Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am not a defeatist, I am a realist. I would have said the same things about the apple systems, but they did some changes for the good. They removed the proprietary components to the systems and opened it for 3rd party developers. It was not the computers they had that saved them, it was the Ipod. they ran acrost a GREAT invention and ran with it. That and the proprietary system is what saved them. As for Linux, it will go nowhere if there is not the backing of a large cooperation. You need advertising money, and a very standard approach to the OS. Right now I can think of at least 10 DIFFERENT versions of Linux. If the past with Linux runs into the present, where they tried to make it a known OS, it will fail again. Redhat was an utterly miserable failure. Another reason it will take HUGE changes with Linux to make any sort of dent is ease of use for the user. When DOS was the OS to have, there were very few personal PC's, DOS was difficult to use, and no where near as user friendly as MAC of the time. When Windows was first released it was still not user friendly enough to really get the Home PC in the eye of everyone, you still had to run DOS in the background. Windows 95 is where things started to get more user friendly with the PC. Anyone can pick it up and use it, and it is just not that way with Linux.
I do know that you are paying for the use of the software and not the CD, it is the same with Autodesk, although Autodesk keys for Autocad Architecture is worth $5,000 instead of 150.00
I couldn't agree more. Wal-Mart even tried selling Linux budget PCs but they didn't sell. When there is ONE STANDARD distro of Linux that is easy to use and intuitive, then it might have a chance. With this fragmentation in the market, it will never break out of its niche market among geeks.
I am not a defeatist, I am a realist. I would have said the same things about the apple systems, but they did some changes for the good. They removed the proprietary components to the systems and opened it for 3rd party developers. It was not the computers they had that saved them, it was the Ipod. they ran acrost a GREAT invention and ran with it. That and the proprietary system is what saved them. As for Linux, it will go nowhere if there is not the backing of a large cooperation. You need advertising money, and a very standard approach to the OS. Right now I can think of at least 10 DIFFERENT versions of Linux. If the past with Linux runs into the present, where they tried to make it a known OS, it will fail again. Redhat was an utterly miserable failure. Another reason it will take HUGE changes with Linux to make any sort of dent is ease of use for the user. When DOS was the OS to have, there were very few personal PC's, DOS was difficult to use, and no where near as user friendly as MAC of the time. When Windows was first released it was still not user friendly enough to really get the Home PC in the eye of everyone, you still had to run DOS in the background. Windows 95 is where things started to get more user friendly with the PC. Anyone can pick it up and use it, and it is just not that way with Linux.
I do know that you are paying for the use of the software and not the CD, it is the same with Autodesk, although Autodesk keys for Autocad Architecture is worth $5,000 instead of 150.00
While you're right that the iPod is really what allowed Apple to bring themselves to the forefront and change their image, giving them the new, hip look that they're using to market to teens and thus college students..
And their inclusion of Intel procs so people can run XP, Apple has managed to start increasing their market share tremendously.
But, where does the AVERAGE home user get their tech advice? That one tech friend. Which is why at home tech support services are not that profitable. Providing local end user support (like GeekSquad, Firedog, etc) is not a profitable venture either, because almost every home user has a 'geek' friend that they call for answers. Hell, one of my friends called me tonight for just such a question. And I then called my 'mac/linux' friend to help me out with it, because I dont know a thing about troubleshooting macs.
But, Linux is ENTIRELY open source and open to developers, yet you say the lack of this is one of the reasons Apple didn't get a solid market share?
But your counter is of course that, "Exactly! Its TOO open, and without any regulation and constant support that a corporation provides, will not succeed."
I understand that point, but I think its flawed on a few counts.
1) Linux IS intuitive. Its NOT intuitive if you've been running dos commands your entire life and have no clue what ls is or cd or rm, cp, mv, etc, etc are, but instead you use dir, del, etc... I agree that a lot of things are still command line driven and that the GUIs aren't fully up to the task in the way their structured... However, this is only about half a step behind, but in a way... two steps ahead of microsoft.
Vista requires you to be an admin to change anything. It doesn't like to let your user account be an admin. In Linux, to do admin tasks, its the same as in Vista, enter your password. It gets a bit annoying personally, but then again I tend to assume that Im the only one, or people I trust are the only ones ever in front of my system.
2) Linux doesn't so much as need a big corporation to run it, as it needs more people to hop on board. Linux is so ridiculously 'grassroots' its absurd... since its on a PC.
Grassroots movements have profound affects on us. And thats exactly what Linux will be doing. However, again Apple has managed to counter this somewhat with their intel based processors and the reason this is a counter is because of the fact that most people will see the marketing that, "Oh! I can install another OS on this if I want! Neato!" But won't ever follow through on that. And linux can be run on either an apple, or a PC.. and it was in the PC market that linux is really going to take hold, because as more and more people realize that its a good, solid operating system... Microsoft loses more and more market share.
