal more), and besides that, the system requirements are definitely insane. If you still haven't heard of just how many systems Linux runs on, I just installed the latest version of my distribution on a Pentium-166 machine with 32MB RAM and a 2.5GB disk. All security updates as well. And it runs beautifully, even better than a Celeron-1.8G with 384MB RAM and Windows XP, if you can believe it.
Anyway, despite what some people insist Linux is slowly moving onto pre-installed systems. Emperor Linux sells laptops pre-configured with just about all the major distros, and there are companies (and even individuals like me) selling pre-loaded Linux desktops. And I'm pretty sure that others will eventually catch on.
I'll be honest, though, the project I'm really hoping to see succeed is ReactOS. Linux is a good system – and I'm definitely a loyal user / developer who's not likely to quit using Linux any time soon – but I think that for users more used to Micro$oft's system, ReactOS would probably be a better solution. Plus it's got a cool logo. :-)
Creative misinterpretation is your friend.
... it's "superior".
although the two notions are not intrinsically related, shoddy spelling kind of clashes with boasts of having a "superiour intellect".
No need to thank me.
unless somebody really smart does with Linux what Apple did with BSD.
Except OSX isn't 'something Apple did with BSD' but rather it's the hermit crab's shell (NextStep) that the curious critters at Apple crawled into.
resigned
I knew somebody would say that. You get what i meant.
The problem I see with Linux on the desktop is that it's nonstandard. By that I mean that a programmer can't assume that any one installation resembles any other. From libraries to window managers to Xfree86 vs X.org or whatever it is now, there are no constants. I understand the benefits of such a scenario; it's great for people who love to pop the hood and do it themselves. But it's a nightmare for the average person who just wants to USE a system rather than build it themselves.
./configure, only to find 5 or 6 things you need to install just to get it to finish without error? And once you get an error you have to figure out if you're actually missing the requirement, or it's just an environment variable, or the wrong verson of the libraries, or permissions, or any other number of potential conflicts. SUSE, for example, doesn't even install gcc by default. I don't think it should need to install a compiler just to be a viable desktop solution, but the fact is that unless someone's already made a binary package, a compiler isn't optional, it's mandatory. The very essence of Linux, its constantly evolving nature, is also its weakness when it comes to getting a foothold in the desktop market.
Users don't want to (and shouldn't have to, in my opinion,) worry about things like dependancies, finding a binary package for their particular distribution and/or kernel, or compiling and configuring a program upon installation. The power of configurability is great, but it doesn't have to be an either/or conflict with usability. How many times have you found a program you were interested in, and you
Also the networking, while powerful, is anything but simple. In XP for example, if I right click on a network interface and select "Share this connection," Windows automatically starts DHCP on my second NIC, assigns my other computer(s) an IP, and everything just works. In Linux, I have to set up masquerading, routing tables, rules, etc. It's these sort of things that send most people running.
Standards DO have drawbacks, but they're generally outweighed by the benefits. Too many choices can be bad. One need look no further than the current battle between HD-DVD and BluRay for a perfect example.
Honestly, I don't ever see this happening, but unless the Linux community can rally around ONE distribution as the "standard", I don't think Linux will ever be an option for the masses.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Cost of MS software is its demise, period.
Does all this razzle-dazzle going to justify the cost? We will see.
I have been an MS Windows user for years and have alittle experience with GNU/Linux and Mac OS X. After seeing all the cool things stripped out of Vista (especially the new WinFS) what is left is basically Windows XP SP3. Boring.
Frankly, with the new Intel Macs hitting the street during that time, with its ease of use, long track record, etc., that is the system that can win big, and I think that Apple (especially with its monopolistic policies with hardware and software, such as leveraging Final Cut to get Avid/Adobe to give up on Mac and of course iTunes) may just be the next Microsoft.
With DRM being so integrated into Vista and upcoming chipsets from Intel, they have pretty much guaranteed that I will not be spending any of my $$$ on their products.
Back in the day, over 10 years ago now IBM did a big push for OS2 Warp since Win95 was long delayed. I remember the TV advertising campaign. Fat lot of good it did..
I feel a sense of Deja Vu..
I think most pathetic versions of windows were 95 and 98 which are long gone, win 2000 and XP have improved ms position a long way in terms of quality of their operating systems, Therefore i think XP, 2000 have penetrated market like never before and have built a strong and stable user base that is why perhaps no new versions for long period of 4 years. Now if Linux realy wants to make inroads to desktop it must target specific users who are willing to understand technical advantages and freedom it offers. such as students and let it grow over a longer period of time with that comunity while making sure that at least these people always have stuff to lurk on to, finding something more exciting than windows. This comunity I think (specially young learners) can help spread of linux in most comprehensive manner though it may take a longer period of time, additionaly other people who may wish to look at technical advantages linux offers are buisness houses. if big software vendors, game studios start supporting linux for faster performance, more flexibility, and lowering their own cost of development people will become more aware of linux existence.
