Why Linux Will never overthrow or compete with Windows
 

I recently tried mandrake linux 9.1 due to problems that i encountered with windows. I am a desktop user with a reasonable powerful PC, a shared broadband connection using the linux computer as a server. I was hoping for linux to solve all the problems such as constant crashing but I encountered many new problems that are just as bad as the bsod or worse. Anyway below are problems that i encountered.
1) To share the Internet connection I must turn on the computers in a specific order
2) the firewall is hard to use and does not work with Internet connection sharing
3)The computer takes a very long time to load
4) Most good computer games do not work(It don't normally bother me but its still a major disadvantage for many)
5)WINE is crap
6)Many good programs crash frequently
7)Newbies will struggle with console mode (as i did)
9)When problems occur the fix can be extremely complex

I tested mandrake and I will expect many would respond to this message saying that mandrake sucks and I'm not going to dispute that, but that is not what I'm getting at i am trying to state some constructive criticism that may well help linux be a real competitor in the desktop market. I wish linux every success in its future as i dislike Microsoft's strong-arm tactics however i don't see it happening soon.

I have changed my opinion since posting this over a year ago and if you look further on in the post you can find out my reasons :)

Mandrake rocks, it has already competed with and completely overthrown windows in my household. Your post is void, goodbye.
All those 'problems' sound simple to fix, just read the relevent info.

3 - You have to specify which programs you want to load at the boot
4 - WineX is growing stronger. In fact, many games are already possible to play very well under Linux... Diablo, Half-Life, Counter-Strike, Dungeon Siege. In fact, in most games I get higher fps in Linux that Windows...
5 - well.... lol.... It actually works, not 100%, but you should use it ONLY when you don't find a similar/equivalent program on Linux (It surely exists)... I get so mad when peoples wants to use wine to run IE and MS Office. What should they learn new them? Windows is the best choice for those.
6 - Which ones?
7 - Well, that's almost true. But Mandrake has an infinity number of wizards to help configuring stuff. Also, editing in text mode is not hard, you just need to know how to read.
8 - How? For example?

Dual booting is easy and you can have the best of both worlds (but is there a best with Microsoft, hmmmmm?) :p

So basically because YOU had a bad experience, Linux will never "overthrow" Windows? Wow, you've got clout.

That said, I don't think anyone cares if Linux does or doesn't overthrow Windows. Personally, I use it, I like it, and that is good enough for me.

Well, Boffy have tried at least :) He has posted 21 times since when he joinned the forum this month. I've seem peoples who just joined the forum and their first message was to make a Linux Vs M$ thread :). I also didn't like Linux in the beginning... I've downloaded a Windows program, clicked in the setup.exe and nothing happened. What stupid OS, I said... lol...

Hi Boffy
Supposing it takes a little longer than an equivalent Windows system to load - Is it then accurate to suggest that it takes "a very long time to load" - this is not convincing.
Ask yourself Boffy - is it an inherent fault in Linux that most good computer games dont work - or - is it more likely that for a raft of historical reasons, the Games manufacturers choose to primarily create Games for the Windows platform - again your not convincing.
WINE is only young - IMO its impressive were they're up to with it.

Be more specific with what programs you're talking about - its difficult for us to assess this - again not a convincing statement.

This pre-supposes that Newbies will regularly need to use a Console.
Again - depends on the problem - I'm currently running Mnadrake 9.1 amongst other Operating Systems - I've had no real problems.

Well, I'm by no means a Linux expert, and I certainly still have a lot to learn about Linux in particular and operating systems in general, but...my belief is contrary to the topic of this thread; I believe that Linux (and the open source movement) could very well come to be the end of Microsoft as we know it today.

Sure, one could say that Linux has a long way to go as a desktop OS, but that's just one aspect (and is the desktop really Linux? :)). I believe that the structure of Linux is superior to that of Windows - and even though it (currently) takes some knowledge and tweaking to get it running as one wants it to, what you end up with is an OS that is _much_ faster and more secure than Windows. You have a degree of control that's just not possible with Windows. I feel this control is a personal matter, because (to cite Bruce Eckel, who possibly was citing someone else) computers are not as much machines as they are mind amplification tools. Computers are becoming more and more important, and showing up in more and more circumstances - it might be a cliché, but in the long run...if you don't control your computer, it (and possibly someone else) _will_ be controlling you. We don't like that. :)

An OS should be (able to be) completely transparent - you should only have to bother about the apps you're running. This is where Windows excels (well, sort of) today, and also where it fails - due to the fact that so much is hidden for you that really shouldn't be. Also, because "everyone" can use Windows, it means that people who are completely computer illiterate are clicking ON THE WRONG ICONS. :) This, in combination with an insecure OS (the security policy of Microsoft is "if you don't say otherwise, everything is allowed"), is how virii can spread so easily (don't you just wonder why people keep clicking those attachments?).

