Lin is not win ...

brainout · 08-15-2012, 06:02 AM

A bigger goal (than mere ad hoc programs for Linux) should be this: make Linux commercial for the 'small' user. MS and Apple have gone the kiddie-picture route. But in truth, they are dependent on Linux. So they put an interface between the end user and the computer's innards, which basically prohibits configurations sophisticated but small-size users, want. We can't TELL how their programs are structured, we don't KNOW how to modify their stuff to suit what we want, there are BUGS which we don't know how to fix. In short, no transparency, in the name of 'protection'. It was for this reason that Linux was made open architecture, right? To provide TRANSPARENCY.

For people need to be paid for what they do. Besides, 'small' doesn't mean poor; 'free' doesn't have to prohibit, 'paid'. Tons of software are offered for free, basically with the idea that the user will WANT to pay for it, after he's successfully tried it. Okay, an extension of that logic is that if the OS is good, we will want to pay for it, to keep it going.

MS and Apple have been paranoid with each other over the years, even though both of them did some 'freebie' gimmicks, in the name of getting their product 'out there'. But the paranoia over potentially stolen profits, interferes: so much so, the end user has NO CLUE how to make anything work. So now they are both in a pickle, as users finally are getting FED UP with the lack of transparency.

Linux thus has an opportunity to step into the gap and relieve customers: and for a profit that is wholly justifiable. For the potential PAYING Linux customer isn't going to be poor. And thus the goal of Linux -- to make it freely available in both senses, 'open' and no-cost -- can be better realized.

How? Look: most of my own individual clients (who also own businesses) pay themselves between $200,000 and $1,000,000 per year. There are hundreds of thousands of these people in the US, alone. Windows frustrates them. I don't do 'IT', but I end up talking to them about Windows problems, often. Like me, they don't want the puerile and tyrannical impositions of MS and Apple.. but they also don't want to have to write their own code. They want to write documents, use spreadsheets -- for they or their wives, want to keep their financial information PRIVATE -- and they need email, surfing programs. Especially email client equivalents to Outlook Express, since they find using online email (even gmail, aol or yahoo), confusing.

With Linux, the user has to do too much, himself. There's no middle ground!

Therein lies the commercial opportunity for Linux: CREATE that middle ground. For the issue isn't so much 'free' as 'open'. A lot of us are quite willing to PAY for an OS, but we don't want to drown in jargon, and we do want transparency. That's why so many people have quietly kept on DOS. We understand it.

A sidetrip on the DOS issue, illustrates the point. The small business owner -- or local government CFO running a municipality -- WITH MONEY, tends to be over 40. So has been using DOS. You stick with what works, and frankly it's easier to create stuff in DOS and then port it over to Windows, than to create it in Windows. Which, they do. So you should see them complain about Win7, and how the 16-bit programs won't run.

So lots of mature business people want to keep their DOS programs, which we of the XP crowd could do.. until now.

So we the older generation with 40 years of files in Win3.x and especially DOS, just kept on using those files. But with Win7, suddenly we've got a problem. Win8 is even worse. For how long will XP really be able to run, as the hardware outpaces its support?

Conversely, at the youth end: DOSBOX was motivated by youngsters wanting to play old DOS games. So they too have the same need, but for non-business programs.

For we don't want the puerile impositions of MS and Apple, but we also don't want to write all our own code. We just want to run our businesses or games. Yet from what I've seen of Linux here in the forum, Linux has nothing commercially packaged; its audience targets are fellow nerds who like to do all their stuff from scratch.

ERGO: due to the Win8 nonsense, suddenly Linux has a COMMERCIAL opportunity for both older and younger, users. I submit to you that there is an intermediate market of small businesses like mine, profits over 200K per year, less than 10 employees and often less than five, who just want an out-of-the-box computer like they have had, with Windows.

The PC World articles on Linux display a peculiar lack of commercial offerings, with few OEM (albeit major) vendors catering to an end-user computer replete with the basic applications a small business needs: DOS compatibility, word processing and spreadsheets which can 'read' and 'convert' other major software packages like Office and Corel, Lotus, Quicken, etc.

I submit this is an opportunity being missed. Paying people who develop Linux programs is something we want to do, but instead of stressing OPEN and then CHARGING, the Linux marketing presentation is distorted into a pseudo-moral claim of FREE as in NO CHARGE. So that's why it suffers. People have to be paid for their efforts.

So start putting out complete commercial packages of the OS plus basic software which is backwards-compatible (for 'open' means that also) -- and then charge for it. Y'all can get together in a consortium, if you want, all the different Linux providers. That serves your 'open' goal, yet gets you more funding -- this time, from a COMMERCIAL usage. Which is only right.

There are other advantages: once you get enough market share, the big boys still holding DOS programs from yesteryear, can re-release them; or, will be even more interested in funding your 'free and open' goal. This is already happening, with respect to DOS games. But there is a ton of DOS-specific software still owned by the big boys, like IBM.