The grandparent was a troll form letter.
BenCurry.net
I know a lot of people who's next OS after they shed Win2k is going to be Linux.
Linux needs no comparision with Windows anymore. Be it that Windows Fister has 2D HW accell and E not just yet. Nobody cares. Linux is one free (beer), stable, virus free OS with 9000 applications for free, two dozen of which cover everything a standard computer user would ever want. If properly configured that is.
What Linux needs to break the critical mass barrier is a big player sellling PCs with Linux (and only Linux) preinstalled, offering service, gaining foothold and dictating which packaging system everybody else in the Linux game (RH, SuSE/Novell, etc.) should use from now on.
The currently best candidate distro for this kind of stunt probably is ubuntu.
The first one to do this and to have the guts and money to pull it through will make a shitload of money. Linux is ready for the desktop, people just need to start to believe it for the rest of what a mainstream OS needs to come to life to happen. We all know installing Linux is easyer in the end. It's just that 90% of the people wouldn't know how to install Windows. They just get it with their PCs preinstalled and take the hidden costs for granted.
Imagine IBM selling a PC Mini (think Mac Mini as PC) for 500$ with all everyone would ever want and Linux preinstalled with all goodies that go with it. THAT's all that it takes to make Linux mainstream.
PC Linux will be on the desktop the day an expensive "DNA print required for unlocking" zero-features-included Windows OS will be an extra option that costs extra 50$, and all HDDs one can buy come with Ubuntu or whatever preinstalled.
Chances are that that day may come. For my part, I'm sticking to my forecast for Linux critical mass reaching pointbreak in Germany. (12 Months left)
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
...and it's probably been said before, but it needs better hardware detection, support, and auto-configuration.
I've been using linux as a desktop off and on for a few years now and the major headache for me has always been getting the hardware to work properly.
I have a compaq laptop and I couldn't get pcmcia to work for the LONGEST time. It'd simply lock up. Common sense tells us that it's a resource conflict (average user won't know that, btw).
So great, how do I fix it? To this day I would've been stuck had it not been for a friend of mine that found a config.opts from a linux guru that toyed with the "include memory" lines in the PCMCIA's config.opts file.
You kidding me? The average user won't know how to do that. Hell, I know what I'm doing and I don't even understand exactly what changes were made to get it to work.
Then again, my other laptop (also a compaq, diff model) hasn't had a single issue with linux.
While the thought of having a compaq laptop in itself is problematic, you have to realize that people have HPs and Dells.
How about your common things, like PCI Linksys wireless cards? Needs ndiswrapper, which... needs driver and inf files to run. People don't know that.
Yes, perhaps they need to RTFM, but that in itself is an issue. Average users aren't gonna spend days on google trying to figure out why their stuff isn't working.
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
1. You rejuvenate and dance when you hear a windows flaw exposed
Impossible! They would all drop dead from exhaustion!
Contrary to what the clueless and ill-informed think (j/k no offense ;) ), Windows Vista is a MAJOR upgrade. It should be similar to going from Win3.11 to Win 95 or, on the server side, from Windows NT to Windows 2000. The 3D-accelerated GUI alone will push the operating system into a new era.
A lot of you complaining about feature cut-backs don't realize that MS was aiming for the moon. Even after the cut-backs, it'll have more new DESKTOP features than what Linux has gained in the last 5 years.
I personally don't see linux overtaking Windows on the desktop side until the operating system market matures and MS stops innovating or releasing any new major versions (maybe 15 to 20 years from now). Linux has potential on the server (its market share growth over the last 5 years shows that) but the desktop side will be tough for Linux. As a desktop, linux just doesn't have enough applications, and isn't easy to use--two key features desktop users care about.
Even the server side will become more tough for Linux. For regular server use (eg. file server, web server, etc for a small to mid-sized company) Windows 2003 is pretty solid. Its market share growth (along with its first incarnation, Windows NT) from almost none to something large is worth nothing. Linux will faced a big challenge on the server side from the next version of Windows server. Linux's server market share has mostly been increasing due to it taking over Unix servers. But when it goes head to head against the next version of Windows server, it will be a tough battle...
Overall, I expect Windows Vista to grow at double digits on the desktop side for the next 5 years, while Linux likely won't exceed 5 percent for the desktop side.
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
Of course, in real life $4000 for tools is a bargain in almost any industry you care to name. And many of the replacement tools are FREE and don't create any vendor lock-in at all. Have you ever heard of OpenOffice?
I really do not think that Windows Vista will effect the uptake of Linux one way or another. The reason for this is that Microsoft is like McDonalds. Almost anybody, and any chimp can make a better hamburger than McDonalds; but it is very hard to compete with McDonald's distribution system. It is over obvious, that because of current political pressures and corporate suck-heads, that techies are made to feel inferior. Remember, you are special, you see the world in unique ways that the general population does not. Evidence of this is the current state of television. Who do you think they are marketing that mind numbing, zombification crap too? For Linux to be adopted into main stream it will take two things: one, dumbification, Joe Six-pack doesn't care about the details of installing packages and drivers, he just wants his hardware to work right, and to surf his p--n...; and two, advertisement and education to the "problem-solving challenged". For many "problem-solving challenged" persons, they only reason they wants a certain product is that their friends have it. They may not know what it does, or how it works, but they have to have it... Create the illusion that everybody is getting Linux, and the illusion will come true!