Etc. :)

I only have brief experience with Mandrake, so I can't really comment on that specifically, but I believe that 1), 2), and 3) in your list is directly configuration-related. These are really non-problems. :) My box (it's a monster, but anyway) boots in like 15-20 seconds, the firewall (that is, the IPTables script) is absolutely configurable and has no problem with connection sharing (masquerading), although I use a switch for that purpose.
Concerning 4) and 5)...well, I think it's cool that a) it's possible to run Windows games in Linux, and b) many major developers actively support Linux and offer patches etc. AFAIK games generally run a lot faster in Linux than they do in Windows.
And 6); programs crash sometimes, though for me, that's more typical for Windows apps than for Linux apps. :) It depends.
Now, 7)...possibly, but I believe much of that "struggle" is only "oh no, I can't DOUBLE-CLICK anywhere!". :) To me, console means power.
Finally, 9) (what happened to 8) ?)...sure, but you still have the power (and possibility) to take total control over your system and fix the problems. It's a looooong way from having to reinstall Windows. :)

To wrap it up, I see it like this; Linux generally demands the user to actually know something of computers. I consider this a good thing. Imagine if the average Windows user was as computer-oriented as the average Linux user! :D Anyway, in return for this demand, Linux offers a great deal of what Microsoft has been trying to reduce all the time; flexibility, security, integrity. It's going to be _very_ interesting to see what the future brings - I wonder where Linux and Microsoft stand in, say, 10 years?

My 2 cents. I'd better stfu now. :)

There is Windows 3.1 and there is OS/2, what is the difference?

Both were made by Microsoft, but one was lisenced to IBM while, the other was lisenced to Microsoft to over throw IBM <smiles>

The GUI is slightly different, but the kernal's are identical.

"NOTE" THe Kernals are Identical!

OS/2 Sucked... Windows 3.1 rocked! (compatiablity)


Why Windows will never rock Linux!

Because Microsoft suffers from a sever case of Narrow-Vision (they are not open minded).

I one time made the mistake of saying something that wasn't true to my professer. "Linux is all the same".

His replay was, "WRONG"
Linux is Vanilla, Strawberry, Cherry, Sherbert, etc.

Windows is only Vanilla.

Linux is only a kernal. Everything else is either provided volentarily and by the distributing company.

If Mandrake does not work for you, then perhaps Mandrake wasn't a good choice for you. However, another version of Linux may prove to be perfect for you.

The up and downs from my own experience.

Mandrake...

The good side of Mandrake is if you get it properly installed into your system, it is very good! Mandrake has many wizards to help make your life easy.

The bad side of Mandrake is, it sucks with hardware. Compared to Red Hat, compatabity is a big problem for them. Not all provided drivers work under Mandrake. ATI is one such example.

Red Hat...

The good side of Red Hat is, hardware compatablity and network management.

The bad side of Redhat is, you almost always have to build drivers into the Red Hat. Windows emulation is horrible. You can not even install WineX into the latest version of Red Hat 9.1.

Lindows...

The good side of Lindows is, compatablity (software/hardware), easy to use, little to no text based environment. Easy to install. Plug'n'Play works very good. Wizards are exceptable and considered good to some. Most to all games and other Windows based software works with it. Comes with Wine, WineX and addition emulation of which you would seldomly have to see, because Lindows steps away from the Text Based Environment.
Has the Network Neighborhood, which works with Windows's version.


From what you have written, it sounds as if Windows is not giving you what you need and you respect Linux for being reknown for doing it. But you were disapointed with your experience with Mandrake. You don't have the patiance to use Linux but want to take advantage of it's power but feel refrained from doing it because of your experience with Mandrake. In short, you want an easy to use Linux. (Linux for Dummies) <Laughs>


My recomendation to you is try Lindows or Lycoris.

www.lindows.com
www.lycoris.com

Lindows works on a FAT32 Filing system where as, Mandrake and Red Hat can only MOUNT it.

Lindows comes with a pre-install of both Wine and WineX. In addition, they have other resorces installed to emulate a better Windows Environment. Infact, it's so good, that Lindows gives you the option to install Lindows right on top of Windows 98.

In Lindows, you could not tell the difference between Windows and Lindows untill you had to go into the Directory Tree...

Windows = C:\<directory>\<file>
Lindows = /<directory>/<file>

LOL LOL LOL Megaman X, that is halarious! hahaha

heheh :) Today I laugh at it too... but I was so angry. I can't remember if it was Media Player or ICQ that I've tried to install. I can't say how dissapointed I was because I could not figure it out how change that gnome's foot to a start button. I was so closed minded, blind with M$ that even to start my applications with a foot was wrong in my mind.... lol. How monkey, or better saying, a M$ laboratory rat was how I felt after learning Linux enough to install a program. :)

Well, anyway, a cool link and some statistics:

http://www.fool.com/portfolios/rulem...aker991124.htm

"According to the Gartner Group's estimate, Linux passed the 10 million user mark during 1998 and was growing at 212% annually at the time. Assuming it slows to 100% annual growth (which it has maintained since its introduction in 1990), it will surpass the Windows installed base in about three years. At that point, the network effects will favor Linux and hinder Windows."

