Hi,

A good article that expresses the experience: From Windows to Linux In No Time.

The follow up article: From Windows to Linux Part Two: System 76 which references 'Linux was not to be feared' a masked From Windows to Linux Part One: The Newbie

These articles would be a good intro for someone to offer to interested Window users to get a feel for Gnu/Linux via *buntu. Personally, I am not a *buntu fan nor care for hold your hand Gnu/Linux but aware that this type of Gnu/Linux will be the pathway for people who are unfamiliar with the OS. Better of two evils *buntu Vs Microsoft.

I know one sure thing: To turn Linux to Windows all U have to do is to make illegal all other OS-es. That would be turning Linux to really subjective steering of the crowd. There has to be alternative technology to make experiments to eventually crush down the main branch when the main branch becomes too restrictive in any sense.

Anyway, does anyone knows anyone who abandoned Linux after giving a serious look? Is it just inertion or there is something really happening here?

Hi,

Never happen in a open an free society. As to technology, why would one need a alternative? Lock things again as some majors do. Again, not for a open source community model.

In the past I have tried to actively drive people to Linux. I have given that up, simply because it doesn't work. Actively pushing people to an OS that forces them to do things different as they are used to is not only not working ("what a stupid OS when I can't download this nice program and just install it"), it is also counter-productive ("Linux is really shitty, because it can't run my games, don't use it"). Of course there are exceptions, when people really try to get the Linux way, but most people are not of that kind.

After I have given up this active approach there were far more people that got interested into Linux when they saw it on my machines or when they came with problems to me that were really easy to solve with a Linux system (like data recovery). Some of them asked if I can install it for them, but before I did that I asked them what they wanted to use it for.

There were the usual things like surfing the net, some multimedia stuff and the occasional use of office applications. For those people I installed one of the user friendly distributions and from those people one person switched permanently to Linux (not really surprising a person with almost no computer experiences, no "Windows unlearning" needed).

But there are also people that want to use their computers for gaming. The gamers want to buy a game, install it and run it, they don't want to fiddle with Wine or one of its derivations. If they have powerful systems they want to use features like anti-aliasing (not possible with Wine). To those people I have explained my approach (since I am also a gamer): Dual boot, I use Windows strictly for gaming and Linux for everything else. Two of those people tried my approach, both have removed Linux now, one person after about a month, the second person after about 1 year, I removed the Linux system last monday. The explanation of this user for his wish to have Linux removed was pretty simple: He also is a "average user", besides from the gaming part he does the usual stuff, web-surfing, multimedia stuff and from time to time a bit office work. For these users there is not real advantage in using Linux. If they end to play a game want to listen to music they see no need to to switch to Linux and I can fully understand that.

And there are the people that have devices or use services that are not really compatible (devices) or simply not available for Linux.
ghoultek says:and IMHO that is simply not true. iTunes is the best example that you can get. The "average Windows user" does not care at all about which OS is a direct competitor of which OS. If iTunes is there preferred service they won't switch to Linux if it is not available for Linux, simple as that. Those people also don't want to fiddle with Wine (which does not really work with iTunes) and they don't want to fiddle with VMs either. They want to use their computer and they want their preferred software to work.

What I concluded from my experiences:
Windows isn't successful. It is just what people are used to. So if Linux wants to be successful it has to sneak into peoples habits, like it has done it with Android, like it has done it with Linpus or Xandros on the first netbooks. Almost all of the people nowadays using a computer have absolutely no concept of an OS. They use what comes pre-installed on their machine. They just don't care, as long as it fits their needs. That is especially true on phones, tablets and netbooks.
On the desktop this would also be true, but there is another problem. Linux isn't Windows. The "average user" doesn't care about that, as long as it does what the user wants. But sooner or later there comes the point where the friendly neighbor vits with a program that, of course, doesn't work on Linux. Or they read that nice article on the net that advertizes a program that "makes your computer faster", which of course also doesn't run on Linux. So sooner or later they want to have a real Windows, not that "fake Windows called Linux" and of course they will find a frindly person that installs a "free copy" of Windows on their computers.

If Linux want to become more popular there are two main issues to solve:
1. The lack of vendors that sell machines with Linux pre-installed. While there are ZaReason and System76 the real impact comes from HP, Dell and ASUS.
2. The lack of cross platform software. We need more developers that release their software (games and some major products, like Photoshop, Quicken, tax software, ...) for all three major platforms, so that a user can change the platform without any impact on his favorite software.

