Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Free, One Year Later
madgreek writes "Last year I wrote of my switch from XP to Ubuntu at work. Now a year later, I am back to reflect on one year of being extremely productive at work using (almost) nothing but open source software in a Microsoft world."
I'm sure that many people will point at his failures (IE6 for some activeX websites & visio) as proof that linux is still not ready for the desktop. But these apps aren't available for the Mac either & few are suggesting OS X is not ready for the desktop.
Unfortunately, what's preventing business's adopting Linux or OS X is the fact that the various 'solution providers' & VARs make more money reselling Microsoft products.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Linux has a Visio Clone: Kvivi
.vsd files. Unfortunately, neither Kvivio nor Dia can do that (not last time I needed it anyway).
The article was talking about interoperating with
Import the Cisco Symbols from DIA.
Why not just say "Linux has a Visio Clone: Dia"
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
I suppose all the 'Year of Linux' people will come out and say 'This is the year of Linux' and so on and so fourth.
Linux has had many years, and for what it has been up against, an illegal government coerced monopoly with more and more stress being put on it from every direction, it has not disappointed me in the slightest. With a dignity I hope that I have a tenth of when I die, Linux users and Linux developers have fought, and some died defending the vision of Linux and the FSF to preserve a future where some of us still do control how our computers are used.
To that end, every year Linux stays alive and relevant is the year of Linux. You see, Linux is fighting constantly a war against complete eradication. Not just Microsoft, but many software vendors, hardware makers, governments, and yes, a malevolent user base hate Linux, and every minute of every day seek to find ways of eradicating Linux from this world. A world where Linux is quarantined into certain sectors like server environment, is a path to extinction like Netware.
As far as Linux in the social arena. Linux as a social movement in its aspect as a social reform movement need not die out. In the Internet world, Linux is a symbol of transparency, of honest behavior, and accountability. Without Linux we would all be staring at a dark Palladium filled future.
So, in the name of the secular Linux social movement for transparency, property rights, freedom of speech and what not. Try and see what you can do to prevent Linux the OS from going into that quite good night. Develop. Write code, fix drivers, create new ideas. That driver for that hardware, that new application may be the driver or the program that changes history.
Yes there are aspects of Linux that are difficult. So, lets make sure this year isn't the last year of Linux, the year Linux became as obscure as DR-DOS, and Amiga, and the Z80. because, I'm sorry, but some things have to be fought for.
I find Linux more capable on the Desktop than Microsoft. There are often times when MS's (using XP) internal burning software is inadequate - like burning images. I don't know if it's fixed yet, but for a long time XP just would not burn an image with its built in software and you had to use something like Nero. Never had a problem burning an image running any linux distro. Same with mounting .iso right from the harddrive as a cd-rom. It usually required some pay-for software (Alcohol 120%) in Windows, while a 2 minute search yield a few command lines to do it in Ubuntu. I know I'd rather save the money.
A typical mainstream Linux distro is ready. It's often superior in many ways to MS, as MS seems to deliberately makes their OS do almost nothing useful beyond the basics it seems (or was it that Monopoly ruling that caused this?) It's now just 3rd party apps for most people. Web Browsing has reversed itself (there are enough people who wouldn't switch from Firefox due to plug-ins they can't get in IE).
On the Corporate Level, solution providers are slow to change if they're an MS only shop. I even know the university/college level has problems. Blackboard and other such garbage.
I suspect the oncoming economic shitstorm may finally get corporations to really tighten their belts and that company-wide OS licenses may just not fit in the budget anymore looking ahead 5 years in some places. I just hope the current/next generation of purchase managers learns from the past and looks to do away with vendor lock-in in so many areas as much as possible.
Take the analogy of building a house. Sure you can buy a piece a land and do it by yourself.
But most people pay contractors to do it. And it costs a lot of money, and there's a lot of delays, troubles, etc. But eventually they feel happy and comfy.
