| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 79522 | 2007-05-22 17:46:00 | Why Linux Is Going Anywhere Fast.... | SurferJoe46 (51) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 552233 | 2007-05-23 06:42:00 | Actually i do agree that there is a confusing amount of choice out there for the average punter to deal with. However, again, ask any long term Linux user what would suit you, and i'm sure you would get one recommendation, and probably a CD burnt for you to install, or in the case of a live CD, to try. O yeah... another myth, VM to is not needed to try Linux. Many Distros are now coming out where you can boot of the CD, and try a slightly dumbed down version WITHOUT installing. Installation is then usually done by clicking a desktop icon to start the process, should one choose to do so. |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 552234 | 2007-05-23 06:54:00 | Even the Inquisition had trouble making sincere converts, chaps. I doubt if you're going to do any better with each other, even if you could hand heretics over to the civil power to be purged with fire. :waughh: OS X might have code based on code written for the PDP-7 used for the first Unix. :D So might all the Linux versions. ;) |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 552235 | 2007-05-23 07:15:00 | Also worth remembering that unlike Windows and OSX, 'the whole point' of Linux isn't actually to take over the desktop market. While there are a few companies interested in this, it's not actually the overarching goal. | Erayd (23) | ||
| 552236 | 2007-05-23 07:56:00 | Also worth remembering that unlike Windows and OSX, 'the whole point' of Linux isn't actually to take over the desktop market. While there are a few companies interested in this, it's not actually the overarching goal. So that would mean that getting Linux a greater market share and making it more relevant would actually be irrelevant...:badpc: |
winmacguy (3367) | ||
| 552237 | 2007-05-23 08:12:00 | It can be more relevant without the mass market . The perceived way to get the mass market is to dumb it down (but bulk it up) to suit computer illiterates, and that would be a disaster . Making it "like Windows" . . . easy enough for people to use without knowing what they are doing is impossible for Linux . Apple can do that with OS X: they are the only software vendor, and they have a fair amount of control over the hardware it runs on . So they can programme for known hardware configurations (in that they have an advantage over MS) and they can offer support . Linux is suited to server use, and the small minority who are prepared to learn . Often servers run without a GUI . So Linux servers can run efficiently, if the users know what they are doing . Trying to make it "Plug and Play" with unknown hardware, with a fragmented distribution system (with much of the software returning no income to the commercial companies) how is anyone going to be able to give support? My ideal "consumer" Linux would be a stripped down version; not one with all the bells and whistles of Windows . Give a simple GUI, and the few essential applications . There are surprisingly few essentials . No development package . Make some (not very many) extra applications available as "plug in" -- easy installation . That would have a future . It would run on older machines; and run like lightning on new machines . But the only way to have a reliable system is to keep it small and tight . The way to survive while being unable to offer proper support is not to need support . |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 552238 | 2007-05-23 08:18:00 | I like the sound of that. :) | winmacguy (3367) | ||
| 552239 | 2007-05-23 08:26:00 | And I suppose the ideal situation would be to allow the owner to have only a "user" account; the root password reserved to the vendor, so any changes being made remotely by the vendor company. I bet Microsoft would love to have that control. They could cut their support costs by 95%. | Graham L (2) | ||
| 552240 | 2007-05-23 08:33:00 | And I suppose the ideal situation would be to allow the owner to have only a "user" account; the root password reserved to the vendor, so any changes being made remotely by the vendor company. I bet Microsoft would love to have that control. They could cut their support costs by 95%. You could still keep user account control without giving over the ability to make remote changes to the system. Apple provides system and security updates to OS X, but I don't have to install them if I don't want to. |
winmacguy (3367) | ||
| 552241 | 2007-05-23 08:33:00 | Ok so who is going to answer the question! What is a distro ? a linux OS ? or is there more to it? :illogical beetle |
beetle (243) | ||
| 552242 | 2007-05-23 08:37:00 | If you want a reliable system you don't let users change things. :D How many people come here with problems caused by their not "fixing" the system, or because they haven't downloaded a wonderful programme from the Internet? |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | |||||