... until developers can get fired for having certain things not working correctly or good enough. KDE and Gnome are both very close to being good enough for every possible type of user. They just lack the finishing touch. And that stuff is hard to code... not because it's difficult but because it's boring and tedious. Developers working for Apple have to do this because they know that if they don't, they _will_ lose their jobs. Same goes for developers working for Microsoft. If they don't get it working the way they've been told it should be, they're in trouble.
In the OSS world it's different. A lot of these developers are volunteers, and are scratching an itch. They are gonna be working on stuff they actually enjoy working on because hey, it's their free time. And who could blame them? Why should they work on boring stuff in their free time? Of course there are also paid developers working on KDE and Gnome. But i have never heard of any of them getting fired for not putting on that finishing touch for their latest release. And that is the reason why every year it's the year of Linux On The Desktop, and it never actually is.
Apple is luring Windows users to OS X despite the Windows monopoly. Linux should've been able to do this as well.. they sure have had enough time to get it done (more than Apple has spent on OS X).
When will there be a lawsuit regarding microsofts hold on the gaming industry. Yes it is argued that companies develop for directx, Microsoft is not holding anyone to the standard. But that can be argued both ways. I want to be able to load any microsoft directx game into my *nix box and frag away.
The only way to put Linux on the desktop.
Let me tell you what the Vista launch will mean from my perspective as a Linux desktop user. It will SUCK for the Linux desktop. Why? Because I can list at least a dozen hardware driver and system application problems on Linux on my laptop (a Thinkpad T40, one of the most Linux-friendly laptops) that severely degrade Linux functionality but are nonexistent in Windows drivers and system applications. The drivers for all the devices exist, some of them are just nowhere near as good as those for Windows.
...OK, rant over.
The only reason Linux is running on this laptop right now, in fact, is that Windows XP is so old and security-challenged, as well as feature-challenged in some areas, that overall it has fallen way behind the curve. When Vista comes out, much of this gap will have been closed. And unless some fairly major things get fixed in several packages, I just might switch back.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
When desktop linux is as easy to use for the desktop user as microsoft Windows then desktop linux will gain ground
Progress has been made, but many people still don't understand or accept that basic point.
Many tasks have gotten as easy to do on the linux desktop as they are in windows. However, desktop linux has always been behind on making the cutting edge hot tasks ( or at least the ones off of the beaten path ) easy to do.
For example, do you want to copy some of your old VHS tapes to a DVD. Windows users can go to the store and buy a number of easy software options and get going in an afternoon.
A linux user will probably need to read a collection of cryptic, out of date articles, download/compile some odd components, futz forever with the settings, go to a forum for help with adjust some oddity etc etc.
Someday, this PITA task in desktop linux will be easy, but the point this and similar tasks are easy right now on windows ( and the mac ).
As long as linux is behind in making off the beaten path tasks easy desktop linux will always be behind proprietary systems.
Most "desktop users" just want the job done, they don't want a hassle.
Timely? How does that even come close? Vista is still ~14mo off.
> A decade ago it was Windows 95 that was going to
> be a big opportunity for Linux to make headway on
> the desktop
Where did you hear that? Windows 95 was the OS I switched to moving *away* from Linux (see below). Also, back then Novell had a version of Windows 3.1 that ran on Linux and was going to create a Windows distribution based on Linux, not DOS. Win95 and Win32 pretty much killed those plans. Also, if you read Unix mags back in 95, you'd see that they were forcasting Unix's doom. Once WinNT had a VMS base and once NT 3.x got a Win95 interface, it would be the final nail in the coffin for Unix. (Of course, Microsoft seriously dropped the ball on that golden opportunity by not getting its server act together, but that is beside the point.)
And back in 1995, I was triple booting OS/2, Win3.1 and Linux. I came from an Amiga background so long file names and multitasking was a must. Win3.1 just wasn't up to sniff. I loved OS/2, but most programs ran for Win3.1 and it was lighter, so I booted Win3.1 more than OS/2. When Win95 came out, I gave OS/2 the boot. Win95 wasn't as good as OS/2, but it was "good enough" and I needed the extra hard disk space. Most of the apps I ran were Win32 based and most development tools were made from Borland. I spent less and less time in Linux. I got a Windows job in 1995, and I stayed almost completely on Win95 because it was "good enough" (thanks to Cygwin). I peaked back at Linux from time to time, but it was more for curiosity than anything else. I finally erased Linux in 1997. I also loved Windows 2000 when it came out.
