Slashdot Mirror


Desktop Linux Survey Results Published

An anonymous reader writes "The Open Source Development Labs has published preliminary results from its desktop Linux survey, which had 3,300 responses. The month-long online survey focused on determining the key issues driving Linux on the desktop, as well as the major barriers to Linux desktop adoption. 'What was most surprising to us was probably the top two reasons given for deploying Linux on the desktop,' OSDL's Principal Analyst Dave Rosenberg said. 'It's not TCO (total cost of ownership), or security, or lack of license fees. It was 'employees requesting Linux (user demand)' and because 'my competitors have successfully deployed Linux,' he added."

9 of 384 comments (clear)

  1. Well, there you have it. by Atario · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not for stability, or security, or pricing, or modifiability, or all the great things that come to us from Unixland.

    It's because we're all so cool.

    Who could have guessed it?

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
    1. Re:Well, there you have it. by Siguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Geek Chic should not be underestimated. I've known quite a few people (including myself) who have run linux on a desktop with no real reason to do so other than the "cool" factor. The problem is, once you get it running and get set up you kind of realize that it is just a computer operating system and not something inherently cool like a tiger or the fonz.
      "Oh wow, I'm running Firefox. On linux! [fifteen seconds pass] Hmmm, maybe I should go download BeOS..."

  2. actually by iced_tea · · Score: 5, Funny

    "It's not TCO (total cost of ownership), or security, or lack of license fees," Dave Rosenberg said. "It's about the lack of a talking paper clip."

  3. How representative was the sample? by David+Hume · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Looking at the results, I have to ask, how representative was the sample group? Was it, as it appears, entirely self-selected? And what does that say about the validity of the results?

    I mean, 54% of the respondents use, or are considering, Ubantu? With only 19% for Red Hat, with another 26% for Fedora, for a total of 45%? Could that possibly be representative?

    And the second most important application is "Digital Camera/Video?"

  4. The State of Linux Desktop by ccozan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Believe it or not, i am using Linux as primary desktop continuosly from 1997 ( with just a short interval where i was forced to work on windows, or face getting fired). I've grown practically toghether with Linux as Desktop. Man, it was a challenge in the beginning. Things that for a server weren't important, they become for a desktop the equivalent of endless hacking nights. But it was worth. I was really pleased with it. Ah, and there were not that many distros, i think i started with Slackware, and since then only Redhat ( and now Fedora). I've tried also SuSE and Mandrake, but RH was the most consistent and the most easy to work with that time. SuSE was a PITA, until maybe the latest versions. Debian was out of range because of the "stable means old software" filosofy, even though i used the backports for various friends of mine, who wanted desktops with Debian.

    Now, if i take a look of latest gnome, but especially latest KDE, i can tell you, boy, this a fucking marvellous piece of UI, compared with was before. And all the small bits of integration with hardware are getting close to be a commodity, and not a luxury. I know, i didn't give back to much back to the community, but i am lurking from time to time in frenode's IRC channels, helping some poor beginners. Although, i think while the user friendliness of KDE(or gnome) has skyrocketed, there are still many hacks needed to make the user get the max out of what is offered. The weakest point and also the strongest point of FOSS is this somehow fractured and all over the world decentralised development of software. We should never abandon it, even if that would hurt the potential user ( i am not saying customer, because we talk about distribution and not commercialization).

    That being said, I applaud again the efforts of all developers, that keep us with the vision of a Linux Desktop.

  5. Re:Built for Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The day all hardware distributors starts writing drivers for their products in linux, will be a milestone in my oppinion. The only thing keeping me from using linux on my laptop is the lack of drivers for videocards/touchpads suspend etc. Linux for me isn't about license costs etc, it's about a stable working system at all times. A system where things eighter work or don't work at all. Thats not the case in all other OS:es...

    In other words, if installation and hardware support where as good as in for example Windows, this wouldn't keep the day to day users away.

  6. Gamers by DigiShaman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What about games? THe only reason I'm staying with WinXP is to play the latest games due to DirectX/Open GL support and the always updated driver base. Seriously, why is the entertainment aspect always left out? For fucks sake, gaming is a multi-billion dollar industry. I would THINK it would be a huge factor for home PC users.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  7. Penguin powered for ages by LABarr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have been running my business on a Linux desktop and F/OSS for a number of years. (My servers are all OpenBSD, however) I have done a number of consulting gigs where a Linux deployment is discussed, and in some cases, choosen as the exclusive desktop solution. If there are no applications that the client has that absolutely requires Windows to run, i.e. beyond what they can do with e-mail, firefox, openoffice.org, GIMP, etc. --it isn't a difficult to sell them on the idea. Especially when pointing out the many advantages of an MS free office. I once recommended a Linux solution and told the client to keep a reserve of cash on hand to purchase Windows (OS and Office suite) software if they should find themselves feeling like they couldn't get by running a Linux desktop. That reserve has long since been spent, they are still running Linux, and there isn't a Windows desktop to be found anywhere. In other cases running a handful of Windows boxes for the people that really need it mixed with a mostly Linux deployment is the answer.

    Many clients have said that it is not that much of a change for them and that they wonder what all the fuss was about?

    I personally have actually found myself lost trying to do even trivial tasks on a friend's borrowed Windows machine that I wouldn't have to think twice about using my own laptop running Linux... I have started carrying LiveCD's just so this doesn't become more of an issue. The tools that come standard on many Linux distro's are far superior to those available to other OS's. It's a no brainer for me...

    ---
    Simulated Sig

  8. Re:Built for Linux by NickFortune · · Score: 5, Insightful
    In some ways the linux-on-the-desktop debate reminds me of the early days of AI. People used to think up realy hard problems for computers saying "if a computer can perform task X then it will be intelligent". The trouble is that every time we find out how to make a computer do task X, people say "oh, that's not intelligence - that's just an algorithm" and start devising harder problems to crack. Computer chess was once regarded as an AI Milestone, for example.

    Similarly, I think that what Linux needs to be considered desktop ready is being likewise constantly redefined. I mean the guys who were interested in Linux when Slackware was frst released saw "desktop readiness" happen years ago. The trouble is that each such milestone brings Linux to the attention of a larger, less technically adept group who look at the OS and say "Nice ideas, but it's not ready for the desktop..."

    Just a random passing thought

    --
    Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!