Specific example illustrates the general point. Lotus 1-2-3 version 2.01 has an add-in by the former Funk Software called 'Worksheet Utilities'. IBM now owns the rights to the old DOS programs. Together, these two programs OUTDO anything later Lotus versions, Quattro Pro, or Excel have ever offered -- especially in the areas of audit trail and formula debugging. So I've made do over the years, by creating the wk1s and then importing them into Excel for fancy presentations, pdf color formatting, etc. No GUI spreadsheet software can even begin to compete, except for presentation and printing. Okay, so then the CORE NEED for the spreadsheet's calculation capabilities, is short-shrifted, in favor of pretty presentation.

Thus a big market for better calculation capability ALREADY CODED in yesteryear programs, can be tapped. Ergo, it would behoove IBM to re-issue these DOS programs, because of the superior auditability, etc. A lot of financial people and local governments still use them, so the market is large enough. But on what platform? Obviously, Linux could be that platform. It's already the basis for most of the enterprise operations worldwide, so would be a natural choice for IBM. They just need to know the potential.

So what better way to alert them to that potential, and get more business and funding, than to make a commercial package of Linux programs which can be made backwards-compatible, and use DOS? Commercial, so your small business owner can just turn on his LINUX computer.. and compute?

Please beat MS and Apple at their kiddie games. Time for Linux to grow into the small-business and end-user market?

For as it stands, people like me can't just download Linux and use it. Too much tweaking is required. So it will be hard to motivate us to leave MS or Apple, however much we want to leave.

irneb · 08-16-2012, 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brainout

Give Businesses TURNKEY packages?

How's this not already done? Stuff like the commercial Red Hat for instance? Or many of the others offer some form of paid-for version which they'll either install for you or give you a easy-to-install-on-your-hardware version.

But even the free versions seem reasonably simple to install for the most part (e.g. Ubuntu / Fedora). It's only in some situations where hardware (e.g. Graphics Cards / Wireless) and software (e.g. MP3 licensing) where the user needs to either download or accept a separate license agreement. For the paid-version this might already be installed - since the licensing would then become compatible.

The major reason why MS & Apple are still so prevalent is not because they're commercial and closed-source. It's because they're pre-installed on the hardware the average user buys in a shop. I'd say at least 90% of everyone owning a PC has at best a vague idea that there is something like an OS on their PC - usually they'd not even think about it. Very few consider installing a different OS from the one which was installed when they bought the PC/Laptop/etc. in the store.

There are other reasons, but they're totally overshadowed by the above. I've seen some laptops come with Ubuntu (or similar) pre-installed, but they're the exception rather than the rule. I think the 2nd most major reason is what this thread is on about: The programs you can run on the OS.

brainout · 08-16-2012, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irneb

How's this not already done? Stuff like the commercial Red Hat for instance? Or many of the others offer some form of paid-for version which they'll either install for you or give you a easy-to-install-on-your-hardware version.

But even the free versions seem reasonably simple to install for the most part (e.g. Ubuntu / Fedora). It's only in some situations where hardware (e.g. Graphics Cards / Wireless) and software (e.g. MP3 licensing) where the user needs to either download or accept a separate license agreement. For the paid-version this might already be installed - since the licensing would then become compatible.

The major reason why MS & Apple are still so prevalent is not because they're commercial and closed-source. It's because they're pre-installed on the hardware the average user buys in a shop. I'd say at least 90% of everyone owning a PC has at best a vague idea that there is something like an OS on their PC - usually they'd not even think about it. Very few consider installing a different OS from the one which was installed when they bought the PC/Laptop/etc. in the store.

There are other reasons, but they're totally overshadowed by the above. I've seen some laptops come with Ubuntu (or similar) pre-installed, but they're the exception rather than the rule. I think the 2nd most major reason is what this thread is on about: The programs you can run on the OS.

Yes, the second major reason which can make the difference in market share. It's always been true that a company can go hire developers. But what put Windows on the map, was consumerification, so to speak, of computers -- by having them pre-installed en masse. Why did that work? Because small business won't or can't afford to, hire a team of developers. Small can be one person who is a doctor, a consultant, an attorney, an accountant. Many of these 'small' have fat paychecks they seek to shelter in pension plans, and that's my job. I'm 'small', too.

So will I go hire developers? No. My needs are like the average guy's, limited to a few really good programs I daily use, and Windows fit my needs. Until now.

So if the Linux people would get together and for a price offer pre-installations, teaming up with the hardware manufactures en masse, a lot of profit can be had, because people like me have just been left in the lurch, by Windows.

I was searching yesterday for just such a package. The manufacturers offering Linux-based PCs are basically Acer, ASUS, and Dell. The latter offered a new 6530 laptop with Ubuntu 11.10 (not the latest version). ASUS' offering wasn't attractive, per the PC World article back some months ago (May?), and I didn't yet get to Acer.

For just as you said, the graphics and other peripheral stuff ends up costing extra time to find the right drivers or whatever. I don't want to spend that time. I want a turnkey package. I want to pay the manufacturer to do the OS installation, make sure I get the right video, wordprocessing, spreadsheet, internetting stuff with all the right drivers, right out of the box. Am willing to pay more to get it. But it's not offered.

