The Next Leap for Linux

Nrbelex writes "The New York Times is taking a look at the state of Linux. "Linux has always had a reputation of being difficult to install and daunting to use. Most of the popular Windows and Macintosh programs cannot be used on it, and hand-holding — not that you get that much of it with Windows — is rare. But those reasons for rejecting Linux are disappearing." The article discusses major PC makers' newest offers and compares them to their Windows counterparts."

Comments

Less keystrokes

[jonoton]

to install debian than to type in the windoze license key.

Re:Less keystrokes

[Aladrin]

When something goes wrong with my mother's Windows-based computer, what does she do? I'll give you a hint: It doesn't involve fixing it herself.

How is that any different than Linux, with the exception that with Linux, I wouldn't have to leave my house to go fix her computer?

The only reason I've left her on Windows is that she plays those Reflexive.net games. If they played on Linux, and were easy to install (there's nothing easy about Wine, and it only works on these Reflexive.net games some of the time) then I'd switch her over. Heck, I could even install the games for here remotely, if they'd run afterwards.

Re:Less keystrokes

[walt-sjc]

The ubiquitous nature of windows makes it very easy to fix your machine should something go wrong.

Really? Sorry, but that's just not true. In fact, the famous Geek Squad usually fixes all Windows problems by re-imaging your box (which may solve the problem, but also wipes all your data, which is not cool at all, and not REALLY a true fix.) It would be like hiring someone to fix a leak in your roof and you come home and find that the roof was replaced, but now all your personal possessions in your house are gone.

To really fix windows problems requires a fairly significant amount of skill / knowledge that MOST end users (and Geek Squad employees) simply DO NOT HAVE. If this guy's mom runs into problems on Windows, she will call him anyway.

Once a Linux box is properly setup and running (which I admit may be a bit of a challenge if you have certain bits of "Windows Only" hardware) it is LESS likely to have problems than a Windows box in the first place.

The fact that it's on mainstream press..

[jkrise]

Itself means Linux has made a good 'Next Leap'. Seriously! Until a few months back, the only Linux news used to be about the SCO case, Microsoft - Novell patents FUD etc. The nature of the GPL has meant that the cat is now well out of the bag, and the mainstream press outlets are compelled to sing the Penguin March.

Poor network performance in Vista, the OOXML vote and now, the Excel 2007 calculation howler have made bad press for Microsoft. Not a day passes on Digg without Ubuntu articles getting over thousands of Diggs. So now, the NYT, Forbes, Gartner, Yankee and the rest must join the Linux bandwagon. Or be left behind.

Re:Correction

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

The same reasons still exist... a lot of the professional software used by many folks, still only exist on windows, and hardware vendors are not quick to support linux.

Its been that way since i installed slackware 1

COULD THIS BE!?

[kevmatic]

The Year of the Linux Desktop!?!?!

Probably not.

There's not going to be some sudden revolution to Linux, its going to come gradually. There won't be a Year of the Linux Desktop, I'm thinking one day we'll all look back and marvel about how mainstream Linux snuck up on us.

I doubt this article will get any more than a couple dozen people to try it. But its a start.

What amazes me is how rapidly its improving. The Kubuntu install I'm using is only a year old, but the new Gusty Beta is so much different it might as well be a different OS entirely. How much does Windows improve in a year?

Oh, that's right, they take SIX YEARS to improve, and ended up with Vista.

(K)ubuntu is out pacing Windows so bad its only a matter of time before it overtakes Windows in all fronts. I mean, the automatix problem they're talking in TFA is supposedly already fixed for Gusty, and there's a ton of other features that people will love.

And yeah, and takes days to get an XP reinstall into a usable state too, with drivers and Firefox and updates and anti virus and antispyware and office suites and media players that have to be installed.

Seems to me people who ask the question "is Linux ready for Mainstream?" compare it to a perfect Windows that I've never seen in person.

Re:The article contradicts itself.

[Dr. Manhattan]

we'd really need wine to be easier to handle and more feature-complete to satisfy those users too.

Nope, that's a trap. OS/2 was essentially 100% Windows 3.1 compatible, and what happened? Developers thought, "Why bother writing an OS/2 native app when I can just write a Windows app and be compatible?" So OS/2 never got any apps to speak of. And we know where it is today.

Linux needs those alternative, native (or at least cross-platform) apps.

Re:what?

[PFI_Optix]

Troll away, but I think it's safe to say that Linux has taken far more leaps than any other OS since OSX and XP were first released.

It's nice to see an article that at least touches on the shortcomings that hold Linux back as a desktop operating system AND about what is being done/needs to be done to resolve those.

I think this sums it up nicely:

After using the operating system for writing, Web surfing, graphic editing, movie watching and a few other tasks, it is easy to conclude that Linux can be an alternative to the major operating systems. But since common tasks like watching a movie or syncing an iPod require hunting for and installing extra software, Linux is best for technically savvy users or for people whose needs are so basic that they will never need anything other than the bundled software.

However, trying Linux -- especially if you boot it from a CD -- is a great way to find out what a lot of open-source adherents are so excited about.

Linux is easy to start using, especially distros like Ubuntu that bundle a lot of good apps into a near-turnkey solution. I don't think any other OS is quite so functional immediately after install. Linux is also a dream for the technical-minded power users who love to customize and control every aspect of their digital workspace. Where Linux falls short right now is in the middle ground: going from the basic install to a system that is functionally competitive with Vista Home Premium or OSX without being one of those powerusers is a daunting task that can--and will, given time--be made easier.

Articles like this coming out of the mainstream media can seem like fluff with very little content to the avid Linux community, but they need to be taken seriously. They're a good indication of what the outside world wants to see in the next round of distros, which gives the developers at least a hint of a way to expand the userbase. Based on this article and others like it, I'd suggest two things:

1) Make media easier to start using. I'm sure there are a dozen distro teams working on this right now, so I'm probably preaching to the choir...but it needs to be said, lest no one say it at all. I've had issues making media work in Linux recently, and am sticking with Vista at the moment because I can't find a few consecutive hours to devote to troubleshooting the matter.

2) The current method of documentation is quite informative, but a bit dry and sometimes difficult to absorb due to the format. The Linux community would be greatly benefited by solid tutorials based on the documentation and FAQs that are spread all over the internet. I'm not talking about a text file tutorial...I'm talking about a video, or even (if it's possible) a custom live cd distro for the purpose of instructing users. However it can be executed, the end result should be advancing the skill level of the user beyond that which they might reach with the current documentation. (disclaimer: I have a personal interest in this, as I tend to stall out on Linux projects because I have trouble finding some crucial piece of information that might be better taught than read.)