Why not Linux

irishdude11 · 24-04-2012 12:48am

ntlbell wrote: »

It could be anything from a new filesystem to swivelling your desktop in that aero nonsense. the point is as soon as it goes in, you can have it.

I think having a system that can handle your wifi card or mouse is more important than having a new filesystem or desktop effects.

if one has no use for it, don't use it.

I knew nothing about IT and very little technical knoweledge when I first tried to install RH 5.x but the reason I attempted it was I was sick and tired of the problems I had with windows.

I paid for FreeBSD and bought a book and put the time in. Right one shouldn't have to and that;s fine don't bother. but people seem to be putting their technical limitations and laziness down to a problem with an OS.

There is a problem with the OS, it does not work properly with tons of devices.

And whatever problems you had with the 11 year old XP operating system or the crap vista are not present in Windows 7. Microsoft nailed it with W7.

Anyway, Im done with the thread, just like to say before I leave that alot of people who left XP or Vista for Linux could do with giving W7 a go. Obviously many people havent tried W7 as they are still talking about slowing down over time and crashing as reasons not to use windows. These issues dont exist anymore. I was in the same boat myself, sick of XP slowing down and having to be reinstalled every few months. But its a completely different story these days, W7 is as good as it gets, it beats everything hands down.

melekalikimaka · 24-04-2012 12:55am

my issue is the stupid file systems... you'd think mac would work with it... but no

PrzemoF · 24-04-2012 8:58am

Groinshot wrote: »

Why is this an issue for most people? don't need it? don't use it. What if someone decides they don't need gcc, or gnome, because they don't know what they are? remove them?

I'm just picking cherries here. gcc or gnome are not known for running background updates, "quick starts", or system checks to make sure you can install next version. Windows software is doing it all the time!

irishdude11, I bet that ms mouse is not using any standards. Probably ms decided "let's do something easy for us and force the rest of the world to use it as standard".

@viruses: even if there were as many viruses for linux as it for windows they would have no chance to survive. Critical patches are available within hours after the discovery and normal user has no access to the system, but only to his/her data.

A real life example of linux vs w7: http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/03/29/0025239/munich-has-saved-4m-so-far-after-switch-to-linux

ntlbell · 24-04-2012 9:11am

irishdude11 wrote: »

I think having a system that can handle your wifi card or mouse is more important than having a new filesystem or desktop effects.

Sorry, in all my years I never had any problems with a mouse and I always checked the hardware requirements before install so never had an issue with network cards or chipsets. It might be an idea for you to purchase that book.

irishdude11 wrote: »

There is a problem with the OS, it does not work properly with tons of devices.

As has been mentioned all ready the problem is not with the OS the problem is with the vendors who don't open up their source code, maybe you should write a letter to them instead of waffling on here about an issue you seem to have no grasp of?

irishdude11 wrote: »

And whatever problems you had with the 11 year old XP operating system or the crap vista are not present in Windows 7. Microsoft nailed it with W7.

They nailed it with dos :rolleyes:

irishdude11 wrote: »

Anyway, Im done with the thread, just like to say before I leave that alot of people who left XP or Vista for Linux could do with giving W7 a go. Obviously many people havent tried W7 as they are still talking about slowing down over time and crashing as reasons not to use windows. These issues dont exist anymore. I was in the same boat myself, sick of XP slowing down and having to be reinstalled every few months. But its a completely different story these days, W7 is as good as it gets, it beats everything hands down.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it and I agree the majority of people should stay with something simple and srtraight forward and require little or no engadgemnt of their brain and gives them little choice. Then things break. glad you found something that suits your needs.

gimme5minutes · 24-04-2012 10:12am

PrzemoF wrote: »

irishdude11, I bet that ms mouse is not using any standards. Probably ms decided "let's do something easy for us and force the rest of the world to use it as standard".

what are you talking about? there are no 'standards' that cover all operating system. each operating system has to specifically supported. thats their are different versions of device drivers for different OS's and different OS versions. MS dont support Linux, the same as most companys dont support it.

ntlbell wrote: »

Sorry, in all my years I never had any problems with a mouse and I always checked the hardware requirements before install so never had an issue with network cards or chipsets. It might be an idea for you to purchase that book.

another reason not to use linux, you have to check hardware requirements to make sure a mouse or network card will work with it.:rolleyes: it is a big negative for an operating system if it doesnt work with a whole heap of devices meaning you need to check compatibility before buying anything. so no only can it not run lots of software, it also doesnt work with lots of hardware.

i had a problem with a printer and broadband dongle when i started using linux. i already had these pieces of hardware, was i supposed to go out and buy a new printer and broadband dongle and bin the old ones? i actually did buy another dongle and that didnt work properly either.