As a double defector, I can say for a fact that Linux *has* been getting to be a better desktop with each release. Back in 2000, I started seeing more and more of the tools and apps that I liked on Linux. They weren't available on Windows so I began dual-boot between Win2000 and Linux. In 2002, I took the plunge and switched completely to RedHat (bye-bye Windows 2000). Thanks to VMware, I could even take a Windows job and not be disadvantaged. Fortunately, the rise of web programming meant that programs could be platform independent, so I could even work on Linux.
These days, Linux (Ubuntu) is more comfortable and problem free than Windows 2000 ever was (XP, IMO is a big step backwards in usability). I started Windows 2000 in VMware, exactly once (to use Audible.com and gave it the boot once I discoved how DRM-enabled it was). Linux is good enough for the educated user's desktop who is either a tech expert or has a friend who is. It's lower maintenance than Windows so the "guy who knows stuff about computers" doesn't have to put in a lot of effort to support the user.
But it's not yet ready for the average joe six pack. Those people need support from their local computer store or electronics store and need a few friends who know Linux. That informal and consumer support network doesn't quite exist yet. It takes a lot of time to form, but such networks tend to grow exponentially. You'll know when Linux is ready for prime time when you start seeing it regularly in "Prime Time TV", your barber starts talking about Linux, and "the foot" or "the gear" or the "fedora" start appearing in the menus of a a significant number of jobs you apply to.
The only difference is they don't have any Jedi fighting for them.
Warning: This one comes across as a flame, but I'm to mad at this Win2k Server Bullcrap I have to deal with every odd week to contain my anger caused by parent post. Please excuse.
.Net Joke, have allready spent a fortune on MS IDEs and a Win2K licence and don't have anything mission critical your working on"? Or "Nice if you like a clean one-server-per-webapp policy to keep things in order?"
.Net Beta. The Windows experts were laughing their heads of on BG renaming .obj to .net and making a big marketing boohey about it and this guy was thinking he was cream of the crop cause he was following the MS call. I asked for 80k$ anual income, he said no (what I'd hoped for). Now he's the cook at my favourite lounge (good at cooking - just made me a nice ciabatta this noon) and the only thing they've managed to build is a hideously overpriced, under-performing Win2K-server-only content management system (http://www.q-affairs.de/index.htm) that doesn't even do HTML Umlaute correctly (despite being a german project). Due to it's Win2K-only restraint they can't even guarantee 99% uptime.
.obj recycled as .net is little more than an expensive hype. Nothing less. The nice Win-Only IDEs aside maybe. If it prevails then only because hardware vendors are happy to sell one box per server-app ("otherwise win2k crashes, you know") and MS is shelling out a few hundred million from their office-coffee-piggybank to push Win2k Server into the market against all sane reasoning. Money allways beats reason, y'know?
.Net zealots please cue flames below. Thank you.
For regular server use (eg. file server, web server, etc for a small to mid-sized company) Windows 2003 is pretty solid.
"Win2k is pretty solid?" As in "sort of stable"? Or "Kinda so-so not to totally viri and exploit ridden?" Or do you mean "Nice if you've been lured into this
Give me a f*ckin' break. And whatever you're smoking, don't offer anything of that to me, please.
Contrary to what the clueless and ill-"informed" think: The only reason professionals are still dealing with utter morons (read: Consultants) who still consider MS as a server alternative is because MS is spending massive amounts of money to push Win2k server into hosting providers and their kin.
Everywhere you can see "Now with special ultra professional Win2K Server option" and such. MS is paying hard cash for these adds to be presented on hosting homepages. That's why their all over the place.
Little Tidbit:
5 years ago a guy I knew wanted me to join a project on a content syndication system built in
Bottom line:
Win2K is a server-side joke. Just as
Yes, my friend, you're just outed yourself as someone who goes for the buzz and not the hard facts. Show me something with the power, flexebility and stability of Zope, RoR or even that PHP-mess called Typo3 in the Win2K server world and I'll make an opinial u-turn. Until then I recommend you check Linux/OSS out properly AND do a hard facts comparsion of both Linux* and Win2K before you get to close to bullshitting territory. Zope is a good start. It has both my dual-MS-certifed friends converted to the light side of the force. And it even runs on Win2K. With it's own Webserver and all.
* You may substitute Linux with BSD or even Mac OS X if you like.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
... It's a bit late to jump in this discussion, but it amazes me that someone can write an article like this when most of the things they say are conjectures coming from at most incomplete information... Yes, WinFS isn't in the OS... That's about it when it comes to 'all the features that have been dropped'. I can tell you being on the inside -- there are an unbelievable amount of new features in Vista. People will be very surprised. Just recently my dept had a big celebration because we finished over 150 new features since the release of beta 1 (these were not small changes, mostly new functionaliy, and we're just a small portion of the OS). Over the whole OS each component has been revamped and hundreds of new features are in. It will be interesting to see how this crowd reacts to Beta 2...
