i see in the news very few weeks or so,that linux is making more and more inroads on MS,and was wondering what the opinions are from here?will it be a slow build up from the underdog and then move faster as linux distros are more prevalent?do you think OS can really compete with windows with everything?
for my home use,i love linux,it is great--i like the idea I get to control what it is doing,and i can use it as i see fit.what would you think if MS made a linux distro?talk about feeding off both sides of the fence!
i am an autobody collision repair tech,seriously considering a new career in computers--a degree in computer science to be more to the point.sorry if i ramble too much,and apologies to the mods if this is not the right place to ask this.and what do you think of the employment/salary aspects for the future in the industry?i am paid totally on comission right now,and i would really welcome a regular paycheck.and health benefits etc.would now be a good time to move to this industry?
anyway,thanks in advance for all replies
scott

Well, in a nutshell, Windows has the market share and that is important to the end user. They want to use what everyone else does even though it's not as good... Linux is not user friendly, even with the great effort to try, and the marketing for Linux has been non-existant.

Bill is the guy who sells you the car for the profit and Linus is the guy that sells you the car because it works even though he may not make as much profit, if at all.

Linux continues to get easier to use but if they keep up the pace it will just be; as you stated an MS/Linux distro... THAT would be a catastrophe. Can you imaging the blue screen of death because you have dependency problems!!! I just hope they never cross-breed.

KC

Sorry but until I can use programs like AutoCad and others without having to have a dual boot there really isn't anypoint in running LINUX of any flavor. Major programs arent compatible. Why? I agree Microstuff sux but LINUX has similar if not more complex problems. Ever try to up grade a driver ... you have to be a programmer to make sense out of any instructions and then they don't work. If you want to talk about cost look at what RED HAT sells for...not quite the reasonable price for everyday use. until it changes I have to stay with windoze LINUX is too frustrating

Sorry but until I can use programs like AutoCad and others without having to have a dual boot there really isn't anypoint in running LINUX of any flavor. Major programs arent compatible. Why? I agree Microstuff sux but LINUX has similar if not more complex problems. Ever try to up grade a driver ... you have to be a programmer to make sense out of any instructions and then they don't work. If you want to talk about cost look at what RED HAT sells for...not quite the reasonable price for everyday use. until it changes I have to stay with windoze LINUX is too frustrating
try printingm a good high quality photo from GIMP without getting a headache

You are quite right in the CAD aspect... I use Autocad as well and the only reason I even use Windows... It, (CAD) has been a forgoten component for Linux but thrived on Unix in the old day's for really high end developement and to some extent still today... but sadly most software developers are profit driven as is America and hence the decline in Linux based so called (killer apps). We really need a Killer app for Linux... something that is so wonderfull and that cannot possibly run on windows... of course we linux users know of many but the Gen-Pub is clueless...

The only hope Linux really has is in it's stability... Once people get tired of being attacked with Spam, Adware, and Virus, maybe they will turn... but if the computer world is anything like the real world it will take many attacks and loss of data before they catch on.

KC

A friend and I decided to start our own business, so I'm taking the opportunity to test out how well Linux functions as the foundation of a business. Well, one of the foundations since my colleague is a die-hard Mac fan. Anyway, what I've found is that Linux is close to being able to replace Windows, but there are a few significant gaps.

As a server, Linux kills. We have a box dedicated as a private web server that hosts our CRM and test web site and uses Samba to hold data backup. The box is rock solid and has done everything I've asked of it.

As a general desktop, Linux works well, but with gaps. Open Office 2 beta is going to give MS office headaches. It takes a little getting used to, but I have yet to run into a taks Open Office can't handle. For our basic image manipulation needs, GIMP does just fine. Thunderbird is a great email client. SugarCRM is a very, very acceptable alternative to SalesForce.com. So the basic office functions are nicely covered.

