| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 83703 | 2007-10-10 07:23:00 | "Linux is not ready for the desktop"!! | johnd (85) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 600094 | 2007-10-10 08:58:00 | I think the question is more along the lines of "who's desktop?" Mine? Myth's? Certainly. Granny? Yep, her too. In my opinion, the major stumbling blocks to widespread desktop Linux are these: Hardware support. It's getting better, but it ain't there yet. That said though, a lot of manufacturers are now getting on board and providing Linux drivers - still not wonderful, but a lot better than it has been. "Help! It broke!" - The only way that Linux will get the widespread familarity that Windows currently enjoys in the support area is by gaining market share - as it gets more users, so the support will naturally pick up. I reckon this one is just a matter of time. "It's not Windows!" No, it's not Windows. Get over it. Linux was never intended as a Windows clone, it's an OS in its own right. It's a good choice for some, but not for others - especially the Windows power-users, who have already learned all the tips & tricks for an OS they are familiar with. To my mind, this group is the biggest block, and as it's usually this group that advises everyone else what to buy and helps fix it when things go wrong... OEM distribution agreements - from what I can see, this is the biggest stumbling block. Windows comes by default with almost every new PC on the planet - no wonder it has such a huge lock-in. For many, Windows is the computer. Force people to choose and I'm willing to bet that the Linux market share will skyrocket. So overall, I think Linux is 'ready for the desktop' - just not all at once; it will come gradually. Is it ready for all segments? Of course not. But it does have a steel-capped boot in the door, and it ain't going away anytime soom :D. |
Erayd (23) | ||
| 600095 | 2007-10-10 08:58:00 | So I agree, Linux is NOT ready for the desktop To me the items raised here do not write off an OS - if you really cannot get a win-modem to work you can buy an external serial port modem from TradeMe for $25. The problem with WiFi is not Linux - the wireless NIC manufacturers regularly change the chipset without changing the model or version number. There are heaps of supported chipsets - but if you have no way of knowing what you are getting it is difficult! If the manufacturers can be "educated", the problem will largely disappear. |
johnd (85) | ||
| 600096 | 2007-10-10 09:19:00 | To me the items raised here do not write off an OS - if you really cannot get a win-modem to work you can buy an external serial port modem from TradeMe for $25. The problem with WiFi is not Linux - the wireless NIC manufacturers regularly change the chipset without changing the model or version number. There are heaps of supported chipsets - but if you have no way of knowing what you are getting it is difficult! If the manufacturers can be "educated", the problem will largely disappear. Trying to get wifi to work on Ubuntu prior to 7.04 was a huge mission, the Ubuntu forums are full of people who have fail and given up. it was nothing to do with chipset support in most cases the card was detected and install fine but the software was at fault. The default wifi manager only had support for WEP and even then still struggled to connect to the network. Thankfully its been fixed in 7.04 and wifi is much easier to use. |
Pete O'Neil (6584) | ||
| 600097 | 2007-10-10 10:39:00 | The day I say linux is "ready" (by the definition the article is using) is when I can install it and set up all my hardware without spending days crawling through forums to fix the problems. And that will be a very good day :D |
george12 (7) | ||
| 600098 | 2007-10-10 10:59:00 | This is correct I personally have used Linux as an only OS for over a year now. I love it, and won't ever change. But Linux is not ready to take on Windows. Case in point, half the linux users on this forum blow about PCLOS, or Ubuntu. Both are useless. Try setting up a winmodem, or [as I found out over the weekend] wifi. I am no tard with Linux (I use Gentoo, the install is cli) but damn, did I get a headache trying to set up wifi on PCLOS (a supposedly easy distro). I also noticed that when I posted asking for help, not one PCLOS user was able to. Go figure So I agree, Linux is NOT ready for the desktop Maybe I was lucky with my intel wifi card... But under PCLOS, it worked perfectly with setting up my card. In fact, by the time the livecd is loaded, I can be fully connected to my WPA2 protected WiFi network. With most other distros I've tried, getting WPA/WPA2 working properly is a real mission. |
Sherman (9181) | ||
| 600099 | 2007-10-10 11:06:00 | I tried both Puppy Linux and Damn Small Linux, couldn't connect to the internet because of winmodem problem, so didn't go any further. This is not an example of a system that is ready for the desktop of the average user. What is up with the developers that they have not sorted out this problem? Most people in the under-developed world who would use Linux will be on dial up and have winmodems on their computers. |
zqwerty (97) | ||