Oh, in what way is she (or you) a potential customer for me? Open source is not a corporation, we have no obligation to be nice to you, at all.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away, I was a linux user. However, I had not used it recently, due to just not having enough games support, and having to write win32 apps for work related things. Recently I had the opportunity to download/install Fedora Core 4(Redhat).
First off, it's actually much, much better then it used to be with linux, desktop wise. Most every bit of hardware was autodetected. The various apps that got installed all work togther, and I didn't notice any of the dependency problems that used to plague the OS. It multitasks better, has a nice security model, and the huge apt get/yum style repositories mean that installing new apps has become a snap. The autoupdate feature is quite nice too.
However, the thing I noticed the most that was lacking was... hardware support/driver issues.
For example, using a Creative Labs Audigy 2 ZS sound card, you do get sound. But it's the barest minimum of sound support. None of creative's various cool software utils that make the creative cards rock, are available. This might not seem like much, but it's something I missed.
The biggest driver issue though, was with ATI. I have a Radeon X800 XL video card. It's a little newer, and xorg didn't automatically detect it, or have a driver built in for it.(Falls back on the generic vesa driver) Basically, ATI's drivers on linux leave something to be desired. Skipping over the lockup issues with certain kinds of 3d accel.(Cedega for example) which are only repaired with an obscure option to be disabled in the xorg.conf file(by hand mind you!)... Well you get the idea. What is the real killer, is just the terrible performance gap. The binary native version of ut2004 for linux run's far worse on linux, then it's win32 equivalent. This is not to say it's unplayable. Just that the gap is noticeable.
At any rate, there are still a few quirks like those that still hold it back in my opinion. The learning curve, while less then it was, is still way higher then a windows system. It's *so* close though. I'm really, really dying to switch permanently.As it is, I'll keep it as a dual boot for my own tinkering.
Most of the commentator failed to understand that with each new expensive windows sw/hw upgrade means some defection from windows corporate and home users .. if your bread & butter solely depends on M$ then u r different .. there are still 1% windows users who rejects to move away from win95 . and so win98, winMe, win2k and winxp. Now many corporate users use win2k in a decent PC without patch and upgrade commitment from MS. Also there are many vendors who offers PC without any OS. Check this out cybernetman.com. So this old windows users can keep their hardware and move to linux or can get a new cheap hw + linux with considerable savings. Banks, Retails, home user are perfect target for this segments.The best approach for MS would be to provide upgrades for win2k for @ least seven years and gradually introduce vista's features .. thus they could have a loyal userbase. If you check most linux upgrades are gradual non invasive and with full of options ..
Shaikat
Really. Vista is the deathknell for Linux and Mac desktops. Read it again if it hasn't sunk in as yet.
Linux isn't going to die off. It may never really get into the mainstream as a desktop OS, but hobbiests and hackers would still keep Linux going forever along with popular packages like KDE and Apache, even if Linux does turn out to be a niche OS. If anyone should be worrying, it should be Apple, as OSX will die if Apple can't turn a profit selling Macintoshes and retail copies of OSX.
Slashdot's stated bias is to promote open source. If you don't like it, leave. No one is forcing you to stay here.
Have you noticed that everything over the last few years has been an opportunity to get Linux on the desktop, but that has not happened? I don't have to ready any article or postings to know the end result of this one. It's a short historic circle we're still stuck in.
Almost everyday on /. there is a comment that Linux should conquer the Desktop, and how the world should use Linux, etc. But why? there is actually no reason! would you like to see Microsoft go away? if they do, it will be Sun or HP that will take its position, not Linux...because big contracts can never be open source, since they require the back-up of some corporation.
What I want from Linux is better services, and not a shiny new gui. Better DBs, better file serving, better web serving, more throughput, faster multitasking, more development tools etc. As long as the basic GUI is good enough, I really don't care if windows zoom in 3d or just pop up/down in 2d.
I'm a Windows and Mac Os user and I've also tried KDE and gnome.
Both can be pretty but the usability is terrible. But all is not heir fault. Installing programs is too many times not a question of double click that icon and you're done.
Installation of programs that are not part of the distribution is hard and can be a nightmare. More than once I've given up (and I'm not your average user!).
I use Linux for server things with remote shell access and I'm happy with it.
Linux on my desktop, I've given up. The alternatives are far more usuable.
(I must add that Desktop Linux for entreprise user might make sense but not for home)
Now we will surely become market leader within the year!
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
You know, Microsoft makes all the computer sellers sign an agreement where they will not put any other OS on a computer that has Windows on it. (No dual boot setups.) But what if, instead, they put a Linux LiveCD in every box? They could include instructions on how to boot it and how to do some stuff with it. They could say something like: "This is a demo of one of our other products. If you like it and what to order a copy call: 1-800-DELL-LIN" This is one way that more people could be exposed to Linux.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Like what happens when the copyright expires on the DRMed xyz, you won't be able to release xyz into the public domain because it's crippled by DRM and you won't be able to break the DRM because of the DMCA. Bye Bye copyright legislation.