1 members found this post helpful.

As I've said, the operating-system is just a tool for a job. Linux (in the form of Android) is already running portable phones and tablets all over this planet. It even runs microwave ovens. So it's not going anywhere to be "replaced by" anything. Operating systems really never "replace" each other anyhow, because all software is more-or-less particular to its environment. That software, whatever it is, and the possibly revenue-producing business operations that it supports, is what is really important.

If you simply look at things from the "retail desktop computer" perspective (and ignore OS/X), you really don't have a balanced perspective. But also, if you don't look at some of Microsoft's power-house strengths such as dot-Net, SharePoint, SQL Server, and its administration tools, once again it's not a balanced perspective. As much as we like to throw stones at Microsoft, they all happen to be damn good at what they do and at what they have done. We really do have to give the Devil his due ...

... "far away from us!!"

Do we want to look at Windows at our screens for ethernity? As with me, alternatives are a must have until a good solution comes out that would allow the change without spilling too much blood (think about all good Win apps if Win turns into history). Remember Windows if Linux one day comes to rule the world.

Win is for me a pain in the ass, forcing its closed ideas that suits Microsoft company. They make things for users easy enough to keep their share of the market. They are considered as successful company, they are really supported, so we need to forget about "gamers" for now, we have nothing to offer them right now. "Gamers" care about quality of products and no one can take that from them.

What we have is the fact that Linux alternative has the great thing that Windows lucks: its openness and the great spirit of freedom to change things that do not suit us. That is the card that is really important to me. But to "gamers"? I think they need applications that really rock, no matter of the way of how they are made.

Admit it, we suck currently for "gamers". Without rocking apps, all we have is the question: how to turn a "gamer" into another type of person?

Hell of the problem.

I'm not really sure if I want them to do the switch for now.

Hi,
My meaning was in direction for current hardware. No need to have alternative hardware for present desktop/laptop to lock out users. We do have hardware that supports the Gnu/Linux community without locking someone out. I really do not wish to rehash <secure-boot> but we can still install a Gnu/Linux with EFI/UEFI. Just requires more effort for certain hardware.

As to Android, great OS but loads of users are not aware of the origin.

" How often do you try to turn people to the dark si... oops Linux?"

My answer. Never.

Year ago I was updating my laptop and my bro-in-law got very interested in linux after having to spend some money getting his windows machine fixed. I gave him a live cd of buntu to try. He ended up installing it but could not find the shutdown button. Panic. Payed his windows tech more money to remove buntu. Now he hates linux.

Everyone is intrigued by "free" and no antivirus. But as soon as they realize it is different they bolt.

Now I just glaze over when someone mentions my OS looks different. I just do not have the time or interest to hold someone's hand during a linux adventure. It was bad enough getting my wife onboard.

1 members found this post helpful.

Nice write up and suggestions, thanks.
I don't know about xtuple, but tried gnucash once as an alternative of Tally for a short term; still on hold.
No WINE but Yes, Windows running successfully in a VM with that software, that's where it belongs.

Regards.

This is a really good discussion you guys. I appreciate having differing opinions/view points in a mature conversation.

Onebuck:
Thanks for posting the links. I followed the links and read through the content after reading your post. I then continued reading replies here. It is good for newbies to see that the Linux adventure road is well paved and indeed has some fresh newbie tire tracks.
-----------------

ivanvodisek:
Me. *raises hand*

In the early 1990s I tried Linux and kept encountering so much stuff that got in the way of using the system the way I used Windows. Part of the problem was that some of the Linux drivers and apps. were unstable or well below my newbie tolerance level. The other part of the problem was that I couldn't get passed my own Windows habits and bias. Both Linux and I needed some time to mature. I gave up on learning Linux at the time because I worked in a Windows corp. IT environment, I had invested a bunch of time into learning M$ products, and I wanted to further my career along the M$ career path. However, I kept an eye on Linux because I had a hunch that if the Linux software/drivers/UIs matured M$ was going to be in very serious trouble. Anyone suckling the M$ nipple that was caught unprepared was going to be in very serious trouble as well (job/career wise).

As I've detailed in a previous post, I helped put together a presentation that made a long list of the intellectual arguments in favor of a full-on 90%+ migration to Linux in a corporate IT environment. In order to contribute to creating the presentation I needed to re-evaluate Linux objectively. My boss and I (to a lesser extent) were putting our jobs on the line by recommending a jump off of the Microsoft ship. If the project would have been approved and later had gone terribly wrong I imagine I would have a) lost my job, or b) crippled my future at that company. The Linux migration proposal died. I left that company about 2 years after the proposal died and I didn't bother trying to persuade people to try Linux.