i havent had any probs with mandrake so far and ive been using it since 7.2...
1)obviously you need to turn the computers on in a specific order if your internet is being shared by the linux box you would need to turn it on first
2)which firewall have you tried? i read up on the man pages about iptables and it works fine for me..its not point and click so you have to use your brain a bit =)
3)my computer is slow and it takes me 20 secs to boot up mandrake
4)you want to play games on your server?
5)im not a gamer nor do i want to run windows garbage so i wouldnt know
6)what programs are good? who told you they were good?
7)your using mandrake there is 1000000000000 wizards to help you so you dont need to use console
8)you cant count? (are you sure its mandrake and not you?)
9)at least you dont have to reinstall =\

i used to like microsoft but one day it crashed and i said that was the last time it ever crashed on me and switched to linux and now i love linux and wonder why i ever used windows.....my 2 cents

I hope that linux will overthrow Microsoft because its so very big and doesn't really care what users want they dictate to them what they want. I am going to stick with linux for a bit yet but I'm going to use red hat instead because mandrake's wizards i either cant find(Server Wizard and DCHP wizard are not on the control centre despite me installing everything) or return errors(ICS disables itself and lilo returns errors no matter what i do).

Like a few in the thread mentioned I agree and know that its not linux fault that the computer game makers don't make games for linux and i think that it is very wrong. I do hope wine will come into its own because I really need windows programs to run for school work.

I will try some of the changes suggested in the thread so thanks for the advice. By the way if anyone knows of a site that will teach me to fix my cm8738 sound card into 5.1 i would be very thankful.

Boffy

Wizards - go into Mandrake Control Centre, Software - Add Software - search for wizard in All Choices Alphabetical. You should find drakwiz.

cheers
`

Windows vs Linux type debates/discussions don't go in Linux - General, moved to General where its more suitable.

wow so much replies, i havent read every reply but ill speak my mind anyway.
im a red had 8.0 desktop usr/
i dont know a whole lot but i know enough to get mp3s paying, networks talking to eachother, and open gl support (nvidia ai 32)
the only problem i have with linux on a whole is that its up to you to get it to do what you want it to do. but then im in a double bind becuase the reason i got linux to begin with was to gain control over my computing experience. redhat has given me the amount of control that i am able to handle. ive tried suse 8.1 and i was impressed with how crisp its kde environment was and how easy it was to get 3d acceleration. and i imagine mandrake 9x should provide something alittle nicer. ive noticed that nonslackware distros tend to focus on ethier gnome or kde as their main windows manager and usually the latter is left with alot of work to be done on it. (ei:redhat uses gnome and its kde sucks, suse uses kde and its gnome sucks). so what ever distro you get i
you get your self setup on the defult windows managers and download netscape and link your java plugin ( ln -s /java/pluginpath/ /usr/netscape/plugin/) in the mean time you figure out how the hell to java to really work on konqueror( im in the middle of reading the help section of Konqueror. for those who like getting stuff off the newsgroups id suggest getting pan which seems to primarily for the gnome environment.
anyway in response to the thread starter, go back to windows you should never compare winblows to the worst linux distro.
you're right it'll never compare to windows becuase windows is a program and its not open source. it was a copy of linux geared to help the weak minded get their porn and buy products at twice the cost of products found anywhere half as cheap. for the rest enjoy mk 9x you deserve it
youve work

LMAO......Mandrake Rocks BIG WILLIE STYLE.....
Take some computerlessons and come back !!!!

I don't care if Linux overthrows Windows; it won't affect me in any way (except games will be easier to set up.)

However, I'm worried that Windows may overthrow Linux. I wouldn't put it past Microsoft finding a reason to push a law against Linux through Congress or something like that.

Erm, the US has already sued Microsoft twice for its anti-competative actions, so I don think that'll happen. But it is the US and Microsoft afterall ;)

Yeah, but what really happened to M$ as a result of the law suits? Not much :(

Little added info for ya bud. Network effects do favor Linux right now... In fact, they have been.

It is a sad fact, but us end users are considered the miyority in Networking. LOL


If you want to learn a bit more about how I know this, read up on stuff regarding Novell.

Microsoft's NDS tree has been getting there arse wooped none stop with Novell. For a long time, Microsoft's OS Dept. has been funding there Networking Dept. to keep it alive. (mwahahaha) <Evil Grin> I don't remember if it was the last lawsuit or the one prior to it regarding Microsoft being legally, a monopoly. Novell had invested a bit with Linux to setup that lawsuit. Novell believed, if Microsoft had been forced to seperate, due to legally being classified as a monopoly, there OS Dept. could no longer fund there Networking Dept.

But hey, you might not want to read it, so here's some good info for you, if ya want a spoiler. heh

How many sights do you see with .com, vs .net?

Any and all sights with .net are hosted by the WINS NDS Tree from Microsoft.

.com is Novell.

