Slashdot Mirror
Linux Desktop Ready, Says Mainstream Media
DeathElk writes, "The Sydney Morning Herald recently featured an article espousing the virtues of desktop Linux. From the article: 'Linux is shedding its hard-core techie image in a bid to woo ordinary human beings seeking an easy-to-use operating system that can be downloaded for free.' Is this a step forward for widespread GNU/Linux desktop adoption? Too bad the article doesn't mention the large range of live CD/DVD distributions available for try-before-you-fly, or the range of Windows applications tested and working under Wine." Also, the article is slightly unclear on the concept of open source, defining it as an arrangement "where the source code can be modified upon the request of users or other developers."
The mainstream media is never confused with the meaning of open source.
Lies.
"If you don't have eyes you shouldn't have wings" -- Carl Pilkington
What about the geeks who use Linux because it's not mainstream? What will they use now? Dragonfly?
-uso.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
If the Mainstream Media says Linux is desktop ready, then desktop ready it must be!
After all, the Mainstream Media is well known for its expertise in IT and its reliability as a source of proven facts and sober analysis!
Hrm.
Actually, now that I think about it, I do believe this is proof positive that Linux is absolutely not desktop ready.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
How exactly does one Australian newspaper with a circulation of 365,000 (Wikipedia) count as the mainstream media?
I used to play with Red Hat in 2003, and I found it just a little too hard for everyday use to keep using, so I went back to Windows/OSX
A few weeks ago, I started playing with Ubuntu, and I gotta say, there is no reason why it can't replace windows on the desktop. If Dell will start installing it on systems (thus knocking $100 buck off the price of a machine), then it can make some serious in-roads, and knock Windows back.
I don't know if it's ready for a corporate enviroment, though. Although I don't like MS, their combo of Exchange, AD, and DC is pretty powerful.
when exactly was this quote taken? what is he talking about, am i missing something?
granted, i havent used Ubutuntu, but i used Red Hat, SuSE, and Fedora as a desktop for a few years, and all were very easy to install and use.
IMHO, linux has been ready for the desktop for years, but the world just isnt ready for linux.
I like Windows XP Home Edition much more than the Linus-operative system.
... plus even more!"
It is the most powerful operating-system for Pee Cees. It looks not as metrosexually-oriented as Mac OS X by Steve "Rim" Jobs and has 1,0000,0000 times more softwares that the Linus-operating-system (I mean real software, not shareware like GUN).
Plus, it comes with every Pee Cee for free. People who have grown acusstomt to paying RatHat 699 $$$ or more can hardly beleive this when I consult them with my proffesional Internet- and Network-Service-Center-Bureau.
When I have a new customer, I take him to the back-room to show him the "alternative" to XP Home, which is Suse Linus 7.0.
I have set-up an old Pentium 133Hz and a small monochrome monitor to show the customer what Linux looks and feels like.
I have it set-up so it runs a fullscreen-Flash-splash-screen on the KDE-4-beta-desktop. It takes 13 min until the mouse cursor responds.
The customer will then make a sound like: "BAH!"
Then I tell them: "See, this is how it is if we let the communists make software."
Then we have a good laugh, wich is psycologically valuable for the customer-relationship.
I always tell them:
"Windows XP Home Edition is all you can do to embiggen the producationality of your human resourcers and empower to leverage the outcome-bottomlime of your stickholders
My customers usually are like: "OMG!"
You should really try it one day; it has a very nice light-reddish color theme to hit your tastes.
Thank you!
1. The check is in the mail
2. I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you.
3. I won't cum in your mouth.
4. Linux is ready for the desktop.
...does it have the latest version of "Microsoft Drm?" Because I'm not buying it if it doesn't manage my digital rights.
Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.
I am so tired of two sets of articles: those discussing whether Linux is "ready" for the desktop, and those that say that "NOW is the time when there will be massive adoption of Linux on the desktop."
On the first set of articles: Linux is already "ready" for the desktop. I use it on my desktop already, and it does everything I need it to do. It is for me a superior choice.
On the second set of articles, what they usually mean is that upon some event, there will be massive adoption of Linux on the desktop in rich, developed countries. "some event" varies and is typically purported to be 1) the coming of a new Windows version, such as Vista, which will be expensive and have high hardware requirements; 2) some big vendor preinstalling Linux, or 3) some big Windows security flaw, or 4) some other pain in the ass thing that MS is newly implementing, such as more DRM or copy restriction.
Well I've got news: it's highly unlikely we will ever see "widespread adoption" of Linux on desktops in rich developed countries. People in these countries can afford Windows, and switching is a big pain. Windows is crappy, but not crappy enough to switch away. It would be amazing if we even saw adoption rates that paralleled the adoption rates of Firefox in parts of Europe, but I think even that is unlikely. Note that I'm not saying anything about developing countries, where the dynamics--economic and political--may be quite different.
I'm tired of these articles because I don't understand why they're relevant. It's much more likely that we would see massive adoption of the Mac than of Linux. But we don't see articles crowing about that. Macheads are secure in their superiority complex; they don't see a need to sit around and predict when Mac world domination will happen. They don't worry that the Mac is irrelevant, no matter how small its market share is. Macheads are happy because their machines do what they want them to do. As a Linux user, I feel the same way. My machine does what I want it to do. My platform is not irrelevant--huge companies like Adobe, IBM, and Intel realize its importance even on the desktop. I do not care that roughly ninety percent of people use Windows, and I do not care about world domination.
Unfortunately it's often pro-Linux people (rather than just random press idiots) who promote this world domination crap. We need to realize that we've got a great platform, it works for us, and it's continuing to improve and work for even more people. The world domination and "ready for desktop" talk is tiresome and it just makes us look stupid.
Penny - plain text accounting
>But didn't you just say you used Ubuntu?
Fake mustache falls off...
Oh my God, it's Ballmer! Get him!!!!
Summation 2