As has been mentioned all ready the problem is not with the OS the problem is with the vendors who don't open up their source code, maybe you should write a letter to them instead of waffling on here about an issue you seem to have no grasp of?

this thread is about 'Why not Linux'? not working properly with a huge number of devices is one of the reasons why not to use Linux. that is a big problem for many users. and whether that stems from vendors not opening up source code is besides the point, the fact is these devices dont work. a user is not going to say 'oh well i dont mind that its not working, as the vendor didnt release source code', they are going to say 'f*&$ this its driving me mad trying to get this working'.

and why should vendors release source code anyway, they own the code and have spent tons of money on developing that code, why would they just release it and let all their competitors get their hands on it. but thats a bit irrelvant to this discussion anyway.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it and I agree the majority of people should stay with something simple and srtraight forward and require little or no engadgemnt of their brain and gives them little choice. Then things break. glad you found something that suits your needs.

'simple and straightforward'...another plus point for windows. needless complexity is hidden, that is the sign of good design. and i dont see what you are talking about regarding 'gives them little choice'...choice of what? people uses pcs to browse the net, get some work done, play games, films, music...fiddling with operating system internals is a non-issue for just about everyone.

what are you talking about 'then things break'. things dont break on windows 7. linux is the operating system where things break and you cant get your wifi card/printer/broadband dongle/etc.. working with it.

ntlbell · 24-04-2012 10:27am

gimme5minutes wrote: »

another reason not to use linux, you have to check hardware requirements to make sure a mouse or network card will work with it.:rolleyes: it is a big negative for an operating system if it doesnt work with a whole heap of devices meaning you need to check compatibility before buying anything. so no only can it not run lots of software, it also doesnt work with lots of hardware.

Yes, 30 seconds to glance over support for your hardware again as I said it does require one to engadge their brain if someone is not capable of it then absoloutley don't bother with linux. so if not being a complete and utter retard is a reason not to use linux, you're 100% correct. it's not for you.

gimme5minutes wrote: »

i had a problem with a printer and broadband dongle when i started using linux. i already had these pieces of hardware, was i supposed to go out and buy a new printer and broadband dongle and bin the old ones? i actually did buy another dongle and that didnt work properly either.

No, I don't think linux was for you, as has all ready been figured out, it's not for everyone, you seem to be one of the examples of why it's not. or you're just _really_ unlucky.

gimme5minutes wrote: »

this thread is about 'Why not Linux'? not working properly with a huge number of devices is one of the reasons why not to use Linux. that is a big problem for many users. and whether that stems from vendors not opening up source code is besides the point, the fact is these devices dont work. a user is not going to say 'oh well i dont mind that its not working, as the vendor didnt release source code', they are going to say 'f*&$ this its driving me mad trying to get this working'.

As I said, i don't have these problems and I'm sure it's very difficult to find a machine made from one of the large manufactures where a linux won't work on them out of the box. I can't recall the last box I installed ubuntu on that didn't work out of the box. as much as people complain windows XP is been used as an example, maybe you're discussing really old versions of linux? because even since this thread started things have changed, in linux they change every hour. not every 4-6 years

gimme5minutes wrote: »

and why should vendors release source code anyway, they own the code and have spent tons of money on developing that code, why would they just release it and let all their competitors get their hands on it. but thats a bit irrelvant to this discussion anyway.

A lot of them do, if you look at OpenBSD a single guy writing to a mailing list can have a wifi manufacturer **** themselves and release the code very quickly. why cut yourself off? why reduce sales?

gimme5minutes wrote: »

'simple and straightforward'...another plus point for windows. needless complexity is hidden, that is the sign of good design. and i dont see what you are talking about regarding 'gives them little choice'...choice of what? people uses pcs to browse the net, get some work done, play games, films, music...fiddling with operating system internals is a non-issue for just about everyone.

Absoloutley,, as I said if you're a complete an utter moron, please do us all a favour and don't use linux life is too short.

gimme5minutes wrote: »

what are you talking about 'then things break'. things dont break on windows 7. linux is the operating system where things break and you cant get your wifi card/printer/broadband dongle/etc.. working with it.

maybe you should stop by a local pc repair shop and talk to some of the staff and ask them what nonsense they see.

