Because Shiny Things Are Fun - The New New Windows v Linux Thread

Originally Posted by Sumguy The only reason Win-D'ohs comes pre-installed on most PCs, is because Microsoft used/uses very aggressive guerilla business practices to corner the market. They did this when the personal computer market was in it's infancy, offering computer manufacturers the ability to purchase their OS's very cheaply, in exchange for requiring that they install MS operating systems exclusively on all of their computers- thus saturating the market with an inferior product- but one which is familiar to moist people, since it has come pre-installed on every PC they have ever bought.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by Sumguy The average consumer not being very computer-savvy (especially in the past) merely sticks with what is familiar and common, for fear that they might have to learn some new tricks.

In my experience, the end user runs whatever will run their apps and allow them to do what they want to do - with minimal fuss. Whether that be Windows, Android, macOS/iOS... a computer is a tool/appliance to many (even software developers), not a hobby project.

Originally Posted by Sumguy What's more, since Windows cornered the market early-on, it ensured that most software; hardware; peripherals; and basically anything made to interact with a computer, would be Windows compatible, since the manufacturers of those things would have to cater their products to the OS's that come with nearly 100% of new PCs.

x86 has been very much the MS domain and has very much remained so, since it was effectively hijacked from IBM, very early on back in the MSDOS era. MS used nasty tactics against all whom it dealt with in the early days, including the developer of CP/M. But likely those tactics were "just business", to those who move in corporate circles.

"UNIX" was never very heavily invested in x86 until the likes of Linux and 386BSD came along. BSD in particular was very much and still is, all about servers. This is why many who opine on the various BSD performance on x86 hardware as a desktop are missing the point. None of the *BSDs are "competing" in that kind of market (except perhaps a few FreeBSD derivatives).

Linux in particular has made very little inroad into that x86 desktop market, which is dominated by MS Windows - other *nix are not even a blip on the scale.

Originally Posted by Sumguy Even Apple, with all of their resources and a superior product can only hold a small share of the market in light of the above; so it is no surprise that more obscure OS's which were once considered only the province of bonafide computer geeks; and which the majority of the general public does not even know exists, would be passed over by most in favor of what is already installed on their computer when they pull it out of the box.

Apple are in a different market. macOS and the over priced "designer" hardware it runs on are inextricably linked - they are collectively "the product" (as with iPhone and iOS). Apple have simply not sought to enter the same market as MS Windows.

and it's also a fallacy for Linux to attempt to enter this market - as to compete there, you have to adopt the same practices as MS, get the same anti-competitive deals, resort to the same patent trolling, etc and turn out the same kind of quality... (or lack of)

As far as I'm concerned, the masses can have their Windows, the rest of us can have whatever we want to have. The closest they will get to Linux is probably the Android OS on their phone or some IoT thing - the Linux which they are entirely oblivious to...

Originally Posted by Sumguy I just purchased a new computer a few weeks ago; really wanted to get one without MS pre-installed....as I don't care for the idea of a part of what I pay going toward a product (Windows) that I will not use, and to support a corporation (MS) which I detest- but alas, the deals were so, that one can get a better 'puter at a far better price by paying the "Microsoft tax" than by buying a virgin PC- So I held my nose and bought a nice PC for under $400...and nuked Windows after booting it up one time!

Indeed. "Subsidised" MS hardware is cheap and it's about what people can reasonably afford. You buy the device with Windows, it's then up to you, to get rid of Windows and do the legwork to install $WHATEVER_YOU_LIKE. On the plus side, it's got better, hardware is better supported, on the negative side, it's also gotten much more corporate and with the good, there is also some bad (but all depends on your point of view).

Originally Posted by Sumguy How much trouble is it to throw in a driver for Linux, or make their softwate compatible- since it was pronbably written by a Linux user, on a Linux machine, anyway?!)

Developer time and money - many hundreds of thousands of USD, for little perceivable return.

But if it's e.g. HPE or IBM and if also, for example, it's some server hardware of theirs, drivers might get written...

But when it comes to writing device drivers for hardware, for that < 1% of the x86 desktop market, running a hobbyist Linux distro, probably not going to happen in most cases (but does happen from time to time).

Originally Posted by cynwulf In my experience, the end user runs whatever will run their apps and allow them to do what they want to do - with minimal fuss. Whether that be Windows, Android, macOS/iOS... a computer is a tool/appliance to many (even software developers), not a hobby project.

Absotively! I happily used Windurs in the past, until it got to the point where it started becoming a burden; and I discovered that there were better alternatives. Many are not aware that alternatives exist- or, if they are aware, they assume that they would have to learn some complex new skill set. Why they would assume that, as opposed to the idea that the altrernative(s) might be just as easy or easier to use.....I dunno!

Originally Posted by cynwulf MS used nasty tactics against all whom it dealt with in the early days, including the developer of CP/M. But likely those tactics were "just business", to those who move in corporate circles.