The gaps? Drawing and banking. The vector graphics tools available in Linux aren't particularly robust. We used Inkscape, which wasn't bad, but wasn't up to par with the Windows world. When it comes to serious banking, Linux falls flat. Quickbooks is the industry standard and there simply isn't anything like it in Linux, at least that I've seen. Gnucash doesn't even come close and is still dependant on Gnome 1.4. Sheesh.

So I can dump Windows 90% of the time, but that last 10% is too important to ignore. The good news is that even a couple of years ago, I don't think Linux would have done as well, so it is moving fast. And of course the really good news is that my software expenses are very minimal.

I think linux is doing fine,it is still growing .there is only so far you can go with a gui that includes a screen ,mouse ,keyboard and sound.People used to say debian and slackware were hard ,but that was the older versions .Current versions are easier to install and support more hardware and are more user friendly.As for a micro$oft distro I think they should include some open source software,because I like open source software.I would still use linux because I try not to use linux and windows for the same task.I only use windows when I have to.

If you have an application today, like AutoCAD, that needs Windows in order to run, then that alone is sufficient reason to run it.

Where Microsoft is beginning to run into trouble, however, is tomorrow. Right now, Linux can out-perform them as can OS/X (BSD Unix). And both of these systems can expand well beyond the architectural limits of Windows. Furthermore, we are seeing the stress on the MS development organization as Longhorn is delayed "yet again" and the specifications/wish list changes "yet again." By the time we ever see Longhorn, it will be irrelevant.

The essential difference between the two is that, whereas Microsoft must hire a stable of programmers who are the only folks who have access to their source-code and who thus must do all of the work ... Linux is a distributed model. It can develop software faster, and respond to problems faster, and it can advance progress (to some degree) on hundreds and thousands of fronts simultaneously. This makes the competition vastly more difficult.

Another capability which the Linux/Unix community can enjoy is the ease of cross-compiling. When Apple begins to sell units based on other (Intel) chips, they basically must re-compile their software source-code to run on the new hardware. They can, of course, do the compiles on their existing hardware. Microsoft can't do that: they are locked to Intel architectures, and only those of a certain maximum size. It is going to become increasingly difficult for Microsoft to maintain their position (which has already slipped considerably), and to maintain their aura of invincibility. If the company ever stops buying quite-so-many full-color advertisements, the press will turn on them quite quickly.

Just thought I'd drop in my two cents, I personally don't want to see Linux taking over the desktop. Let MS be a target for worms and problems, and let Linux stay elitist without becoming a tangle of user friendly junk that moves from the core Unix values
(PS: I don't use any mainstream software like AutoCAD, so that isn't a factor for me. And I only play nethack).

i just wanted to say thanks for all the replies!
keep them coming.....
scott

cant offer much help in the way of vector graphics (for graphics i turn to a MAC anyways not windows), but for accounting i would sujest Quazar produced by LinuxCanada. Very nice guys and their software is very good. It has everything that QB has, but is not as polished and does require a bit more thinking to get things done.

http://linuxcanada.com/

go check them out.

-------------------------------

Back to the OP and the growth of linux. I see the growth of linux speeding up and building steam. If Linux can ever hit that magical 25% (or is it 15%) of the market share you will see a drastic increase in the software that is ported over to Linux from both Windows and MAC.

Look at FireFox for a perfect example. in less then 3 months it hit 10% of the market share and really was the first browser since the late 80s, early 90s browser war battles between IE and Netscape to take a chunck out of IEs market share. The more people use programs like FireFox and start to learn about how it was created and why that makes such a huge differance in its performance, improvements, and everything that makes the Open Source community so great the more users will start to open up their minds to considering Linux as a real replacement to windows.

Is Linux ready today to take over windows? that is up for debate. I no longer even have a single windows computer up and running. I too had to stay with QB (wife does not handle change well) so i picked up an iMAC. Is the iMAC as good as linux? NO, but it is way better then windows. It is no were near the power of linux as a server, but Apple with OSx does prove it is easier to make Linux look good then it is to make Windows stable and secure.