Of course, if a pipe breaks... when you built it yourself, you're the sole responsible for this.
I think the headline should be written as "Microsoft-free, ..".
few are suggesting OS X is not ready for the desktop
While I wouldn't say that OSX isn't ready for the desktop, I would say it might not be ready for the corporate desktop.
One of the places Microsoft has put a lot of effort is into large-scale enterprise systems management. Features of Windows like Active Directory, Group Policy, WSUS, etc are what corporate clients really care about. They want to be able to easily and centrally manage users, permissions, operating system updates, and software restrictions. Unless/until there are tools that allow you to do these kinds of things with OSX and Linux, I think you'll see some hesitation on the part of large corporations.
I know you can do some of this stuff for Linux (user management with LDAP, customized package repos, etc) but I don't know about OSX. I do know however that there is a big difference between "ready for the desktop" and "ready for the corporate desktop".
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
Unfortunately, what's preventing business's adopting Linux or OS X is the fact that the various 'solution providers' & VARs make more money reselling Microsoft products.
It's not just the Microsoft products that keep businesses using Microsoft products...it's the business processes that are wrapped around the existing software. Upgrades are expensive, but less expensive than conversions to new software (and processes). There are also costs (and questions) regarding conversion of legacy data.
Until businesses can migrate to systems that are agnostic to specific processes (and applications) , it will be difficult to show a positive return on investment for the large expense.
Not to flame, just giving my perspective.
But...You are right...kind of... (you must be a CISSP?)
The funny thing is that the compliances you speak of, are from more respected UNIX/LINUX sources than you think (or care to Google). Just because "Microsoft" is stamped on the box doesn't mean you get a free pass from the NSA or other government security office.
True UNIX and Linux admins don't (and won't) fit into most company IT budgets. Which is why 90% of them are consultants (such as myself), and are treated like rogue warriors, and don't necessarily warrant a full time position. At $75-$125 per hour, they are the true guru's who fix your HP-UX and AIX machines that run your accounting software and gets your numbers to your "precious" shareholders. They are the admins who come in and do "forensics" to figure out where the DOS attacks came from, or how to get your systems running in a hurry.
MSCE's on the other hand ARE $0.10 per baker's dozen, and fit well within the 25K-40K budget for most company IT wages. (And they get the double bonus acting as Windows Help Desk personnel for regular end users.)
They are the ones pointing to the "mystery box" that holds the magical number software as I walk in. Quite often I deal with horrified executives that wonder "Why can't Joe Mcse get it up and running, he's got a certification?!?!" The answer is because it's above their "Geeks" head, and they don't have time to do the research because their phone is ringing off the hook, answering why Outlook isn't responding, or some guy lost his "Start" button.
A lot of warehouse computers use wireless because of cabling issues. It's not that uncommon.
Me failed English...
FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
If you want to compare raw out-of-the-box functionality, then I agree with you-- a default no-frills XP install is practically useless compared to the average default Linux install, which mostly gives you what you need, though there are exceptions.
"It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
Exactly. A Linux distribution is the OS plus userland applications.
The Linux OS itself doesn't provide any of the functionality the GP talks about.
Amnesty International
Because he has absolutely no idea what he is doing. I'm sure his wireless card drops his connections because he lives in an apartment building with 30 routers all within 20 feet, each fighting for the same 11 channels. And what's up with not getting two monitors going? You really have to struggle to mess that up. Maybe he's using some Acer POS monitor that is semi-defective (I've had that problem) or trying to do it under VESA emulation. If you get a $40 Nvidia card with dual heads, you can install the Nvidia driver pretty easily. If you are clueless, you can let the driver do a virtual screen and run two monitors that way. Or if you have more than a handful of neurons, you can set up your Nvidia card as two separate devices and dual monitors can be supported just like with an iMac (for proof, I've posted the relevant part of my xorg.conf file as a reply to myself with my Karma bonus turned off). Also, gnome is stable. My semi-computer literate brother has been using gnome with breezy badger for about 2 years now. He hasn't had any problems. Basically, the GP is either trolling or has been proactive about hosing his otherwise good system. Even lifelong windows users who don't give a flip about *nix can switch to ubuntu without any effect on PRODUCTIVITY. I've seen it done more than once with old computers. The only people who should have a problem are gamers (voiding the productivity argument), ms windows developers, and corporates who get told what they can and can't run on their desktops.