I think it's defiantly time to start lobbying Euro MPs to make them aware that DRM breaks existing copyright and right of first purchase legislation.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Let's see here:
"lack of a new file system"
- There was _never_ a new file system for Longhorn. A file system is a file system and WinFS never was nor is one. It'll show up when the developer story is good enough. Just talk to the devs on the team. They hated having to pull it, but knew they needed to in order to ensure its success when it is eventually added.
(lack of) "the Monad scripting shell"
- Will be available as a separate release, usable on more than just Vista, and quite possibly even before its release.
As for the other unmentioned pieces:
Avalon - available as a separate release for XP and higher.
Indigo - available as a separate release for XP SP2 and higher.
Since all of the above changes are VERY GOOD THINGS for both developers and users, what exactly is the problem?
We've got one feature that people misunderstand. It has been delayed until its developer story makes it so that everyone understands it. This is good.
Then we have a bunch of other features that will not only be available in Vista, they'll be available _beforehand_ so that app developers can use them and target that many more users.
Then you'll have Vista itself, with the new shell, tonnes of other improvements, and out-of-the-box versions of all of the above.
And people are complaining about what, exactly? Oh right, I remember now:
People are complaining because they treat Windows like they treat versions of productivity suites, video cards, burners, heck, even women: Like _each_ and _every_ one that comes around somehow has to be a compelling upgrade for _them_, even if they just picked up a new one recently. They seem to forget that the other 99% of people who didn't just upgrade are using older software, hardware, or wetware and can gain all sorts of benefit from an upgrade.
In other words, it is simple selfish, childish behavior:
Instead of recognizing that something they might not want/need is just something they might not want/need, they believe (and will loudly proclaim) that something they might not want/need is therefore pure shite that no one else should want.
Grow up. And yes, I mean you, Linux users. Pretty much all of you. Or at least so many that they make the good ones look bad. Get over yourselves or we (the other 99% of computer users) will never take you seriously.
This seems a lot more like a sanity test than a fanaticism one.
Too late to get modded up, but what the hell. No, Vista will not be the spark that ignites Linux. Win98 was pretty unstable. Did Linux take over then? No. Win ME sucked ass. Did Linux take over then? No. Win2k was pretty nice but wasn't shipped on much consumer hardware. Did Linux take over then? No. WinXP is annoying as fuck, what with balloons popping up everywhere (Take a tour! This is the start menu! Wireless is here! Wireless is gone! Hey, wireless is back! No, wait, gone again!) and all the activation BS, not to mention spyware, viruses, self-spreading bad stuff, etc. Did Linux take over? No. Vista? Well, technically I can't see into the future, but I'm a pretty good guesser.
"Whether it's the lack of a new file system or the Monad scripting shell, the absence of innovation in this operating system is giving it a black eye." One second--you think customers care one fucking bit about innovation in an OS? What planet is this guy on that he thinks people care about a fucking FILESYSTEM or SHELL?!?!?* I'm gonna say this once really loud for the cheap seats: WINDOWS IS POPULAR BECAUSE IT'S THE OS ON THE CHEAPEST COMPUTERS OUT THERE!!!!!!!111oneoneone. The 5% of customers that do care about innovation already have a home: they're at the Apple store.
* note: Windows does ship with a shell. But no one needs it. (Because Windows also ships with a GUI, natch.) Before writing another article like this, do this simple test: walk up to 50 people and ask them about the shell in Windows.
- 46 will go "huh?"
- 2 will say "cmd.exe but I have no use for it." (You just stumbled across two people who work in IT or a computer store.)
- 1 will say "cmd.exe and I use it once in a while because I've been using PCs for 20 years and I still do things there 'cause I'm used to it."
- And exactly one will say "cmd.exe but I don't use it 'cause it's teh sux0rz! When I get a new comp the first thing I do is use IE to download Firefox and then I use Firefox to download Cygwin!" (Read that page, it's really funny. I love that story.)
Monad is very cool but even if MS would have shipped it in Vista, did you really think you were going to spend next thanksgiving teaching your mom how to use it? "Look, mom, here--I just pipe this through that, and what makes Monad even cooler than bash is that it isn't just text coming out, these are actual objects, so I can take these results and..." Uh-huh. Right.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Remember that monkey in the Lion King? It is time.
Both widely hailed for their innovative and enjoyable gameplay, both available for Linux. www.introversion.co.uk
"The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
This may be the case today, but with huge boom in blogging and increasing numbers of people continually receiving and providing more information over the Internet, I don't think it will take too long before people identify freedom of expression with their computers. Once that happens, the issue of whether you actually are free to use your own computer as you see fit or not becomes vital to your freedom.
The major technology enabling modern democracy was the printing press and the freedom of information that it provided. The Internet is the modern printing press, and it democratizes information in an even more fundamental way then the printing press did. Free access to the internet – i.e. unfettered use of a computer – is vital to that new freedom. So of course, there are people out there who are trying to restrict that freedom before people have realized just how important what they're trying to take away is.