Novell is so simple and easy to use, no offence, but even a computer moron can use the Novell Netware 5.0.

Though Novell can be installed on just about any plateform, including a Mac, the Novell Netware 4.0 and under was all text based. If you have ever used Novell Netware 4.0, you'll be very surprised how identical the filing system is, compared to Linux.

In fact, if your a student, learning Unix, could be a great aid to figuring out how to run any version of Novell under 4.0.

In addition, Novell was rated #1 by the D.O.D. (Dept. of Defence)

So, on the server side you will notice that you almost never see Novell Netware. That is because it was installed on the highest level on the networking tree, along with a dependable Linux Machine. Because of how important this system would be, you will almost never find a job for it. If you do, JUMP ON IT, because it is very possible, to be the $500K per year job. (unless it's the Novell Netware 5.0)

GUI's SUCK FOR A REASON TOO! They get so easy, your paycheck needs to be smaller because anyone can use them. lol

Novell is awsome. Definatelly look into it.

My information was obtain in a Novell Seminar with a representitive of Novell. It was at Seminole Comunity College, about 1 year ago.

If Linux has ever had a great ally, it would be Novell.

Oh, just a few more notes for some incoming comments that I 'KNOW" will come to me on this subject. I know some poeple who host chatboards, using Linux. These sights are also .com. The reason for this is, because the networking part of Linux is actually based on the Novell Netware. If you get ScoUNIX, and some versions of Linux, you will see Novell in a few places on BOOT UP. <SMILES>

I repent im sorry for ever saying such things

I was the starter of this post and since I posted it - seems like a long time ago now - ive grown to love linux. It gives me the control i crave at the price I can afford. It looks pretty, never crashes and works with most of my hardware(except TV card but I can live with that). These are the factors that changed my mind:
1) Getting apollon working with FastTrack
2) Buying a soundblaster Live! and getting to to work better than it does in windows :D
3) Understanding URPMI and how woderful a program it is and that it should be included in all distros
4) Getting MSN messenger to work in GAIM
5) Getting DVD's to play well
6) Finding NVU (frontpage alternative)
7) Getting it to look nice with Plastik theme
8) Running my own radio station
9) Getting apache to work

Boffy

I know the feeling very well Boffy!. Nothing to be ashamed about. From time to time I happen to hate one OS and love the other one. It's a matter of spirit sometimes. Not long ago I hated the Xbox. Today noone touches my Xbox
but me :D

Just my $0.02 worth.

I've used Mandrake and SuSE now for about 6 months. I'm trying to go completely MS free, but there are a few reasons I cannot at the moment. The main one being professional audio production. If anyone has a viable alternative on Linux to Sonar/Soundforge, by all means, let me know. And yes, I've tried Ardour, Rosegarden with JACK. They are nice, but not there yet.

Anyway, my point is that although I'm a newbie where Linux is concerned, I am *not* a computer newbie by any means. Understanding linux for me was a lot quicker and easier than it would be for most people who use Windows for basically text processing and email/surfing/mp3s, etc (I am extremely comfortable with the CLI). That being said, I don't think linux is for the average user, nor should it be. In order to do so, it would probably have to compromise some of its security (i.e. like running as quasi-root or something) and flexibility in order to make it extremely painless.

Ask yourselves this: Do you *really* want linux to take over Windows? Don't you think that eventually, it would be dumbed down to the point that it would lose the edge in security, scalability, open-nature it now has? I could be completely wrong, but I think it would be detrimental. Maybe in 30 years when a younger generation born into computers has grown up and has had technology since birth and understands that there is something beneath the GUI and how it works, maybe then it would be ok.

But remember that the DOS console was a huge part of Windows in 3.1 and then started losing itself as of 95... now, how many people actually use the DOS console? Only the people who would also be able to use linux. Most people are at a loss at how to fix *anything* as soon as an error occurs. People comfortable with being 'under the hood' are not afraid of getting their feet wet and will fix the problem without even blinking.

Bottom line: in order to please the masses, you need to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and if linux does so, there are likely many (who would then be a minority) who would be disgusted and look elsewhere, for a 'new' linux-type OS.

I think there's a certain charm in the linux community of being able to call the os our own, and that would be lost if it needs to be shared and scaled back to appeal to those who don't really want it for its power anyway. They just want to write email. Wouldn't you resent that? What are they contributing to the community? I try to contribute by helping people who have problems, writing scripts and small applications, etc. It's akin to living in a small community where people know each other and help each other out, or living in a metropolis where no one cares and are primarily self-interested. I'll take the small community anyday.

And exhale. :) Sorry for the long-winded post.

Cheers,
Dizzy V.

Oh DOS, that was really cool. I still remember getting my games to run under DOS. I had to type "set" at the prompt to find which sound card I had, it's IRQ, DMA and then use those values to the game setup. At the end, it was either the game crashing or playing it without sound, regardless if you've inserted the correct sound card specifications into the game setup or not :). But it was the only choice we had. Then came win 3.1. Wow, that was really bad... but it was the only choice we had. But I still thought DOS was easier to work with.