Just callin' it like I see it.
DT Pro is the version that you have to pay for, thus getting it for free from some shady website should at least make you think twice, in the same way that you probably shouldn't download kernel sources from untrusted websites without checking the MD5/SHA checksum.
I haven't been infested with malware in the last decade, although this is only anecdotal evidence.
It is indeed convenient for installing various software packages --- which is sorely lacking in Windows --- although the usage of a centralized software repository does not guarantee that the binaries will be free of defects/malware either, since someone could poison the upstream source of software(which already happened in the past) and the maintainer would have no clue.
Jean-Francois Im's blog
And how joyous it would have been if IE were not so tightly integrated with Windows following that theory.
However, wanting certain capabilities bundled with the OS is not necessarily asking for it being integrated with the OS.
it come to our attention that someone released a fake DT PRO version that is contaminated with trojans and viruses, among the fact it is only a DT Lite and not a PRO version!
Tried any bootleg copies of Microsoft compatable software lately? In Linux, malware is the exception. In Windows, you better have your AV up to date as malware, trojans, and viruses is pretty much standard on the shady side of town.
The truth shall set you free!
Linux *isn't* there yet.
Are you implying something is there yet? From what I've seen, Apple is closer to "there" than MS. Especially with Vista. MS may be close, but they are headed away from target. At least Linux and Apple are headed in the right direction.
The truth shall set you free!
Well in my case it's because the kids get XP boxes, so they can run their damn games, and they have to have Administrator privileges to install and run them....so, naturally, they download trojans and spyware and all sorts of evil cruft, and sure as death and taxes the machine gronks every few months.
/home.
My choices are:
(1) Get the 13-year-old to become a qualified Microsoft system admin (snrk! hah!).
(2) Become one myself (like I've got nothing better to do).
(3) Wipe the drive and reinstall every so often.
Thanks, Microsoft and partners (e.g. game developers), for a truly brainless security model.
BTW, please don't bother telling me how if I only took off six months to learn all about Windows I could manage this without pain. I've got a regular job, thanks. Plus I don't have to learn anything to turn 'em loose on my Ubuntu box, because they can install and run anything they like -- Google browser bars, random Java crap -- but the worst they can do is screw up their own home directory and maybe lock the machine up and make me reboot it and run fsck on
Yes. The Civic is cheap, fuel-efficient, probably more reliable than the BMW these days, and gets me from A to B without making a fuss about it. Why would I want the more expensive BMW? For a few extra toys? Fuck that.
Of course in this analogy the Civic is Linux and the BMW is Windows (though I believe everything I said is true about Hondas and BMWs too). I do have a real-life anecdote though to make this post more meaningful.
The Linux desktop experience today in 2008 has the appeal, driver support, and aesthetics of Windows 98. Oh wait, Win98 did have driver support.I got two pieces of new hardware recently. A Kodak EasyShare P850 digital camera and an Epson Stylus E66 printer. Neither is exactly new, but the Kodak is still available first-hand.
The Kodak was an easy one. The instructions for Windows entailed installing the software FIRST (bad things can happen if you plug it in first apparently) and then doing stuff with the camera. Under Linux, installation involved plugging in the camera. Kubuntu detected the camera, and offered to start up digiKam for me so I could get the pictures. Worked first time.
