On Monday 18 November 2002 09:27, you wrote:
> Good Morning All,
>
> I certainly don't wish to fan the flames, but this discussion has made
> me believe all over again that the one thing that will keep Linux from
> getting where it needs to be in the desktop market is the fighting back
> and forth about distributions, etc.
Good point. Some of this flaming over distributions seems pointless.
>
> Now I know that might not be totally accurate, but I am not the only one
> on this list who sees this as a problem as others have talked with me
> about this very thing.
Different Linux distributions are analogous to different makes of cars. It's
all transportation, but people get very loyal to their favorite brand. I
drive a Plymouth, I know a few die-hard Honda owners, and my dad would rather
push his Ford pickup than drive an import.
I'm OK with whatever car you like to drive and expect you to be equally
tolerant of me. Some people like to tinker under the hood and do all their
own maintenance. These guys will customize their cars with extra features:
headers, turbochargers, etc. Others don't have those talents and take their
car in for service. I don't have a problem with either crowd. Different is
not necessarily better or worse.
I bought Caldera, a lot of folks swear by Red Hat or Suse. There's a few
who'd die before giving up their Debian. Use what works for you and be
tolerant of the next guy's choice. Like cars, each distribution has its
unique features that some people like and others hate.
>
> So, to that end, I am curious to know what some of you out there think
> about this. More specifically, what is it that is keeping Linux from
> STRONGLY coming out on the desktop market?
Linux on the desktop needs to be simple and robust enough to use that a
peroxide blonde receptionist can successfully employ it in the normal routine
of her day. That's how the Macintosh and MS-Windows carved out their markets.
The geek reputation stands in the way of Linux being a real contender for the
desktop, but that's bound to be temporary. Twenty-five years ago, only geeks
had computers, and now everybody's online.
The hardcore gearheads and coders may not like this, but "dumbing down" Linux
will bring it to the masses a lot sooner then trying to raise the masses up
to competancy in Unix command line operations and shell scripting. The
computer is a tool for getting things done, and the folks on this list
believe Unix/Linux is a more efficient way of using this tool.
>
> We're 99% Microsoft free here (just converting some files now from one
> machine) throughout our house. One reason is this list. I have a
> replacement for virtually every MS program thanks to many of you.
> Surely if we can do it (wife and kids included) others can to. So my
> question is what can we do to help people make the change?
I've been 100% Microsoft-free (and crash-free, and virus-free) for about
three years. There had to be something better than MS-Windows and MS-DOS, and
I found it. To help expand Linux to those who'd otherwise use MS-Windows or a
Mac, we have to make it easier to use. Xandros and similar efforts are a step
in the right direction. More business applications and cross-platform efforts
like CodeWeavers's efforts will help. Porting Unix enterprise software to
Linux, as opposed to porting to Windows NT is almost a no-brainer and should
convince businesses that Linux is the OS they want.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:01:14 EDT