Now, I haven't heard that it exists... but it wouldn't surprise me if it did...
Apple needs to release a solid intel based version of their OS, so that they can take part of THAT market from the 'Evil Empire', because right now they are limited in the, "Apple Hardware=Apple Software" and theres no way around it.
While you're right that the iPod is really what allowed Apple to bring themselves to the forefront and change their image, giving them the new, hip look that they're using to market to teens and thus college students..
And their inclusion of Intel procs so people can run XP, Apple has managed to start increasing their market share tremendously.
But, where does the AVERAGE home user get their tech advice? That one tech friend. Which is why at home tech support services are not that profitable. Providing local end user support (like GeekSquad, Firedog, etc) is not a profitable venture either, because almost every home user has a 'geek' friend that they call for answers. Hell, one of my friends called me tonight for just such a question. And I then called my 'mac/linux' friend to help me out with it, because I dont know a thing about troubleshooting macs.
But, Linux is ENTIRELY open source and open to developers, yet you say the lack of this is one of the reasons Apple didn't get a solid market share?
But your counter is of course that, "Exactly! Its TOO open, and without any regulation and constant support that a corporation provides, will not succeed."
I understand that point, but I think its flawed on a few counts.
1) Linux IS intuitive. Its NOT intuitive if you've been running dos commands your entire life and have no clue what ls is or cd or rm, cp, mv, etc, etc are, but instead you use dir, del, etc... I agree that a lot of things are still command line driven and that the GUIs aren't fully up to the task in the way their structured... However, this is only about half a step behind, but in a way... two steps ahead of microsoft.
Vista requires you to be an admin to change anything. It doesn't like to let your user account be an admin. In Linux, to do admin tasks, its the same as in Vista, enter your password. It gets a bit annoying personally, but then again I tend to assume that Im the only one, or people I trust are the only ones ever in front of my system.
2) Linux doesn't so much as need a big corporation to run it, as it needs more people to hop on board. Linux is so ridiculously 'grassroots' its absurd... since its on a PC.
Grassroots movements have profound affects on us. And thats exactly what Linux will be doing. However, again Apple has managed to counter this somewhat with their intel based processors and the reason this is a counter is because of the fact that most people will see the marketing that, "Oh! I can install another OS on this if I want! Neato!" But won't ever follow through on that. And linux can be run on either an apple, or a PC.. and it was in the PC market that linux is really going to take hold, because as more and more people realize that its a good, solid operating system... Microsoft loses more and more market share.
Now, I haven't heard that it exists... but it wouldn't surprise me if it did...
Apple needs to release a solid intel based version of their OS, so that they can take part of THAT market from the 'Evil Empire', because right now they are limited in the, "Apple Hardware=Apple Software" and theres no way around it.
Again, a third leg we can add to this arguement you brought up in your last sentence. Software manufacturers are not going to want to develop software for 3 systems, as it sits now, they dont want to develop for 2 systems. Most of the MAc software starts out as Windows based softare and then is ported by a 3rd party company to work with the mac. It will be extremly hard, if not impossable for Linux to change this if Apple could not even get that to happen. I dont know any not so computer literate person that will want to switch to a more difficult OS, when they have a hard time grasping a windows based machine. One of the reasons the PC has been able to merge into our society so well is the ease of use. It is much easyer to double click an icon and get what you want, then to go through a series of commands to get the same result. Number 1 you only have to remember what icon the program has, or a name under the icon, whereas with linux, you need a series of commands you need to memorize and be able to recall to run the same type of program. (we find this with new users of Autocad, that would rather push a button, than type in a two letter command that would be quicker)
There is a fine line between being too open, and to propriatary. I believe one of the reasons why Microsoft is so sucsessfull is that they found that ballance.
Again, a third leg we can add to this arguement you brought up in your last sentence. Software manufacturers are not going to want to develop software for 3 systems, as it sits now, they dont want to develop for 2 systems. Most of the MAc software starts out as Windows based softare and then is ported by a 3rd party company to work with the mac. It will be extremly hard, if not impossable for Linux to change this if Apple could not even get that to happen. I dont know any not so computer literate person that will want to switch to a more difficult OS, when they have a hard time grasping a windows based machine. One of the reasons the PC has been able to merge into our society so well is the ease of use. It is much easyer to double click an icon and get what you want, then to go through a series of commands to get the same result. Number 1 you only have to remember what icon the program has, or a name under the icon, whereas with linux, you need a series of commands you need to memorize and be able to recall to run the same type of program. (we find this with new users of Autocad, that would rather push a button, than type in a two letter command that would be quicker)
There is a fine line between being too open, and to propriatary. I believe one of the reasons why Microsoft is so sucsessfull is that they found that ballance.
I cannot tell you the number of people who use their Windows systems in such a way that they can only know where they store their files by clicking through the open or save dialogs in word. Or, they open word files through Excel. Etc, etc. The Windows operating system is NOT intuitive, its not easy to use and the backgrounds tend to be either a) overly cluttered with every single little program, or b) overly empty with no useful icons on it.