This is a very interesting question.

Windows is a very, very good OS when it comes to what MOST people using computers want to do. Windows continues to be successful because of marketing, and thier distribution channels.

Think about it for a minute. Most people, even many technically savvy people use computers mostly for e-mail, internet browsing, gaming, word processing, printing, and various other simple tasks. Within this group only a very few have ever opened up thier PC, and do not want to. And when they buy a web-cam, or a new printer, or digital camera - they plug it in and expect it to magically work - and in most cases it does.

This is where microsoft was born, and they serve this market quite well since it is clear that these people are willing to pay for the newest next version of the OS, as well as upgrading hardware to support it. They aren't very aware of alternatives (okay i am excluding mac-heads for this entire post) and generally don't think they need anything else. Certainly what they spend on their computers is less than what they spend on many other things.

The problems begin for microsoft in this market segment when linux evolves to more closely match the user experience made possible today by windows. It is only recently that linux distributions have had any significant success in doing so, but it is getting much, much closer. Moreover, it is clear that more and more people are frustrated with spyware, adware, viruses to the point that they'll consider change.

I think that the next real test for microsoft will be longhorn. In my opinion, most people who currently run xp will not feel the same pressure of the past to upgrade yet again. We'll see.

But it is in the government and business oriented markets that Microsoft is starting to significantly falter. THis is a whole different animal. I was very, very surprised at the number of big companies who were still vulnerable to a very old virus recently because they were still running unpatched win2k machines. It is much, much more difficult for a large corporate network running windows to keep current with patches, let alone complete upgrades than it is for the home user. Windows was never designed to support the needs of multi-user, secure environments. Anytime microsoft goes outside their bread and butter consumer applications market they run into trouble.

Microsoft is indeed under a greater threat than ever before, but don't count them out. It would not shock me one bit to see a microsoft distribution of linux before very long.

I think unfortunatally linux is playing the "If you can't beat-em, Join-em" game. KDE and other DT Environments are becoming more windows like. A lot of people posting here want to try Linux but as soon as they install it they want it to look and act like their windows machines.

They want their cake and eat it too. They want a secure OS that Linux is reputable for but they want the PnP and Setup.exe.

Linux is it's own OS and is Open source so trying to compete with windows application developers who make millions in profits by selling applications that cost on average $50 dollars is going to be very difficult as long as people are willing to pay for that junk.

Bottom line is that It's not Linux that is not ready for the Desktop; it's the user who is not ready for Linux.

KC

**
Bottom line is that It's not Linux that is not ready for the Desktop; it's the user who is not ready for Linux.
**

Too right..! and M$soft knows it. And linux-ers don't get it sometimes.

Anyway, the following argument could soon be compelling:

New Computer: 2,000.00
Longhorn 200.00 (or whatever)
MS Office 500.00
Photoshop 500.00
Anti-virus 99.00/year
Anti-spyware 99.00/year
Total approx. 3500.00
Future: Unknown, probably some viruses and pain, another version of windows someday,
people telling me i need faster hardware, why are things slowing down, OMG.


vs.

Keep your existing 1ghz machine. 0.00
Linux plus open office, gimp, whatever else 0.00
Pay someone for install, a bit of training: 1000.00
Pay someone for ongoing support: 200.00/yr
Future: what to worry?

What may be true for some Windows users, though, is:

New Computer: $500
Vista: Pirated
MS Office: Pirated
Photoshop: Pirated
Anti-Virus: Free trial, not up-to-date
Anti-Spyware: Ad-Aware
Future: Buy a new computer when the old one breaks down.

If people are "comfortable" with Windows, they'll find a way to stay with Windows no matter how expensive it gets, or they'll find some illegal means to stay with Windows. Frankly, what I love about Linux and its associated software is the lack of DRM, complicated licensing, and activation, etc. I don't mind paying money for software, but I like some freedom in how I use it.