'Zactly- which is why, regardless of how well they get it to work; how secure they make it, etc. I still wouldn't want to use it- because not only do I abhor companies which do business like that (And I am the penultimate Anarcho-capitalist!), but since there is no honor among thieves, it would be naive to think that a company which treats others the way it does, is somehow going to treat you any better. As the saying goes, if you do business with crooks, you will be robbed too.

Originally Posted by cynwulf Linux in particular has made very little inroad into that x86 desktop market, which is dominated by MS Windows - other *nix are not even a blip on the scale.

Sad but true- but it does seem to be a lot more popular than it was a decade or more ago- even despite Windows coming pre-installed on virtually every PC, and being pimped in the pooblik skools, and all..... Ultimately, I switched to Linux because it works better, and allows me to do what I want more easily with my computer; and to retain control over my 'puter and my privacy- but I'm in it just as much for the philosophical/moral statement that it makes; especially against MS and the non-chalant mainstream, and government-corporate tyranny.

Originally Posted by cynwulf Apple are in a different market. macOS and the over priced "designer" hardware it runs on are inextricably linked - they are collectively "the product" (as with iPhone and iOS).

Good point!

Originally Posted by cynwulf Apple have simply not sought to enter the same market as MS Windows.

Not sdought it, or not been able to achieve it, because MS beat them to it, with even sleazier business tactics?

Originally Posted by cynwulf and it's also a fallacy for Linux to attempt to enter this market - as to compete there, you have to adopt the same practices as MS, get the same anti-competitive deals, resort to the same patent trolling, etc and turn out the same kind of quality... (or lack of)

That, I don't know. I'd say Linux is much more suitable for the PC market; the problem arises when Linux tries to emulate Windows, instead of just being itself. No need for it to compete with Windows- if it would just keep on doing what it does best, and just be there for those who appreciate it- the numbers really don't matter. Trouble is, when it tries to imitate Windows, as if it is in some competition with MS, it ends up becoming more like an MS product, and alienating the very people who most appreciate it- while still not satisfying those who don't object to using MS products with all of their bumnlephuks....

Originally Posted by cynwulf As far as I'm concerned, the masses can have their Windows, the rest of us can have whatever we want to have. The closest they will get to Linux is probably the Android OS on their phone or some IoT thing - the Linux which they are entirely oblivious to...

And that's the beauty of it! All of us Linux users are here because we want to be- not because of ignorance; or because we took the path of least resistance- but because we wanted something better- and we found it! I think there are enough of us, too, that if we make a little noise, more manufacturers and developers will take notice and consider us when writing programs and drivers- which will in-turn make it even better and easier for future Linuxians!

Originally Posted by cynwulf But when it comes to writing device drivers for hardware, for that < 1% of the x86 desktop market, running a hobbyist Linux distro, probably not going to happen in most cases (but does happen from time to time).

Hey, it's a lot better now than it used to be. I just let Fender know that I would be unable to purchase one of their guitar amps, because the software that allows one to customize the settings, is only compatible with Windows. I think if companies would get one message like that per week- representing just a smidgeon of Linux users, they'd sit up and take notice. Many certainly have.

If solar and* wind power are viable in your neck of the woods, there's going to be a law about it!

https://8bitmage.com/papers/2013-10-...story-and-role

Originally Posted by Sumguy The only reason Win-D'ohs comes pre-installed on most PCs, is because Microsoft used/uses very aggressive guerilla business practices to corner the market. They did this when the personal computer market was in it's infancy, offering computer manufacturers the ability to purchase their OS's very cheaply, in exchange for requiring that they install MS operating systems exclusively on all of their computers- thus saturating the market with an inferior product- but one which is familiar to moist people, since it has come pre-installed on every PC they have ever bought.

Exactly. And this is exactly what I meant by "it's got nothing to do with how good, bad, secure, insecure the system (Window$) is or isn't". Most people I know have never even heard of Linux, let alone the BSD's. Why? Because they have only ever seen Window$, because that's the OS that was pre-installed by the manufacturer for them. And most I know don't give a rats arse about the OS either, in at least one case, they think it's cool because it has nice graphics, and you can have nice little widgets installed They also don't have a clue when it comes to OS's either (or hardware), and most certainly are not in any ways knowledgeable. So M$ relies on people's ignorance as much as making sure PC manufacturers have it pre-installed.

... I just purchased a new computer a few weeks ago; really wanted to get one without MS pre-installed....as I don't care for the idea of a part of what I pay going toward a product (Windows) that I will not use, and to support a corporation (MS) which I detest- but alas, the deals were so, that one can get a better 'puter at a far better price by paying the "Microsoft tax" than by buying a virgin PC- So I held my nose and bought a nice PC for under $400...and nuked Windows after booting it up one time!

The last time I had Window$ was XP, and yes, that was pre-installed. Since then I built my own machine and nearly 10 years later, it's still going strong as far as I know - and yes, it's only ever seen Linux (and OpenBSD in a VM), but never Window$ on "bare-metal". I refuse to subject it to Window$ installed on "bare-metal", forget it.