Well, I still use DOS today, a lot, for games. But under Linux and under emulation:

http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/

DosBox is quite slow, but still great to remember games as Prince of Persia, Wolfenstein, Out of this World, Test Drive and one of my favorites... Commander Keen. Worth the shot. Some guys got Win 3.0 to run under Dosbox, that should be really cool to get 3.11 and Netscape to run again... :D

Wolfenstein now thats a flashback. I havent met that game since 1996 on my first PC (a 386 with Dos-old for the time but i was 9 and my dad took some convincing to think that was necessary). I loved those old games, back then I was not as difficult to please games wise - I would happily play a F1 manager game despite hating the sport.

Funny you mention the console dizzy_vee, I was going to put that in my last post but i forgot. Since i've learned to love linux (Mandrake 9.2) Ive learned to use the console far more. I rarely don't use it in a day. Linux would not work without it.

For linux to apply to newbies I think that programs like URPMI should be given a nice ui that can work in user mode rather than as root in the console. It took me a long time to understand the console but once you do its a great tool to have. I think if linux did become a more common desktop OS (which it should and can) then the console should still be there to add more functionality for people that want it but all of the main things should be able to be done from the GUI, just like the registry in windows.

I still pop into windows occaisionally and everytime i do I get increasingly frustrated. Its so SLOW and it crashes all the time and there is no XKill. I run KDE which is not nearly the fastest GUI (i've tried fluxbox-WOW zoom)and its still far faster than windows me. Ive head XP is slower.

Theres another thing windows users whould know - Linux shuts down successfully EVERY time.

Boffy

I do have to agree with him though - I use linux as much as I can, but it is usually a pain in the ass when I do. Mostly cause I'm such a n00b. I know how to _use_ linux, but when it comes to actually _doing_ something with it, I struggle for a while before I figure out what the hell I am doing, and what kind of destructive path I left behind me in the process, lol. If I grew up using linux, I would be the grandmaster like I am with windows. If something rediculous like a corrupt driver error pops up, I know exactly what to do. Hell I can even fix that in DOS. I can even fix it remotely through a network or the internet - in DOS. I can fix it with my eyes closed ... almost. But with linux, if it's like "habababababa error" I think, 'I s**t, I'm f**ked.' If only I knew my way about the OS ... if only ... I could dominate it like I do with windows. But it's so different ... I just don't understand some things. So it's soooo difficult for me to do short of complex tasks in linux. I get most of X, but that's cause it's so similar to windows. You get the idea.

And I'm moving platforms for my FTP server from windows to linux ... damn ... it has taken me three days so far bust I think I'm getting the jist of it.

Happen to come by this post searching for something else. As a newbie myself (as in 4 weeks exposure to Linux) I can see the frustration. I've asked a couple questions orginally here during a very frustrated state and was pleased to get such a cool level headed response from people even though I was probably a bit harsh.

As far as taking over windows well...Linux has the potential, unfortunately I think that most people who use and like linux and have the ability to change linux are so used to doing things via the command line and may not see the value of making things dummy proof that Windows and Apple try to do.

Think about it, what would the world be like if everyone who drove a car was required to get training to become a mechanic? Everyone's life should not start out having to become an expert at using a computer when some people should be learning to do more important things like medicine, law or sciences.

Ever see a Star Trek show where someone just asks the computer to do something and it simply does? This is the direction computers should be going.

I think that Linux more than any other OS out there actually has the potential with the world as it's developer to reach this step before anyone else if everyone would work towards this type of goal. (Not that people aren't, it's just that I honestly feel that ease of use does not always seem like a high priority and research into making easy stuff even easier seems very rare)

That's true that once someone learns all about Linux they seem to like it more than anything they've used in the past.

The problem being is that we have this great system available to us and unless the Linux community can make the OS do more on it's own/or just easier then most people will never have the opportunity to use it at work as a business computer, educational tool, research tool...well I'll take research back since it seems to be popular in research firms.

I'll put it this way, Linux has the potential to rise up and overcome MS, however if things continue the way they are Linux will just continue to be the computer that we like to use and play with at home or the super special application computer.

Linux is great for web services, special research and some new supercomputer stuff that is beginning to pop up. It will just be a matter of time before Microsoft snuffs that out because more people know how to use a MS computer.

As the IT administrator for my company I have struggled to find a place for Linux in our network and the only thing that I can use it for is a file server. There's absolutely no way that I can begin to switch this company over because of the ease of use that our employees require and the special software that requires Windows. I simply cannot sacrifice production time to train employees on using Linux.

Which brings up another point, the more advanced and easy Linux becomes the more software will become available for it and the easier it will be to justify it's use in business. Yes there's software out there for just about everything however lets take Autodesk for example. Our CAD guys know autoCAD and are likely to never use anything else. I simply could not convince them to use a Linux alternative. I would have to get a Linux version of AutoCAD.