[B/v/L]
Ok, I'll bite. If I buy anything online, be it music, videos or whatever, I buy it, it's mine. Mine as in mine to do whatever damned I please with it. As in making low-bitrate AACs out of high-bitrate WMAs for fitting more of them on my cellphone.
See, this is legal. Noone nowhere has any business telling me "you can't do that". That's equivalent to saying "So... we wont be seeing you purchasing our products ever again?"
Now, if I tried to pass these files on to others, now that would be copyright infringement, and thus illegal.
I don't want my computer, restricting me from doing stuff with my data because some executives somewhere are afraid I might violate their copyright. No way. No way in hell.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
Some people just don't get it!
damaged by dogma
Will Vista be backwords compatible? If it's not, then the old "my Windows programs won't run on Linux" cry will be "my Windows programs won't run on Vista." We will have a whole new ballgame, and Linux will have its window.
And it's been sung whenever a new Windows version is due, usually late. Use the exact same lyrics, but substitute any of the following for the OS: OS/2 Warp BeOS OS/X TRS DOS (--I make joke from old) I'm not so sure the decentralised nature of Linux's development, along with a the lack of a Bill Gates-like robber-baron leadership to the whole Linux movement, will push the OS onto mainstream desktops in the near future. Just some thoughts... Cheers
Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
After trying the latest beta of Vista a few weeks ago, I decided to give a Linux desktop another try. Although I've been using Linux CLI daily for years, I'd never been able to break away from using Windows on the desktop, as much as I hated it. I tried Ubuntu and was very impressed, I haven't wanted to use Windows since. Now all I need is for it work properly on my laptop aswell!
Laptops are the 'killer app' for GUI-driven computing, period. In much the same way that DVD-Audio discs will not take off until people can play them in their cars, desktop Linux will not hit big until it can be run easily on laptops, lots of them.
Currently, there are two main problems with Linux on the laptop.
So if you want to see Linux make a play on the desktop, pester hardware manufacturers to make their gear so it will actually work under non-MS operating systems.
"Why don't you interface with my ass...by biting it!" -Bender B. Rodriguez
The only real complaint I have isn't towards windows, but towards the OEM's.
I *hate* it when they sell sysems that aren't designed for the OS. By that, I mean they sell a 40GB hdd (with some insanely low speed), a Celeron processor, and 128MB of memory.
You can't put antivirus on that. You can't do shit on that other than email and surf the net -- but that's not what they tell you. They just say it's a "bargain" deal and people don't know any better.
This ruins the Windows image. Of a basic Linux distro doesn't have this problem, it doesn't do half as much stuff while the OS/WM is running.
As time has proven, both OS'es are getting fatter and fatter, eventually Linux will lose the argument that they are signifigantly more lean (while they may still be more lean than Windows, it won't be a huge gap like it is now due to current lack of software users can run) becuase they themselves will have Money, Office, IM, Antivirus, Imagine (Ghost type, not graphics type), Firewall, Weather Tracker, etc.
While I've never used a mac (other than 12+ years ago) I *really* love their philosphy for hardware. They don't let the customers fuck themselves.
Yes, it *looks* more expensive, but it's not. Compare it to a computer of the same classification from Dell, HP/Compaq, or Gateway. It's the same price.
So yeah, that's my complaint.
"Do or do not. There is no try." -- Master Yoda (Half man, half muppet)
Well, it *will* be "backwords" compatible.
Linsux won't make any headway on the desktop because it sucks ass, and because the developers are faggot zealot monkeys with NO FUCKING SKILL. Eat a dick, torvalds.
A LOT OF PEOPLE will NEVER install linux, unless it plays San Andreas perfectly out of the box. Or some other killer app/game that they require. It's really all about the wine. You evangalists make wine perfect, and it's GAME OVER for MS.
Rightly so and about time, too.
rhY
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
" I'm so sick of the bias here at Slashdot"
Well, duh! If you go to a Republican Convention, do you see Democrats there? If you go to a Catholic church, do you see Mormons there? Most likely NOT.
So naturally, if you visit a pro Open Source web site you *will* find people who don't like Microsoft. Welcome to reality. Now go worship Microsoft's EULA and enjoy the ball and chain riveted to your leg.
Well, the US is fast becoming a poor country--sure there are a few rich, but what happens when all the non-rich are pushed down from middle-class to poor? There's not enough money in the world to satiate the top 1% in this country. They'll keep taking ours until they end up with all of it. Presto! Poor country! I mean, even the poorest countries have a few rich people at the top who profit from it all. Soon we won't be any different than Nigeria.
And anyway, there are a lot of computers in the US. In fact, considering that China hasn't become super wired yet, the US might have a plurality (51% maybe?), though not a "vast majority" of computer users. That of course will change once Asia and Europe finish overtaking the US in every way.
