Linux and MacOSX are also mentioned in this article…but where are the “Google ads” trying to entice you into going to sites where you can “fix” or “repair” MacOSX and Linux? Answer? None! That’s because it really isn’t that much of a problem.

The one Linux related Google ad is about something “positive” i.e. Linux firewalls.

Windows is something that you have to spend alot of time “fixing” and “repairing” and other operating systems allow you to get your work done.

Even if the majority of users don’t instantly make the switch to non-Microsoft operating systems it’ll still be a good thing for computer users. If at least 15-20% make the switch then Microsoft will have some genuine competition on the desktop…and that’ll force them to finally improve the way they do things.

I’m not computer illiterate or anything. Actually I use both Mac OS X and Windows regularly for a plethora of purposes and I’m deeply familiar with countless audio and graphics related applications such as Photoshop, ProTools, Reason, Final Cut, Dreamweaver…etc. etc. etc., as well as the boring utilitarian software like MS Office. Been using computers since age 6. But I don’t touch code. If it requires programming, I avoid it like the plague. Love making media. Programming – forget it. And when it comes to setting up a Linux machine, I simply have no idea where to start, nor do I know that there would be any merit in doing so if my progs can’t run on it.

I love that Linux is free and open source and all that, but since the other OSes come with the hardware you have to buy anyway, and there’s no point in running the latest OS if your machine is outdated and can’t handle it, you may as well just stick with what’s most compatible. Sure, you could build your own computer and install the OS separately and it would be cost effective if you had a pirated copy. But again, not worth the headache.

Despite all this, I would really love to see a version of Linux that can be understood easily, is lean on the surface but has in-depth customizability, and most importantly is accessible to your average user who is not a programmer or IT professional…just somebody who wants to be productive on their computer!

On the other hand, here are a few reasons why Windows has been digging its own grave:

It’s daunting enough whenever you get a new PC and have to fix it because Windows is unuseable right out of the box. Everything has gigantic interfaces for blind people and pre-created folders you are expected to store your files in (My Documents, My Photos, My Music, My Porn, My Banking Info, My Plans To Overthrow The Government, My This, My That, My Ass). The contents of certain basic folders are hidden from you because Windows doesn’t trust you not to screw everything up. Auto-run insists on playing EVERYTHING even after you disable it and you end up having to hack msconfig just to stop it. You must also uninstall the mostly useless apps that were packaged with the OS. Then within Windows every individual program needs to be configured as well. Add that to the fact that things like Asian language support and certain Office features have to be installed separately and you’ll spend several days just getting it functional.

In short, it’s AOL Syndrome – in attempting to make the product user-friendly to everyone including your grandma, it has been rendered unuseable to your average user who demands a streamlined interface and time-conserving workflow.

Macs ain’t perfect either. Window navigation is cumbersome. The user is regularly bombarded with software update requests, many of which require a restart. Unpredictable problems arise which have no apparent cause or solution (i.e. .dmg’s won’t mount, apps won’t launch, OS becomes corrupt and permanently unbootable). Files cannot be renamed or saved to specific folders when downloading, one result being a desktop cluttered with files you may not recognize.

For the love of humanity – somebody make a standardized version of Linux for the layman that can replace these two evils.

Windows enables a certain level of customization, but those hard-core hackers who really want to tweak the guts of an OS at the source and library level tend to opt for Linux because of its open-source nature.

You simply can’t get to that level on Windows unless you work for Microsoft.

The only hurdle for corporations is money, and that doesn’t seem to stop corporations from buying Microsoft’s products.

Simply put, the feature set that alternatives provide is lackluster as best, and non-existent at worst.

The statements made in this article are far reaching and pure conjecture even in the largest stretch of the imagination.

European government administrations are switching to Linux in flocks. After major security blunders under Windows in the past, it seems only natural. An IT guy will only have to make marginal decision as to which packets to distribute across a network, which is not very hard, and it’s his job anyway. Switching involves agreement with the higher levels of administration – and pushing the deployment is no harder than maintaining a Windows network, I can tell from experience.

That Windows Vista is unsafe is not in the eye of the beholder. It’s unsafe. It’s the used up prostitute of Operating Systems. POSIX OSs have the potential to be very safe from the ground up. OSX is such an example. So is virtually any flavour of Linux.

Linux may have squandered it’s opportunity in the consumer’s desktop by forking, but this only increases the quality and selection of products. Ubuntu Linux is one the the many distros out there with a unified theme and attitude to make switching easier for non-technical users.

A world without Microsoft will be hard to accomplish probably in my lifetime, only because it has so much money to burn. But the internet is truly a place without Microsoft. Just look at web server market share.

Just off the top of my head, the choices that a user must wade through just to get Linux include: Red Hat, SuSe, Fedora, Ubuntu, BSD, Debian, etc. Add to that the choice of KDE or Gnome as a user interface, and what you have is a hopelessly fractured marketplace for the average user to fight through. Sure, the similarities FAR exceed the differences, but not to the uninitiated.

Add to that the generally poor quality of the documentation, usually written from the perspective of “You know what all the shortcuts mean, right? No?? What are you, stupid??”

Sadly, Linux has squandered the opportunity to unseat M$ by falling into the all-too-common OSS pattern of “Fork it!! I don’t like where the leaders are taking this so I’m gonna roll my own”, and have created an environment that is far too intimidating for the average PC user. Sure, once you get past the selection process it’s an easy path to acceptance and productivity, but the initial hurdle is high and getting higher.

One last point: even a seasoned IT guy can get stuck in the maze of choices. Try putting together an “appliance server” where all you are interested in is running a single semi-common app (like Subversion or a Wiki); the effort of figuring out which binaries are available for which distro, or making the decision to compile your own, are quite off-putting.

http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/23168/

http://lxer.com/module/db/index.php?dbn=14