Point is, there's no concerted marketing to counter the Windows setup, but there could be. So then if there were, then developers by the dozen or hundred, would start offering their own programs in Linux.

First you have to create the demand. Then the programs will follow. That's how it already happened, when Windows became popular: the DOS houses all retooled their software to Windows. And now, due again to demand, the old DOS game houses are revivifying their DOS games, via DOSBOX. So it works both ways.

So once those involved and dedicated to Linux development will team up with the manufacturers and offer turnkey packages, then that same cycle will repeat -- in Linux' favor.

flamelord · 08-16-2012, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brainout

So if the Linux people would get together and for a price offer pre-installations, teaming up with the hardware manufactures en masse, a lot of profit can be had, because people like me have just been left in the lurch, by Windows.

I was searching yesterday for just such a package. The manufacturers offering Linux-based PCs are basically Acer, ASUS, and Dell. The latter offered a new 6530 laptop with Ubuntu 11.10 (not the latest version). ASUS' offering wasn't attractive, per the PC World article back some months ago (May?), and I didn't yet get to Acer.

Linux enthusiasts would very much like to see widespread hardware with Linux pre-installed. Unfortunately, that is more under the control of the hardware distributors than Linux developers, and I wouldn't be surprised if said hardware distributors have contracts with MS that restrict their ability sell PCs with other OS's. That said it is not that difficult to find computers with Linux preinstalled online, although many are sold by smaller, less well known distributors, and without an economy of scale the prices usually aren't very competitive for the hardware. Also, Ubuntu 11.10 may not be the most recent version. But Dell would want to make sure that everything works well with the hardware and is stabalized. Windows only releases a new OS every few years, Ubuntu releases a new one every 6-months. You would expect Dell to be at least one release behind.

Although I'm not an expert it seems that Ubuntu at least, and probably Red Hat and SUSE as well have and are trying to market their distributions, preinstalled on hardware. But there needs to be cooperation from the hardware distributors, and that is lacking at the moment.

brainout · 08-16-2012, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flamelord

Linux enthusiasts would very much like to see widespread hardware with Linux pre-installed. Unfortunately, that is more under the control of the hardware distributors than Linux developers, and I wouldn't be surprised if said hardware distributors have contracts with MS that restrict their ability sell PCs with other OS's. That said it is not that difficult to find computers with Linux preinstalled online, although many are sold by smaller, less well known distributors, and without an economy of scale the prices usually aren't very competitive for the hardware. Also, Ubuntu 11.10 may not be the most recent version. But Dell would want to make sure that everything works well with the hardware and is stabalized. Windows only releases a new OS every few years, Ubuntu releases a new one every 6-months. You would expect Dell to be at least one release behind.

Although I'm not an expert it seems that Ubuntu at least, and probably Red Hat and SUSE as well have and are trying to market their distributions, preinstalled on hardware. But there needs to be cooperation from the hardware distributors, and that is lacking at the moment.

Yes, I gather that. So what to do? Take advantage of the negative reaction to Win8 that is variantly expressed everywhere I've surfed during the last week. One guy is concerned about losing his privacy, most are concerned about the proprietariness and the extra steps it will take to do the same old things, many more just are sick of upgrades they know will be buggy.

So: if the Linux people got their heads together and designed a series of basic apps that would work on any of the Linux versions, they'd have something to offer. PRICE the thing: you already have Open Office, so that's a start, but features need to be improved. I've had no good luck using OO, and others like me find it doesn't read Word and WordPerfect very well. Its calculation functions aren't that good. So, it's not used. Same for the email client, which is based on Thunderbird, I threw that out an hour after installing it.

In short, DESIGN A PACKAGE OF APPS which are Linux-specific, make the apps really work well, and you can then SELL THE APPS, while (if desired), keeping the OS free.

Then the manufacturers will have more reason to cater to Linux, because sales are turnkey-motivated by APPS one can use.

As it stands, potential Linux converts like me stay on the fence, when we see that we can't get the apps, will have trouble getting video and audio to work (which are increasingly uses for business reasons).

I had to make my decision today, as my new XP is arriving tomorrow, and is Win7 capable. So I had to decide if I'd give it to my computer guys to make a dual-boot Linux with Win7. And I decided against, for now. XP is something I know, and my apps work (have found ways around the bugs). When I can just go to a website and buy a complete computer with Linux and the needed apps, with all the drivers and codecs and bugs worked out, then I'll switch.

Linux is better, no doubt. But the user has to do too much, himself. Need a middle ground, transparency so can tweak the defaults, else turnkey. MS and Apple want to deny the user transparency and tweaking. That's the wrong direction, because today's computer users are much more tech-savvy than my generation. But my generation, has the money. And we don't want to write code. If Linux folks can get together to market some selection of apps, then they can gain market share from both generations. Until then, well -- it takes two to tango, but someone must ask someone else.. to dance.