PC/Mac gamers tend to be willing to spend money to meet hardware requirements and upgrade as needed. Since gaming tends to be a personal free time activity, gamers don't want to spend their free time troubleshooting issues, coding, and debugging. None of those activities are gaming related and only hinder gaming. PC game publishers seem to be preoccupied with their lust for money and take the shortest path to a healthy revenue stream, which is the Windows PC market first and the Mac market second.

TobiSGD:
I totally agree with you in that actively trying to push people into using Linux is going to fail. It fails when it comes to a private end-user PC scenario. However, in corp. environments where IT dept. policies can dictate to a large degree what the end-user experience will be, actively forcing people works just fine. For many companies its easier to issue a company owned laptop, that is setup to conform to IT's policies, to an employee to use outside of the office, instead of supporting non-conforming Home user PC/laptop environments.

I completely agree with you in that the "average windows user" doesn't care about which OSes compete with each other in regard to iTunes. iTunes is a poor example from the hardware/software manufacturer's (Apple) perspective. Apple has a near zero incentive to make their products work with Linux, when Linux is a direct competitor that could hurt their revenue streams and put them out of business. If Apple were in Microsoft's position of dominating the desktop computing market they would have a near zero incentive to make iTunes run on Windows (or Linux).

Apple only ensured that the iTunes client ran natively on a Mac (their platform) and on Windows. Windows was only included because there is a virtual sea of "average windows users", which represents a huge revenue stream for Apple if they make their products work equally well on both OS/X and Windows. So what matters to Apple is that they can market and sell their products/services to the largest pool of consumers, which includes supporting their platform. They would prefer you bought a Mac and used iTunes on that platform instead of Windows. We Linux users aren't going to persuade Apple to make a native iTunes client for Linux without Apple having a real need to perform this task. Apple would have to change their perspective to view the lack of a native iTunes client for Linux as a loss of business/revenue.

The average windows user does not have to be concerned with Linux when they can blissfully throw away/give away their old PC every 3-5 years and get a new PC with Windows pre-installed for $500 or less. Blissful ignorance is further cemented in place when they can get very cheap RAM, hard drive, and video card upgrades in the short-term and delay a new PC purchase. To get the average windows user to even objectively consider using Linux a need would have to be established and the blissful ignorance must be broken. Its better to break it gently and sugar coated eye-candy is just one technique for breaking it gently.

An update on post #18 above. . .

In my absence last week, the two machines at the cyber cafe on which i had installed Linux started experiencing 'conflicts', after months of trouble-free dual-booting. When i returned, i was informed that my Linux partitions had been reformatted so as to resolve the problem. This is how Gates has made his billions, isn't it? Windows had a conflict, so Linux had to go.

The windows 7 service pack 1
will remove a linux install
and replace the grub bootloder on the MBR with the windows bootloder

xp also did this with every service pack

nothing new

As to converting ??

well all the games i installed on my mom's old xp install were linux ports and Mingw builds

so she has her games now but on OpenSUSE

I have done some Linux evangelizing in the past, but no more, unless someone specifically comes to me expressing an interest. I have a friend that once bought a used HP laptop, and didn't want to run the Windows that was on there, so I set him up with openSUSE (the only distro that seemed to work really well on it). Ultimately, he was frustrated with it because he couldn't run some commercial software (I don't remember what), so he had a PC tech friend reinstall Windows. He hated that, too, and ended up buying a Macbook, which he's very happy with.

I keep threatening to migrate all of the sales/customer service/administration folks here at work (commercial printer) from Windows to Linux, because, as the prepress manager/computer geek, I have become the defacto IT guy around here, that has to periodically disinfect their Windows PCs of various malware. I have switched them all from using IE and Outlook, to Firefox and Thunderbird, which has been a big boon. My next task is to install LibreOffice on their machines, because they are all using old versions of MS Office, that won't open the new Office docs that are being sent to them. They are always sending those to me to print out for them, because I have MS Office 2011 on my Mac, hahaha. The funny thing about all this, is that I actually know very little about Windows, but I know worlds more than they do! I've been using Macs since 1986, and Linux since 2000.

Where did you get that from? Didn't happen to me, both Slackware and Lilo fine and in place.