The printer was a slightly more involved issue. My mum and the seller (both Windows people) were fussing about drivers. They knew the CD only included Windows drivers, but I ended up with an e-mail linking me to the website, where one or both thought I may find Linux drivers. As I expected, nothing was present (only Windows drivers, not even Mac OS X drivers, shame on Epson). So I plugged it in, went through drivers in KControl, found the printer, selected Epson Stylus E66 drivers, gave the printer a name, and found that it now worked.
The lesson I've learned with all this is that Linux either works with your hardware, or it doesn't. There's no driver installation or anything. It it works, it works right away. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work and won't work until it's in the kernel. So it's either perfect usability, or no usability at all. My idea of hell being forever made to try and get non-kernel supported hardware working with Linux. It's that bad.
An OS with no bundled applications is rather useless from an end users point of view.
Most people expect the OS to come bundled and pre-configured with applications like a window-manager, file-manager, text-editor, http-reader, cd/dvd-tools, other file-managing tools (copy, move, etc), configuration-managers, tcp/ip-stack, bluetooth-stack, etc, etc.
Why does Windows come with less powerful applications bundled than most other OS's, then?
MS also sell (or license, which isn't exactly the same) applications, which is why they only bundle the minimum of what they can get away with while still keeping competitors at bay.
If you want to have full productivity using Windows, they want you to also pay for the applications needed for this.
A free OS bundle doesn't need to keep the full functionality back in order so sell other software.
They can ship with everything needed for full productivity bundled.
/.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
Kivio is NOT capable of reading/writing visio file format? In fact, none of the "visio clones" can do that. If OOA was smart, this is the one place that they would expand some effort. It is SORELY lacking. In fact, any of the companies that are pushing OOA, would do well to decode the format, and then write a GPL (or berkley) library for interacting with said format. The clones would incorporate that quickly, and Sun would most likely jump on creating a clone as well.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Upgrades are expensive, but less expensive than conversions to new software (and processes). There are also costs (and questions) regarding conversion of legacy data.
There is some of that, though I'd argue that it's ultimately more expensive long term to stay locked in at the process level. Data conversion, I assume you mean file format conversion. Access db's, linked spreadsheets, that kind of thing. Those can be tricky. Luckily the trend toward the browser as a software front end is making that less of an issue.
I've used Ubuntu almost exclusively at home with no problems exchanging data with MS users. The biggest obstacle to large scale utilization of Linux commodity desktops in the enterprise that I see is just a lack of understanding. Linux doesn't have much of an ad budget right now. There will still be some users who need Windows only software for task specific applications which can be managed with a Windows kiosk here and there and some users will prefer Mac. But staying locked in to the Windows/Office/Outlook on every desktop these days is just insane. I think a lot of companies do it simply because the devil they know is better than the devil they don't know.
I'm wondering how practical it would be to do away with internal networks all together? Be interesting to try. Where the local network is nothing but a pipeline to the internet and print sharing. All the traditional network services are provided as web services. File storage, productivity, collaboration, messaging, email. Theoretically that would allow you to connect any client OS with far less of the client management overhead. We're not really that far from that now when you think about it. I could see a lot of advantages. Users could interact with the business environment the same way from anywhere. The office, home, Starbucks...wouldn't matter. Windows, Linux, Mac...wouldn't matter. Then you could treat every client as dirty, and with Windows that's a pretty safe assumption.
Until businesses can migrate to systems that are agnostic to specific processes (and applications)
That's not that hard, either. Just takes commitment to move that direction. To make your business environment OS agnostic. The technical steps aren't that hard anymore. Just seems like we're duplicating a lot of effort right now in enterprise networks.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
This is a 100% Linux laptop and still I need to rely on wine and Vmware to use the applications I really want/need.
That's all very well for you, but I still need to rely on Linux for my audio software, which just plain doesn't work in Windows. So, Windows isn't ready for the desktop either.
Windows comes with less bundled software because the anti-microsoft hypocrites claim that when microsoft includes extra apps that it is an anti-competitive action.