Linux, I'vee found is fairly intuitive with just a few nudges to get you going. When you get into the troubleshooting problems stage though... it does tend to go towards a command line nature, and that can be confusing as all get out.
Its just a different system. its not any harder than the other one out there, and in many ways its most definitely easier.
And, they'll gain market share in just the same way that Apple is gaining market share... get them when they're young and haven't created 15 years of prejudices based on their pro-microsoft beliefs.
If nothing else, I support linux full-heartedly because it gives the ordinary user a real choice. They just have to be aware that they HAVE a choice.
I cannot tell you the number of people who use their Windows systems in such a way that they can only know where they store their files by clicking through the open or save dialogs in word. Or, they open word files through Excel. Etc, etc. The Windows operating system is NOT intuitive, its not easy to use and the backgrounds tend to be either a) overly cluttered with every single little program, or b) overly empty with no useful icons on it.
Linux, I'vee found is fairly intuitive with just a few nudges to get you going. When you get into the troubleshooting problems stage though... it does tend to go towards a command line nature, and that can be confusing as all get out.
Its just a different system. its not any harder than the other one out there, and in many ways its most definitely easier.
And, they'll gain market share in just the same way that Apple is gaining market share... get them when they're young and haven't created 15 years of prejudices based on their pro-microsoft beliefs.
If nothing else, I support linux full-heartedly because it gives the ordinary user a real choice. They just have to be aware that they HAVE a choice.
here is the problem with Linux, there is no "They" Apple computers has the ownership of mac, Microsoft has the ownership of Windows. Win Linux, there is no company that is backing it up. There is no advertising, there is no way for it to gain a major market share because it is relativly unknown outside of knowlegeable computer users.
As I have stated earlyer, one company tried to take Linux to the main stream, Walmart, Computer City, Comp USA and Circut city all offered computers for sale with Linux on it, and the company went under, and failed to push Linux into the main stream.
here is the problem with Linux, there is no "They" Apple computers has the ownership of mac, Microsoft has the ownership of Windows. Win Linux, there is no company that is backing it up. There is no advertising, there is no way for it to gain a major market share because it is relativly unknown outside of knowlegeable computer users.
As I have stated earlyer, one company tried to take Linux to the main stream, Walmart, Computer City, Comp USA and Circut city all offered computers for sale with Linux on it, and the company went under, and failed to push Linux into the main stream.
here is the problem with Linux, there is no "They" Apple computers has the ownership of mac, Microsoft has the ownership of Windows. Win Linux, there is no company that is backing it up. There is no advertising, there is no way for it to gain a major market share because it is relativly unknown outside of knowlegeable computer users.
No advertising? Yep, have to agree there. No companies?
Dell, HP/Compaq, Red Hat, Novell, Canonical, ASUS.... not exactly tiny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noahma
As I have stated earlyer, one company tried to take Linux to the main stream, Walmart, Computer City, Comp USA and Circut city all offered computers for sale with Linux on it, and the company went under, and failed to push Linux into the main stream.
Everex you mean? Might want to read this regarding the "failure"....
they pulled the Everex Linux based PC's due to poor sales preformance, you can still order them online, but they are not in stores.
"Wal-Mart has had little success in the past selling low-cost Linux PCs. It has also offered Linux-based Lindows and Microtel PCs, but the retailer eventually removed those too from its shelves. "
I would suggest you go out on the street, and ask ten, fifteen people if they know what Linux is. My bet is less than 10% know what it is, and maybe a few have heard the name, but have no idea that it is an OS
you cant gain market share if no one knows what the heck it is.
I would suggest you go out on the street, and ask ten, fifteen people if they know what Linux is. My bet is less than 10% know what it is, and maybe a few have heard the name, but have no idea that it is an OS
you cant gain market share if no one knows what the heck it is.
You're right here. Ask most people about Linux and they think you are talking about one of the Beatles.
they pulled the Everex Linux based PC's due to poor sales preformance, you can still order them online, but they are not in stores.
"Wal-Mart has had little success in the past selling low-cost Linux PCs. It has also offered Linux-based Lindows and Microtel PCs, but the retailer eventually removed those too from its shelves. "
I would suggest you go out on the street, and ask ten, fifteen people if they know what Linux is. My bet is less than 10% know what it is, and maybe a few have heard the name, but have no idea that it is an OS
you cant gain market share if no one knows what the heck it is.
Windows was the first to enter the "popularity contest" stronghold so that being M$ is so popular many people don't want to know nothing about some other OS even if it saves them plenty of $$$ and grief especially ones that solely use a computer to surf the internet - that's their loss. As far as I'm concerned - let them keep on using windows and when their hard drive crashes on their few year old computer or get a nasty Virus/Trojan/or whatnot they'll put that computer to the curb and I'll take it thanks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