Apple??? Let us not forget, OS X (Apple, Mac, whatever) uses the UNIX Kernel, which is from experience, far more command-line then Linux. SunOS, ScoUNIX, Debrian(???) are all examples of this. Point is Linux/UNIX/DOS, what ever it may be can have a very user friendly GUI applied to it. You can throw a nice GUI on it to do everything you want. MS had to step away from DOS for a very good reason. DOS had limitations, UNIX/Linux doesn't. With X on Linux & UNIX, it's Windows that has the limitations now.

Here's an example for people who would like just a sample of how much more powerful Linux is. While you are on your X Window for Linux, run a program that opens a window, but not something that takes your full screen. Do the same thing with Windows.

Now run a 2nd program, this time one that takes your full screen. Again, do the same thing with Windows.

Use Alt + TAB to switch between programs. Seems like the same process found in Windows, doesn't it?

Now, use Alt + TAB so you can see your task-bar on X Linux and click one of the 4 boxes to switch to a new desktop. Wow, nothing in there.

Click back on the box with the windows you had open. Your stuff is back!

Do this on Windows. Oh right, you can't do it on Windows because it's limited!

Now, go back to the program that takes your full screen, do the same thing with Windows.

Assume the program froze, both on Linux and Windows. How will you ever get out of this one?

Windows (push Ctrl + Alt + Del and hope Task Manager will come up)(NOTE: If your video is responsible for why you froze, you can forget about task manager coming up)

Linux (Push Ctrl + Alt + F1, log in, do ps -A, find the process # for X, then type "kill #, wait 10 seconds, X starts back up automatically)

Cool huh? Cheers!:cool:

Oh, one more thing. MAC OS X is so simple to use, most people have a hard time trouble-shooting problems with it because they can not understand that it's so simple. They are so used to serious problems with MS OS and confusing modules with Linux, they just can't get a hint. OS X was made for a dummy, so a dummy can often fix it before you! :p

No arguments there but there's a reason why Apple/Mac made thier stuff so easy. So people will use it!

You gotta remember that the majority of the population still has trouble even learning how to alt-tab! I have literally had a 30 minute discussion with our employees on how to copy and paste.

In the long run who cares how much more powerful something is. If someone has a computer and gets the job done then what does it matter. Obviously this is true because Windows is the dominant OS. They marketed their product better than anyone else and strongarmed their way into dominance not because they have a better system.

It's one thing to sit at home and learn all this great stuff about Linux/Windows/OSX etc., but try doing this in a business environment where all most people care about is doing their job (which isn't IT) and going home.

Sure Linux has some nice front ends like KDE or Gnome but if I got to remotely walk one of our employees through a problem do I want to walk that person through a graphical troubleshooting process or a command line one?

Again just to be repetative - It don't matter how limited windows is compared to Linux/Unix because the general population will not want anything to do with advanced Linux/unix features.

Yes OS X is awesome and easy to use and they are moving well from my perspective to get a good piece of the market. But if you want OS X you gotta buy from Apple and you'll probably spend more than you would on a cheap system from Dell. Most families do not have a computer budget so which one are you going to buy if you are part of the majority population with little to zero computer experience.

Of course you're probably going to get a Dell because you've seen those ads for $250 computers. Most people will ask their computer friendly friends and family for advice but in the end they're going to get something they can afford. Hence they got Windows and that'll be all they will know unless Linux becomes more user friendly.

All most home users want is internet/e-mail/video games. These home users have jobs and are probably comfortable using Windows at work.

It's as simple as that. I get the impression that most computer people hang out with other computer people and don't seem to understand that most people don't know jack about computers.

As an experienced Windows/networking/programming user who had to endure 3 weeks in Linux re-installs, many hours looking at message boards for answers and finding great difficulty installing absolutley any new into the system....heh...yeah I might be able to see why some feel Linux cannot compete with Windows.

On the drive home I began to think that perhaps my posts were somewhat misunderstood. I don't think anyone would argue about how powerful/useful Linux can be over windows.

At the rate that Linux users are growing it still does not compare to Windows at home or in business. Eventually MS is going to double their efforts to snuff out Linux.

How long do you think it will be until MS begins making deals for hardware that would only run with Microsoft? A hardware manufacturer wouldn't do this if the demand for Linux is great but as it sits now, a company like Dell could make an arrangement like this and would not decrease their sales when you would consider what MS would be willing to pay for such a service.

As you all know MS will do everything they possibly can to dominate the market. It would be foolish to think they wouldn't try something like this.

The only way to combat this is if the Linux community as a whole could rewire their thinking and just simply attack the desktop community in force. The Linux community is bigger and IMHO better than the MS development group because we have no constraints.

Since I'm mainly using KDE now I really think these guys understand this. Although some of the utilities they offer have given me major issues I understand the direction they are trying to go and would do so much better with even more programmers and testers.

If everyone banded together to really come up with some innovative and amazing stuff then maybe one day I'll be able to use a Linux box as my main computer at work. Anyone who's into SciFi should already have an idea of the things we can do with computers.

