Re: Considering switch to linux

Joe727 <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >> You have your opinion about Linux. I have mine. What's the problem?
> >> Unless, of course, everyone must conform to your opinion.
> >
> > It's comments like this that are getting you so much flak. Show me
> > *exactly* where I said you have to conform to my opinion? I was pointing
> > out that your comments were false. Nothing more, nothing less.
> >
>
> My comments are false - in your opinion.

No. You're comments are false period.

> > You stated that Linux isn't ready for the desktop. I pointed out that it
> > is for some of us and that your statement is false. It's just not ready
> > for you in this case.
> >
>
> As I mentioned, I am an average user as are the vast majority of PC users.

Then let me try this approach. Maybe you meant Linux isn't ready for
many average users' desktops? You didn't say that though. You said Linux
isn't ready for the desktop. It's clearly ready for my desktop because I
use it for at least 8 hours a day Monday - Friday at work and at other
times in my home office ergo you comment was false due to it being too
broad.

As for the command line comment, I rarely /need/ the command line. I
sometimes /choose/ to do things there because I find it quicker. I can
go for days without starting Konsole at all. Does that sound like Linux
is command line oriented to you? It doesn't to me.

> > You said that Linux is command line oriented which is false. I pointed
> > out that it doesn't have to be if you choose to only use a GUI and that
> > even MS seem to be coming round to the idea that a CLI is useful.
> >
> > How in hell is that telling you to conform to my opinion? I say you're
> > just trolling now.
> >
> >> Again, I am not anti-Linux, nor am I pro-Microsoft. I just had hoped
> >> that
> >> Linux would be further along than it is. After all, if Linux were ready
> >> for
> >> prime-time, the $25 billion a year PC games industry would have all their
> >> games ported to Linux. The fact is, they don't.
> >
> > The games industry are purely money oriented. I worked in that industry
> > in a minor way from 2000 - 2002. The reason they don't port games to
> > Linux is because there's not enough money in it for them to make it
> > worthwhile. They realise that many gamers are happy with Windows and
> > won't switch to Linux just to play games. When there's a large enough
> > Linux gamer user base for them to be losing money from lost sales and to
> > make it financially worthwhile for them they'll start porting games
> > over. It's a chicken and egg situation though unfortunately.
> >
>
> Precisely. How can Linux hope to gain wider acceptance, if there's no money
> in it?

As Linux gains wider acceptence things will change. There are Linux
versions of the Unreal Tournament and some Doom and Quake games, among
others. It's just going to take time.

> I really would like to see Linux as easy to use as Windows XP (I
> have the Professional version). That way there would be real choice PC OSs.
>
> One of the big problems, as I see it, is that there are so many different
> versions of Linux. That's ok for niche markets, but it is an impossible
> obstacle to overcome in the mass market. Perhaps Linux programmers should
> focus on getting *one* distro and *one* desktop to work as easily as
> Windows, to go head to head with Windows. Since Linux is Open Source,
> enthusiasts can still focus on niche distros and desktops.

How can you be sure that all the developers of other distros and
desktops will align themselves behind the one distro and the one
desktop? You can't. Maybe they'll be the enthusiasts who focus on the
niche distros and desktops. Oh wait, that's how things are now.

You also assume that we'd all like the one distro and the one desktop.
Personally I dislike the Windows desktop and find Windows too
restrictive and therefore harder to use. That's the reason I left
Windows behind. When I do have to use Windows I favour 2000 because I
find XP even more restrictive than 2000 is.

One of the many things I like about free and open OSs is the choice. As
I grew with Linux I moved from Mandrake to Debian to Gentoo. Those moves
were to free me from the restrictions of the previous distro. I use KDE
because I want a full desktop environment but find Gnome too restrictive
and XFCE lacking in features I use.

Now to my point. Noobs complain that distro X or desktop Y are too hard
and come up with the idea of the one distro and one desktop but forget
that Linux is for everyone. One size does not fit all. Windows is the
proof of that. I don't see why I should give up the OS I want just to
accomedate you when the free and open source way can support all of us.
I find Ubuntu, Linspire and the other noob friendly distros too
restrictive but they do a good job of making Linux more usable for some
noobs. If no distro suits you then maybe you should work with the distro
devs and help them make one you do like instead of complaining to us.
It's just a suggestion because, unlike with closed OSs, you can make a
contribution.

> It's unlikely to happen though. I've been following Linux since I
> unsucceesfully tried to install Red Hat a few years ago. There is much
> acrimony among users of different Linux distros. It's as if everyone needs
> to has his or her little kingdom. About the only thing they have in common
> is that they dislike Microsoft. That's not a stratetgy for success in the
> marketplace. I wish it were otherwise.

I can only speak for myself but I don't want a "little kingdom", I just
want an OS that does what I want without having to compromise too much.

And if you got you way, let's say that Linux gets pulled into a single
group with one distro and one desktop, you may find that a lot of very
knowledgable people stop using Linux and either move to FreeBSD (or one
of the other BSDs but I'll go with FreeBSD for this paragraph) or start
yet another OS. Eventually people like you who are using the "New Linux"
who want to move to something else will come over to FreeBSD and
complain that it's not easy enough and there are too many desktops and
the whole thing starts again.

And who says that any free OS wants to go head to head with MS? I'm just
thankful that there are OSs out there that do what I want be it Linux,
FreeBSD or Mac OS X because Windows doesn't fit for me.

I've deliberately let this post sound a little selfish (I want etc)
bcause that's how your "one distro/desktop" stuff sounds to me, sort of
like "as long as I can use it screw the rest". You have the choice to
stay with Windows until Linux is ready for you. I don't have that choice
because I've already completely outgrown Windows. I also don't care what
OS you use. As long as we have at least one OS that works for both of us
I'm happy.

Does that make my position clear now?

--
Andy.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Latetes Slew of patches.
    ... I've and others I visit often who use Linux, ... Why haven't you mentioned these things about windows? ... There may be an alert out for 'pppd', but it will tell which distro it's for. ... Where did I say anything about your post other than the computer science part? ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Which Distro
    ... which distro is suited for me, and it said Ubuntu may not work on my ... Yes, to answer my own earlier question, Opera does have a Linux ... While I get the feeling you dont care much for Windows, ... a Linux distro that looks and works similar to ...
    (alt.linux)
  • Re: Linux and the Consumer
    ... > as Windows XP. ... You can try out almost any distro for free, ... The linux paradigm is more like "what doesn't fit will be made to fit". ...
    (alt.os.linux)
  • Re: The future of Linux
    ... The main source of Linux is *"Open Source*, ... Windows will NEVER meet the requirements that Linux has, ... beta2 my very first distro. ...
    (comp.os.linux)
  • Re: GO Tanya!
    ... and i learn most when my opinion differs from the opinion of someone else, ... in relation to the 2nd in chips. ... If you want to discuss windows vs. ... > in jest, and in pure linux fanatical style, you went off the deep end. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)