5? Informative? It's just FUD with a non sequitur example. Randomly downloading an executable and expecting it to be as advertised is not what this is about. He found free software for Windows, thus dismantling the OP's argument. What you did was to compare a software repository in Linux with anything randomly downloaded from the internet. That's not only inaccurate .. it's stupid.
Your example is furthermore flawed because if you'd downloaded DT from the original site (or any other repository you might trust, like Softpedia or FileForum) you wouldn't risk the trojan. There you have what you could call your precious "centralized repository". Add a rogue/unknown repository for, I don't know, MP3 support in Fedora and you're about as safe as you are downloading programs from the evil innertubes! Having a warning from the authors in the authors' site as an example of the benefits of "centralized software repository" in Linux vs freeware on the internet is *facepalm*. It's like saying communism is superior to capitalism because "it's centralized planning and thus perfectly safe and fun for the whole family". Yes. I can use stupid analogies too.
The "centralized software repository" you like is just convenience. Someone compiled software so you don't have to. It's not safe, nor is it for the greater good of the users. Don't find what you want/need in the main repo? You either do what the poor Windows users do and download a package from some evil random website, or compile yourself from some evil random website with sources. Difference being...?
Well, there is one thing. Microsoft isn't allowed to add too many freebies in it's OS because of monopoly allegations (Media Player in Europe for example). Linux just copies stuff they like from the Windows platforms and call it something funny//witty/similar and often get away with it. It's a "port" and not a "copy".
The OP argued about free software in Linux versus, what he believed, were only commercially available software in Windows. He's wrong, and your argument is too.
/* Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana */
It's integrated into the OS and into many of its applications. Many things won't work without it. Like Windows Update, Steam, Active Desktop and just about any app that integrates IE to view webpages.
In most circles, modularity and code-reuse are considered *good* things.
You can't really remove it without crippling the rest of the system.
And how much stuff that depends on khtml or WebKit do you think would keep working if you just ripped them out ?
The "tightly bundled" argument is basically complaining because a piece of shared code is being used exactly in the way shared code is supposed to be. I fail to see why it is a valid complaint.
, since someone could poison the upstream source of software(which already happened in the past [slashdot.org]) and the maintainer would have no clue.
True, but once the upstream project discovers the problem the distro repo. maintainer can release the fixed version as an update, which will automatically apply to all users of their distro.
With random Windows apps I'd have to keep checking their websites or news sites myself to keep track of these issues, or any other security issues with the app. And then manually download it.
The current method adopted by many Windows apps of each having their own 'update manager' process running in the tray is not a sustainable in any way.
Pre-canned Evolution Links for all those Slashdot holy wars.
Remember when ppl would complain when asked to RTFM? now it's "I don't want to click the updater, or do a simple google search!" The biggest boon to Linux in the past 5 years is the support coming out of forums IMO.
"drink deeply the illusion of your safety"
If all you do is push around documents at work (word processing), write/answer email, and browse the web, then you can use anything you want as long as it's not a problem with your boss. However, many of us here on these boards do things more platform specific... whether it's admin a bunch of Linux servers or write/maintain Windows or OSX platform software. If you are tied to doing something more platform specific, it's just more work to install some-other-OS that you won't use except maybe as a host OS for some VM software that you'll use to run VMs of your platform. IT doesn't necessarily want to support you (or let you support yourself), either.
It would be "bad" for me to just decide to switch OSs at work for the fun of it and it would buy me practically nothing (in fact, it would probably result in a huge problem) even though we already use VMs for 100% of our 'real' work (I only use the host for word processing, email, and surfing the web). The 'badness' would come from our IT people having support issues and probably numerous issues with security assessments and such that the IT people are (ultimately) responsible for. It'd just be too much hassle and I'd be singled out as 'that ass who is trying to be self-cool by going against the grain'.
These threads are always fun to read.
/rant
If an app crashes on a Windows box, it must be Windows fault. If it crashes on a l/unix box, it must be the app's fault.