And exactly who cares about being able to read/write "a vast array of filesystems"? Maybe it they weren't all shit in different ways, there would be no reason to have more than ONE.
Tell me, how would I learn that little command string to input?
Ya know, that was flamebait as well.
A blown Windows upgrade may be a good thing for Linux server prospects, but seems like much more of a desktop opening for Mac OSX.
Linux isn't ready as a desktop for the vast majority of people (i.e., my parents) and probably never will be as long as Linux users can't understand why it isn't. I use Linux extensively, but I'm a hardcore geek, and I certainly wouldn't inflict it on my parents. Perhaps if I pre-installed and preconfigured everything they might possibly want to use, like Thunderbird. Or I could just buy them a Mac Mini and not get any more phone calls.
Maybe this will give you some opportunity among Windows users of a techie mindset who are leery of the Mac entry cost. The 'hey, it's free to try!' is a huge win.
Using lack of features in a Windows Vista Beta 1 as a selling point for Linux is setting it up for a fall when Beta 2 comes out with the features. Linux advocates would be better off selling Linux on its own merits, not on the foibles and deficiencies of Windows. Take the high road, not the low road.
While droves of geeks might opt to try out Linux instead of Vista on their next system crash, grandma and the rest of their family members are still going to stay with Windows.
How are people even going to know an alternative exists? If they goe into Best Buy or Wal-Mart, the shelves are 99% Windows and 1% "other". If they watch TV (or read a magazine, etc), they're not going to see anything mentioning Linux software.
If you think about it, there's better odds that your average person buys a Macintosh than a Linux distro.
Yes, a few of you might recommend and help someone get into Linux, but even if successful that will only affect a very small population.
As someone else pointed out, the OSS community needs to collaborate on a joint marketing effort. Packaging, advertising, distribution, etc are all key parts of getting market share, and OSS severely lacks each of these.
The last time I saw a box for Red Hat, it was certainly not intended for grandma to pick up and install.
And *that* is why Vista will not help Linux get market share. Because even if people wanted an alternative, they wouldn't know how to find it.
-David
Yes, very good. But I thought we were talking not about stuff that you bought, but stuff that you licensed and downloaded with DRM.
Once again, I think you're missing the point. Stuff that's yours you can indeed do what you want with. Stuff you download with DRM isn't yours, and you can't. That's kinda what DRM is all about.
I would like to point out here that the existance of DRM does not mean my fair use rights have been taken away. I still have them, I own any and all content I purchase and no click thru license can change that.
Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
I wonder why the features has to be scapped / delayed !
Microsoft has sent lots of its development to India, where there are lots of people, so what is wrong with the company ? Apple gets far more done with fewer employees.
Well, I personally learned it from the Linux Mandrake manual (there is - or was - a section on building software from source). In fact, all in all, it was a useful guide to installing, using and understanding Linux. There's probably also a HOWTO at the LDP (a vital resource)
Also, normally (there are a few exceptions) there's a text file named "INSTALL" in the base directory of the source code instructing you to do roughly these commands. In any case, this particular sequence of commands is used by nearly all open-source software, so once you know it...
Well, computing world by it's nature tends to favor one OS and that one is currently MS Windows. Another "advantage" is that everything is standardised and thus successful running of app is guaranteed while with linux this varies from distro to distro (besides installation is often complex for third-party-non-OSS) or commercial software). If one distro becomes a standard (or all distros agree upon some strict desktop rules) linux does have a chance.
Still, there are numerous technical and usability disadvantages in linux that will have to be overcomed for it to be equally attractive to newbies as windows is.
One chance is if Vista will be impossible to pirate (or update) more people will move to linux, especially in poor countries.
God! I feel like a complete dumbass now! I only suspected this to be a troll but I just wasn't sure. The formatting was the give-away.
l .3.178798.34
http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?joe
This is the source of the parent's text... I guess we'll know it when we see it again....
I sit corrected. Thank you.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
Until Microsoft puts out a Linux based OS, Linux will remain unknown to most users. If/When Microsoft puts out a Linux based OS it will be the worst OS based on Linux (think Linux ME). Will M$ ever put out a Linux-based is doubtful, but even if it did happen, it would still not attract the attention of most windows users. Having said this, the only reason I would want Linux to be a popular OS, is because of games. And personally I don't play enough games to care. If you want to make people familiar with linux, put it on their desktop at work (I know of a few org's doing this now). But you might not want to do it at a LARGE company all at once. Maybe just a one division at a time, like payroll, or H.R.
In fact, chances are that it'll never happen, unless somebody really smart does with Linux what Apple did with BSD.
This statement is partially valid.. except that it's more about unity within the Open Source community towards defined goals rather than "somebody really smart" coming in and changing everything on their own. Part of that unity needs to include a collective realization that the commercialization of Open Source is the secret to its long-term success. Every non-trivial project needs at least one full-time, paid developer. In most cases there is simply no substitute. Community and professional collaboration is still what ultimately fuels the effort, but financing of lead developers provides an enormous boost.