Otherwise if MS continues to dominate the market then my Linux box at home will be simply for entertainment purposes. What's the point of going crazy learning Linux at home if it'll never be used at work.

Get Linux into the mainstream by making it easier to use or innovative.
When it goes mainstream it'll become supported by non-MS major software developers.
Then suddenly Linux is a wonderful alternative in business.

I don't think it will ever happen that M$ will be able to buy off all the hardware manufacturers. Don't forget tha tM$ has already been convicted as a monopolist, and it would only take a little effort to re-open the case against them. This is one of the very things that they were convicted of.

Furthermore, Hardware manufacturers are feelig the sting of M$ and their push to make them do things M$'s way. When M$ arbitrarily decides to change a driver model (Which it has done several times in the last several years), hardware manufacturers end up behind the 8-ball. Plus Linux users are always finding new ways to make Linux run on things. Look at the Ecchs-Box. It is made by M$ and yet has been hacked to run Linux successfully.

Microsoft wont go away and its not really because of the reasons you mentioned but because even though there are many people like us who make that switch for whatever reason (love of computers, power users, curiosity, freedom etc) there is still the majority that don't want to learn anymore than they have to. Using Windows is hard enough for some of these people imagine trying to switch to a new platform. Linux will compete with Windows on the business side as it already does but as a home desktop I think Micro$oft will continue to dominate that market no matter how many anti-trust , monopoly suits are filed. They're like McDonalds!! There arent going anywhere no matter how many Wendys, Burger Kings, Hardees, Rallys, White Castles and Fatburgers show up people still want their Mickey D's!! LOL!!!

Mandrake 9.2 has replaced window$ in my house....we are 99.9% microsoft free....since it was installed in February...i have not had one lockup....not one blue screen freeze....not one virus or trojan horse even though my computer is on hours a day attached to the internet with a cable modem....i have firewalls and routers attached...

Long Live Linux....i will never install another M$ product again.

just my 3 cents.
Tom

BTW, this is just an observation from many posts in this thread and also others... I'm not sure the argument that "Windows always crashes", or "No more blue screens" is as valid as it was during the win98 days. I used XP everyday from the day it came out until about 6 months ago when I switched for good, and trust me, I stress my computer out... lots. I download lots, do audio and video production, tons of email, etc, etc.... and never once have I gotten a virus (knock on wood, though not anymore with linux) nor a blue screen. The only application that has ever crashed has been IE on occasion. It runs 24/7 with servers and sporadic traffic.

So, this is not a defense of MS, but just my personal experience that crashing and freezing was the stock excuse 3-4 years ago, but XP is quite solid, at least with my experience.

Cheers,
Dizzy V

I agree with that. Although, I hated WinXP always wanting to install all the drivers for me, I place a CD on the drive and it auto-runs, I was tired of tweaking WinXP to do not do things automatically and disabling services. Some global variables works oddly, in a lame attempt of MS blocking Java. The compatibility mode feature does not work. Dos is too slow to be usable. But oh well, it's still a good system. Now Win2k Pro with SP4 is my all time favorite Operating System. It's fast, it's stable, it's "secure" as long as you are behind a good firewall...

You know, the world is full of lame marketings like this: Linux is secure, never crashes. Java runs one every platform, it's 100% portable and Windows crashes a lot and shows the blue screen of death...

Oh well, can't blame anyone for this. You always try to convince the others that your diamond shines more then the others :D.

There *are* still some things that make Linux less suitable as a desktop OS than windows. The most important ones are:

1) Easy installation of applications
2) Easy installation of drivers
3) Compatibility with windows applications and drivers

Of course, we have the RPM and DEB package managers, but you still have the problem of dependencies, conflicts and distribution differences.

An important problem is that the developers of Linux user interfaces are geeks, who have a lot of computer knowledge. It's really difficult to think as a n00b user if you have that much knowledge. Most desktop users don't want to learn how computers work, they just want to use them. Modern Linux user interfaces are GUI programs that really look nice, but in the end they still require computer knowledge. Auto-detection, and some pre-defined configurations for usual situations would help a lot. A good interface should require these things:

1) Everything is possible (for geeks and for people with unusual requirements)
2) All normal things should be easy and should not require any knowledge (for the normal desktop user)

A feature that would really make Linux break through into the desktop market is easy & flexible configuration for multiple workstations on a network. If system administrators decide that Linux is not only useful as a server platform, but also as an office desktop OS, then they will switch very easily. And, as people sometimes want to take their work to home, they also want Linux on their home computers. Windows will only remain a platform for old windows applications and for games, but the games will automatically follow the office apps.

And remember: office use is the big money maker for m$. Take away that, and you will take away their money, and their political power. That will finish the Linux revolution.

Well said cjp. I get a little passionate about this topic because the only thing keeping linux from really breaking into the desktop market is...well Linux.

The Linux community doesn't have any limitations, it can be absolutely anything the community wishes to make it.