If an app that runs on Windows has a price tag attached, it must be Windows fault. If an app that runs on l/unix has a price tag attached, the developer needs thier head checked.
If an app comes comes preinstalled in Windows it's bloat (and Microsoft's fault, even though most of the adware/shareware/freeware has nothing to do with them). If an app comes preinstalled with l/unix, it's a feature.
Yes, Windows is not free and it's not open source. When viewed purely as an OS, it certainly isn't perfect. But please, for the love of God, how is it Windows' fault that *any* other application is not free, and most app/security problems because of poor 3rd party coding? Yet every time this discussion rears its head, people trot out a list of free alternatives to applications that have absolutely nothing to do with Microsoft or Windows (as an operating system) as a reason for how much better thier lives are in Windows free world.
If anything, it's the community that should take the blame for the lack of free/open source software on Windows, not Microsoft.
*Disclaimer: I have nothing against either Windows or linux and use both. This rant courtesy of having had to work with some very rabid linux fanboys in the past. The kind that would regularly spend hours, or even days, fine tuning whatever shiny new app they'd discovered for thier linux box - and then turn around and use it as an excuse as to why thier actual work isn't done (and no, they were not sysadmins).
I've had a strange trip on finding what was 'there'. I went from Microsoft (dos to xp), to linux (ran the gauntlet over the years, redhat, fedora, gentoo, debain, ubuntu), and just last month found my sweet spot with apple.
I've actually explained OSx as a *nix that works as advertised. While ubuntu was almost flawless without messing with it, the key word there is almost. There were minor annoyances that were always floating to the surface. After switching to my mac, I've found that none of those are there. My sound works perfect, my wireless is perfect, my multiple monitor support is perfect, All my favorite apps exist on mac (including all my old linux apps), and mac has some great features ubuntu didn't have.
I'll still keep a linux workstation at home and keep up to date. Windows is gone from my house, I sold the last copy I had of it with my last computer. But going forward, I think I'm sticking with apple. Unless their DRM gets 100% unbearable.
Because he has absolutely no idea what he is doing. I'm sure his wireless card drops his connections because he lives in an apartment building with 30 routers all within 20 feet, each fighting for the same 11 channels.
Even though the rest of your answer was dead-on, I take issue with the part that I quoted.In my case I also have my media center / headless server connected via wireless because my dsl modem is next to my door (that's where the POTS line is), and I don't want to run cables on the ground/walls/under doors all over my house when it's much easier to just use wireless.
In any case, in my appartment building I have almost no wireless interference from other routers and I've always been able to use my internet connection to it's limits without any loss of signal quality.
So what I mean is, for some people it makes a lot of sense to use wireless, even if it is for a computer that never moves.
That, or I also "have no idea what I'm doing".
Nope. And, the fact that you have been modded "troll" proves it.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
I find it interesting and a little aggravating that people always imply it is the open source software that isn't interoperable, i.e. "Kivio and Dia can't do that." Visio and the .vsd file format are the ones actively trying not to be interoperable, i.e. "the .vsd file format can't do that."
The problem goes away if the people you work with also use open standards. Even if they don't, usually all it takes is for someone to send you an exported image file instead of a .vsd file, as I rarely have to edit a file someone else controls.
This space intentionally left blank.
Dev 2: Great idea! Hey, in the next version lets combine the chat client and registry editor!
Dev 1: Oh, and the speech recognition with the disk defragger!
Dev 2: Now that's slick coding! Let's stay late and brainstorm again tomorrow!
Dev 1: Aw man, I can't stay late tomorrow, I have to go home and combine my car and my clothes dryer.
Dev 2: Oh that is gonna be so badass! I have to
stop by and see it on the weekend!
Also you might want to check the definition of modularity. A quick Google search turned up this: A quality of a system where it consists of various parts which separate cleanly and fit together well. High modularity costs some design time but pays back well through clarity, elegance, maintainability and flexibility. Separate cleanly. Can I separate the update functionality, or Active Desktop (ugh) from IE?