I'm not going to sit here and explain very basic simple concepts to you.

syklops · 24-04-2012 10:28am

what are you talking about? there are no 'standards' that cover all operating system. each operating system has to specifically supported. thats their are different versions of device drivers for different OS's and different OS versions. MS dont support Linux, the same as most companys dont support it.

If thats the case, how do Generic drivers work? Why is it, that I can spin up Red Hat linux 7.3 from way back in 2001, and a brand new straight out of the box Logitech scroll mouse will work on it?

/me sighs perplexed.

This thread is getting ridiculous. It has basically turned into a fanboy versus anti-fanboy debate. Like the beer I had last night, lots of foam but very little substance. "Facts" are being trotted out with very little to back them up. Anecdotal evidence is being used to back up arguments; "My mouse didnt work on linux ergo linux sucks".

If I was a mod I would have closed and deleted this thread by now. This forum is about helping people with problems with Linux and other Unix-like OS, and sharing information on the topic. Learning and sharing is what Linux and its community is about, not bitching on the internet about whose computer can do more. I stopped taking part in such conversations when I was about 11 and got on with the learning new stuph aspect.

If Linux does not work for you either ask for help, file a bug report, or go back to windows.

BostonB · 24-04-2012 10:51am

Kinda of pointless asking people why they don't use Linux then deriding them, and name calling them for their responses. It doesn't make any sense to suggest you can't maintain a stable windows system but have no problem with all sorts of Linux issues, and claims to have no knowledge of IT when trying Linux, but in the same breath years of experience in IT, and of Windows problems.

You might ask bpb101 did they get the info they wanted. Because you can't choose the replies you get. Doesn't matter if someone is mis informed, that mis information is your reply for your poll.

I expect most people who don't use Linux had no need to. The OS comes free with their computer and they don't have enough problems with it, to change to something else.

Linux came with a lot of Netbooks. Thats probably been the biggest exposure its had for a long time? be interesting to consider how did that turn out?

PrzemoF · 24-04-2012 11:08am

gimme5minutes wrote: »

what are you talking about? there are no 'standards' that cover all operating system. each operating system has to specifically supported. thats their are different versions of device drivers for different OS's and different OS versions. MS dont support Linux, the same as most companys dont support it.

Please get familiar with [1] and say again that there are no standards for input devices...

syklops, I hope that the thread won't be closed. It might became compendium of FUD "facts"

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_human_interface_device_class

P.S. We made a step forward. We're not duscussing "what is linux", but "why I don't like linux"! :-)

pacquiao · 24-04-2012 11:14am

ntlbell any chance you can take off your linux underwear ?

ntlbell · 24-04-2012 11:20am

pacquiao wrote: »

ntlbell any chance you can take off your linux underwear ?

Beastie underwear if you don't mind.

pacquiao · 24-04-2012 11:36am

was waiting for something alone those lines :mad:

gimme5minutes · 24-04-2012 11:39am

PrzemoF wrote: »

Please get familiar with [1] and say again that there are no standards for input devices...

syklops, I hope that the thread won't be closed. It might became compendium of FUD "facts"

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_human_interface_device_class

P.S. We made a step forward. We're not duscussing "what is linux", but "why I don't like linux"! :-)

yet again you are posting irrelevant stuff. that is a standard for writing USB compatible devices. you were talking about microsoft not writing their device drivers to a some cross platform standard that would mean those devices would work with linux. there is no such standard. there is no cross platform standard for devices such that you write to the standard and it works on windows, mac and linux. go learn some assembly code and system architecture and youll understand why.

gimme5minutes · 24-04-2012 11:48am

syklops wrote: »

If thats the case, how do Generic drivers work? Why is it, that I can spin up Red Hat linux 7.3 from way back in 2001, and a brand new straight out of the box Logitech scroll mouse will work on it?