| 600100 | 2007-10-10 11:25:00 | OpenOffice is good, but MS Office is the standard and app most people use. I notice OpenOffice does falter with some of the formatiing, not necessarily OO's fault, but it should have 100% compatibility with what most people use (that being MS Office I recently requested an order form from a company and it came as an MS Office doc format which could not be read by any program I had so they lost my business. From what I have seen the majority of home users would hardly ever need anything more than a basic word processor it is businesses with years of macros that have a problem changing. All these people wanting a hundred percent compatibility I disagree with as now ODF is a standard and OOXML isn't for the moment OpenOffice should be doing it's own thing. I feel one reason Linux will be slow at increasing it's share is the fact that so many open source projects are also ported to Windows which gives no incentive for people to make a conscious change. |
mikebartnz (21) | ||
| 600101 | 2007-10-10 17:26:00 | To me the items raised here do not write off an OS - if you really cannot get a win-modem to work you can buy an external serial port modem from TradeMe for $25. The problem with WiFi is not Linux - the wireless NIC manufacturers regularly change the chipset without changing the model or version number. There are heaps of supported chipsets - but if you have no way of knowing what you are getting it is difficult! If the manufacturers can be "educated", the problem will largely disappear.Why should someone buy another product just so that they can use Linux? Also, not once did I blame Linux for the lack of hardware support, I know it NOST of the problem lies with hardware manufacturers I think the question is more along the lines of "who's desktop?" Mine? Myth's? Certainly. Granny? Yep, her too. In my opinion, the major stumbling blocks to widespread desktop Linux are these: Hardware support. It's getting better, but it ain't there yet. That said though, a lot of manufacturers are now getting on board and providing Linux drivers - still not wonderful, but a lot better than it has been. "Help! It broke!" - The only way that Linux will get the widespread familarity that Windows currently enjoys in the support area is by gaining market share - as it gets more users, so the support will naturally pick up. I reckon this one is just a matter of time. "It's not Windows!" No, it's not Windows. Get over it. Linux was never intended as a Windows clone, it's an OS in its own right. It's a good choice for some, but not for others - especially the Windows power-users, who have already learned all the tips & tricks for an OS they are familiar with. To my mind, this group is the biggest block, and as it's usually this group that advises everyone else what to buy and helps fix it when things go wrong... OEM distribution agreements - from what I can see, this is the biggest stumbling block. Windows comes by default with almost every new PC on the planet - no wonder it has such a huge lock-in. For many, Windows is the computer. Force people to choose and I'm willing to bet that the Linux market share will skyrocket. So overall, I think Linux is 'ready for the desktop' - just not all at once; it will come gradually. Is it ready for all segments? Of course not. But it does have a steel-capped boot in the door, and it ain't going away anytime soom :D.Agreed (maybe I should have PMed you and asked you to reply for both of us :p - yours was worded better) Maybe I was lucky with my intel wifi card... But under PCLOS, it worked perfectly with setting up my card. In fact, by the time the livecd is loaded, I can be fully connected to my WPA2 protected WiFi network. With most other distros I've tried, getting WPA/WPA2 working properly is a real mission.Some cards have full support while others don't. IN theory my card should have worked (the driver is in the kernel, just not working on PCLOS) I recently requested an order form from a company and it came as an MS Office doc format which could not be read by any program I had so they lost my business. From what I have seen the majority of home users would hardly ever need anything more than a basic word processor it is businesses with years of macros that have a problem changing. All these people wanting a hundred percent compatibility I disagree with as now ODF is a standard and OOXML isn't for the moment OpenOffice should be doing it's own thing. I feel one reason Linux will be slow at increasing it's share is the fact that so many open source projects are also ported to Windows which gives no incentive for people to make a conscious change.In order to take on the beast (MS) one should beat it on all fronts, even if this means porting to an inferior format until you have the main share |
Myth (110) | ||
| 600102 | 2007-10-10 19:12:00 | Why should someone buy another product just so that they can use Linux? Maybe because they think Linux is a good OS - why should anyone buy another product just so they can use Vista? |
johnd (85) | ||
| 600103 | 2007-10-10 20:03:00 | Linux is fine for computer enthusiasts. I actually like to know how my system works and having problems with it - in the long term view - helps me learn more about it. I have played around with Linux (Suse 9 & 10 & 10.1 with KDE) and true, it does give me a lot more control over things than Windows. The reason that Linux is not ready for the desktop market is that the vast majority of users are not like me. People go to Dell/Noel Leeming/Hardly Normal/Apple and buy integrated systems because they just want to sit down and use their computer - not manage it. |
Deane F (8204) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||