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
If your definition of "desktop-ready" is "works exactly like Windows", then no non-Windows OS will ever be there. There will always be Windows apps that will not work for Linux. This isn't a "shortcoming" of Linux, and it is not the job of developers to make Linux completely compatible with Windows applications.
Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
This is the key. They *approach* functionality, but don't *exceed* it. What's the point of a tool if it half-asses it? Just because it's free?
I personally think the biggest Achilles Heel wtih OSS (on top of the crummy user interfaces that seem to be everywhere) is the mindset that *almost* doing it as well as the commercial closed counterparts is good enough, because hey! it's free! We end up with a ton of software that mostly does the same job, if you fidget with it just right, but it's "ok because it's free and open". Firefox got it right - they offer a BETTER product than their competition. Most everything else just feels like it's perpetually playing catch-up.
Ardour, and a bunch of softsynths. In particular, there is no Windows replacement for the softsynths, and nothing really like Ardour.
Try using the tool before you slag it.
Kivio is better and easier than Visio for 99% of the users who typically work with flowcharting software. I used the term "approach" because it's functionality doesn't precisely overlap that of Visio.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
I think you missed his point. He wasn't saying it's not bloat, he was saying it probably has nothing to do with MS since, and I quote:
most of the adware/shareware/freeware has nothing to do with them
I mean, have you ever installed XP off a retail or corporate disc? There are virtually no apps installed. Most of the crap people complain about when they rant over free installs is actually installed by OEMs.
"I realise this is not a very popular opinion but it's the truth, and there for needs to be said" -Bill Hicks
I find the centralized software repos to be one of the big turn offs for Linux. Most of the things in the repositories are stuff the average user has no knowledge of and almost no way to gain knowledge about.
Someone should look at downloads.com for a model of how to present software to end users. It has ratings and reviews from the cnet editors and visitors, screenshots of the products, they test the binaries for malware and offer multiple download sites usually including the makers of the software.
If something like this existed for Linux, it would go a long way to getting more people on board.
The main problem isn't "works exactly like Windows", it's a double standard a great many people have. Windows is judged far less harshly than Linux by many non-techies, and this extends to open source apps as well.
For example, I had one user almost scream at me that Thunderbird wasn't showing linked images in his email messages and to remove Thunderbird and put him back on OE. He couldn't stand that behavior. When I pointed that he didn't have Thunderbird and was using OE, then he told me, "Never mind, it's OK."!
Sadly, this is not an isolated case. A hardware vendor I know tried putting on OpenOffice.org (OOo) on new computers for free when the customer didn't buy MS Office. He quit due to people's double standards. They expect him to support OOo for free and called constantly, but these same people are willing to pay for MS Office support when, on occasion, they do call for support.
I'm not idealistic about open standards. I use them because they are convenient and free, not to protest capitalism or something, and I fully realize some people feel a compulsion to use closed formats. More power to them. I'd just like the blame for lack of interoperability to go where the blame is due.
Having done it successfully through two engineering degrees and 10 years in industry, I can tell you that getting around the compatibility barrier is easier than most people think. 99.9% of the time the following magic words work: "I don't have visio, can you export it to a png or something and resend it?" When you send a file to them, do the same thing. Formats specific to a certain software application are meant for the author or a small group of authors to use, who are likely going to be in the same office and therefore can easily use the same software. Export formats are generally much better suited for "publishing" the work to other people who will not need to edit it.
This space intentionally left blank.
I personally think the biggest Achilles Heel with OSS is people with the mindset that just because they are used to one particular program, it is the pinnacle that everything else has to strive for, and these people are closed minded to trying something that may take a little getting used to but just might end up being superior for them.
It doesn't help that software like OpenOffice perpetuates this, parroting other software just to placate this mindset.