We have here the perfect environment to really take software technology into a new level with Linux....well...I guess it's easier to pay a community of programmers to believe in a vision than say...convince congress to do something just because it's the "right thing".

I always think in terms of what one's purpose is. I would not hesitate to use a Linux setup as the working standard in an office. Everything gets complicated if you want to do tricks, but - if you have a setup with KDE/Gnome, OpenOffice.org, Evolution and Mozilla - you do not really have to mess about in any complicated way, right? And the logic of a /home/myname/ -folder is manageable, compared to finding your Windows doc-folder starting from C:\ . I suspect an employer would be more comfortable knowing it requires a very solid portion of knowledge to install a video game in a Linux system...
I got a bit of a laugh when it occurred to me that the reason I could not install a lot of programs earlier was that I had not installed the "developer" bits of Mandrake. Imagine installing Windows XP Home and being asked "do you want to install system developer tools and compilers?" Argh! Heh... but it's necessary even in the bubblegum Linux version known as Mandrake 10.0 with KDE.
Using the console (in this case, the Konsole) again is nice. The old DOS commands come flowing back. One gets to appreciate Tab-completion.
I really feel that a system with such flexibility encourages improving, well, everything. I have a Logitech keyboard. I remapped a couple of function keys, because the Windows shortcuts are labeled on the keys. There is a My Computer-icon on the F9 key - and I mapped it to the console, because, well, they are quite alike. Unfortunately, the Send/Receive shortcut in Evolution is F9. Heaven forbid doing anything with a mouse if there is a keyboard shortcut for it. I found the ui folder, in which all these things were managed with XML files - and edited the relevant file to use F4 instead.
Now, this is not complicated. But I would never have thought of it with Windows. And I like that kind of inspiration.

What is the .1% MS product you have? :p

That would be the operating system...

I just had an amazing linux experience. A friend of mine was having great trouble with windows and he could not get access to his art coursework material. He came to my house with his hard drive in the hope that I could do something with it. I decided to shove it into the computer and see what happened (typical scientific approach). Unbelievably the hard drive was detected immediately and a shortcut to it placed on the desktop. My friend was amazed given all the trouble he has with windows. I think he is going to be a linux convert.

Just though I'd share this good experience and point out how linux is improving and is well on the way to replacing windows.

I also got a lovely new keyboard that handles like a dream (just thought I'd share my good news)

A few people are still under speculations that Linux is not working hard toward providing users a transition from Windows to Linux. Though I personally believe they should work harder on it, I would like to stress that the Linux community is gearing toward this goal.

I am able to play over 70% of all Windows based games with Linux using Transgaming's winex3. Each month, there is yet another 3 more games that work, and another 1 more game with a bug that disappeared.

HQWine is coming relatively close to to getting Photoshop 7 usable stable on Linux (though some users can already use it now)

Xine can play over 90% of all codecs I have seen on the INTERNET and is totally beautiful to use. One of these codecs is DivX, which is often seen used for Jap. animation.

Gain can run AOL IM, Yahoo Messenger, and Microsoft Messenger.

Netscape can work on Linux and has a nice skin to replace the Mozzila interface. It also comes with several neat additional tools, like a AOL IM, E-Mail Manager, and more!

ATI Drivers work great (gotta remove that MESA RPM prior to install though)

nVidia Drivers work great (when you fix there tainted kernel (laughs)).

And then there is OpenOffice.

Last week, I spent several hours a day, testing, debugging, analyzing, and speculating if I could make a full transition from Windows to Linux. My final assessment came as a failure. However, last year, I could get so little to work. I could not get one Windows game to run. I could not get one Windows Application to successfully start and maintain stability. I could not watch any media on the INTERNET or listen to any MP3's or MPEG's. All I was really successfully at doing, was mounting a NTFS on my duel boot. Even samble sucked, and required a great deal of work just to make a Linux system into a server, rather then just a client.

This year, all that changed. If I was to score Linux to how close it came to providing a complete and satisfying migration, I would score it a 90%. Back then, I would not have even given it a 30%. To me, that makes a hell of an impression.

dolvmin's impressions very much match mine. I suspect I just might dump WinXP if I go WineX installed... and I will get there. I have decided that I will start paying for things. I use a downloaded version of Mandrake, but I feel it is extremely bizarre that Mandrake could get so close to having to close down when it sells one of the most user-friendly and all-compatible systems ever. So, I intend to support. Same with WineX.

Re: Why Linux Will never overthrow or compete with Windows
 

don't understand your position, one minute your shitting on Windows, then Mandrake then your praising "LiNuX" again in your signature.

get yourself a System Commander installation so that you can switch between both... this gives you the best of both worlds and can come in handly when one of them is having problems....

chin up... your learning something new today!

- perry

Thats quite inspiring. I'm going to install once I get finished with finals :rolleyes:

But my slackware server is serving as a very nice CGI proxy for my friends who want to surf the Internet at school... I'm sure I'm making the admins at school happy :p