There are many millions of people using Linux- especially outside of the US. More people are hearing about Linux; and more people are using it- even here in the US. As Linux use grows, so does the demand for Linux-compatibility; as compatibility increases, people will have no excuse not to use Linux. (This is why, I always let manufacturers know when I am would have bought one of their products, but didn't, because it was not Linux compatible. How much trouble is it to throw in a driver for Linux, or make their softwate compatible- since it was pronbably written by a Linux user, on a Linux machine, anyway?!) /tome

Yes, but most of those people are either people in Europe, and/or are knowledgeable people/know knowledgeable people that have Linux installed. The average person outside of Europe for a large part probably doesn't have a clue about Linux, and only knows two choices: M$ or Apple.

Most PC hardware these days (other than certain types of hardware, think TV tuners/cards) IS supported to at least some extent by Linux. Although, the BSD's have less hardware support because they have less market share than Linux does.

EDIT: To be clear, at least some TV tuners/cards do indeed work with Linux/have Linux drivers available for them, but you can't just buy almost any TV tuner/card and expect it to work.

I have Windows 10 Prof on bare metal. Why, because the CAD software I use does not have a Linux version, and running the CAD under VM impacts the performance of the CAD. I also run numerous nix versions under VMware on this same Win 10 box. Has been stable since I built it. It's a decent Xeon machine with powerful graphics card. Would I advocate for Windows? I don't, but sometimes you just need to have it. And yep, I did a P-to-V of my very old 32bit XP and run that as VM on same Win 10 box. Crazy.

You also have to allow for the concept of "legacy". Why do keyboards have such a weird layout? Originally because mechanical typewriters jammed if successive keys were pressed too closely together. So characters which commonly came together in text, like Q and U, had to be well separated on the keyboard.

But why do we still use that layout on electronic keyboards? Because everyone is used to it and no one wants to have to learn a new layout. Everyone is trained on qwerty, so everyone uses qwerty. Everyone uses qwerty, so everyone learns the qwerty layout. It's a self-propagating endless circle. And the same is true of Windows. Everyone learns it at school, so everyone knows how to use it, so everyone uses it, so everyone learns it at school. It's not all a nasty conspiracy by Microsoft. Human nature has a lot to do with it.

Originally Posted by hazel You also have to allow for the concept of "legacy". Why do keyboards have such a weird layout? Originally because mechanical typewriters jammed if successive keys were pressed too closely together. So characters which commonly came together in text, like Q and U, had to be well separated on the keyboard. But why do we still use that layout on electronic keyboards? Because everyone is used to it and no one wants to have to learn a new layout. Everyone is trained on qwerty, so everyone uses qwerty. Everyone uses qwerty, so everyone learns the qwerty layout. It's a self-propagating endless circle. And the same is true of Windows. Everyone learns it at school, so everyone knows how to use it, so everyone uses it, so everyone learns it at school. It's not all a nasty conspiracy by Microsoft. Human nature has a lot to do with it.

Originally the std qwerty as we know it was shown to be very non efficient. A new layout was invented for computers, but because the qwerty proliferated so quickly (and was known to typewriter folks) the new better layout was hung out to dry. Those darn typewriter people. I never did ask anyone, is qwerty also common around the world? Maybe boxed up Linux systems should have their own keyboard?

Dvorak Simplified Keyboard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvorak...ified_Keyboard

The Dvorak keyboard always made sense to me.

Originally Posted by cwizardone Dvorak Simplified Keyboard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvorak...ified_Keyboard The Dvorak keyboard always made sense to me.

That's precisely the point. The Dvorak keyboard makes perfect sense. It is designed to make the typing of English as easy as possible with a minimum of unnecessary movement. But because everyone has qwerty encoded in their muscle memory, it takes a conscious effort to learn a new layout and most people reckon they have better things to do. So in practice Dvorak will never catch up. That's legacy.

Originally Posted by hazel That's precisely the point. The Dvorak keyboard makes perfect sense. It is designed to make the typing of English as easy as possible with a minimum of unnecessary movement. But because everyone has qwerty encoded in their muscle memory, it takes a conscious effort to learn a new layout and most people reckon they have better things to do. So in practice Dvorak will never catch up. That's legacy.

So, the solution is old --> new, but not in one huge step.
qwerty should morph into qwerty v2 where only a few keys are moved around, then in two years qwerty v3 where a few more keys are moved around. Until you get to Dvorak layout. People can adjust a few keys at a time, but not all at once. Or, keyboard should have small displays for the key chars, and then allow you to reassign the key positions. I have been typing on keyboards for past 30yrs, I still kinda look at the keys as I type, so perhaps it would be easier for me to learn new layouts because I see it before I press it. All those people who learned to not look and type, they stuck in qwerty.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 There are plenty of Linux distro's that someone with little to no knowledge could use, for any number of purposes.

Because they want to cater Windows users. Why would anyone want to use a wannabe Windows though?

Is it a wannabe UNIX, no it's free as in freedom!

Originally Posted by cwizardone The Dvorak keyboard always made sense to me.

His symphonies were wonderful, too!

Dvorak:

It looks to me something you'd have to use for awhile to even see the benefits. Although I've heard a few of them loud and clear and am intrigued?!.

I own my system KISS