/me sighs perplexed.

do you not understand that it is not possible to have cross platform device drivers by the nature of windows/mac/linux being different platforms. this isnt like regular software that can be written using a cross platform language, the assembly code (and c) that is used to write device drivers is specific to the platform. linux assembly will not work on windows and vice versa, they are syntactically different and they are implemented differently to handle the way things are done differently by each operating system.

that logitech mouse works because their mice all interface with the OS in the same way because logitech must have a common standard for their mice. it is not a generic driver in the cross-platform sense it is a generic Linux only driver, there is no such thing as a cross-platform driver.

gimme5minutes · 24-04-2012 12:03pm

ntlbell wrote: »

Yes, 30 seconds to glance over support for your hardware again as I said it does require one to engadge their brain if someone is not capable of it then absoloutley don't bother with linux. so if not being a complete and utter retard is a reason not to use linux, you're 100% correct. it's not for you.

its more pointless crap you have to go through to use linux. checking up if hardware will work with it, you havent had to do that on windows in over 20 years.

As I said, i don't have these problems and I'm sure it's very difficult to find a machine made from one of the large manufactures where a linux won't work on them out of the box. I can't recall the last box I installed ubuntu on that didn't work out of the box. as much as people complain windows XP is been used as an example, maybe you're discussing really old versions of linux? because even since this thread started things have changed, in linux they change every hour. not every 4-6 years

im sure there are massive changes happening every hour...there is feck all changing, big changes happen over the course over years, they are not happening hourly or daily or whatever timeframe you seem to be suggesting. significant changes happen with about much frequency as windows/mac. i have ubuntu on virtual box for assembly programming and there is feck all difference between this ubuntu and the one i was using 3 years ago.

and you would be dumb to start running the latest version of linux that comes out. the amount of times ive seen people complaining when they upgraded to the latest version of ubuntu and it was worse than the previous version and/or stuff didnt work with it. in the community you will have people saying dont use this version or that version as there are recognised good and bad versions.

Absoloutley,, as I said if you're a complete an utter moron, please do us all a favour and don't use linux life is too short.

maybe you should stop by a local pc repair shop and talk to some of the staff and ask them what nonsense they see.

I'm not going to sit here and explain very basic simple concepts to you.

i dont know why you think you are so clever for using linux. if you had any sense and were impartial you would be using windows 7. it is better in every way as a personal operating system, the reasons for using linux disappeared once w7 came out and fixed all the issues with xp and vista.

gimme5minutes · 24-04-2012 12:04pm

im out of this thread ill you to it guys

syklops · 24-04-2012 12:22pm

gimme5minutes wrote: »

do you not understand that it is not possible to have cross platform device drivers by the nature of windows/mac/linux being different platforms. this isnt like regular software that can be written using a cross platform language, the assembly code (and c) that is used to write device drivers is specific to the platform. linux assembly will not work on windows and vice versa, they are syntactically different and they are implemented differently to handle the way things are done differently by each operating system.

More sighing on my end.

Well actually the Assembly that is used is specific to the architecture, not the platform. There isn't anything inherently different in windows and linux assembly, aside from the fact that Linux utilises the int 0x80 interface to the kernel and has static syscall addresses, where as in windows the address of the functions can vary from version to version and has no direct kernel interface. Even then a bit of clever programming can get around that small issue.

linux assembly will not work on windows and vice versa, they are syntactically different and they are implemented differently to handle the way things are done differently by each operating system.

No they arent. You can take code meant for the likes of MASM(Microsoft Assembler), and use it on jWASM, and most of it will work with no alterations whatsoever.

gimme5minutes wrote: »

that logitech mouse works because their mice all interface with the OS in the same way because logitech must have a common standard for their mice. it is not a generic driver in the cross-platform sense it is a generic Linux only driver, there is no such thing as a cross-platform driver.

This is the funny bit. So the logitech mouse probably works because of some kind of standard then? Good to know.

PrzemoF · 24-04-2012 12:33pm

gimme5minutes wrote: »

[..]you were talking about microsoft not writing their device drivers to a some cross platform standard that would mean those devices would work with linux.[..]

I really don't want ms to make a special mouse driver for linux (it would mean that I have to reinstall it every time I have a new kernel). Using standards is more than enough to make a mouse work with linux/freebsd/haiku/you name it without any special driver - the "driver" is already there.

Johnboy1951 · 24-04-2012 12:53pm

i dont know why you think you are so clever for using linux. if you had any sense and were impartial you would be using windows 7. it is better in every way as a personal operating system, the reasons for using linux disappeared once w7 came out and fixed all the issues with xp and vista.

You are entitled to your opinion ...... but bear in mind that is all that it is, and others do not necessarily hold a similar opinion.

I have Win7 and linux on my laptop.
Yes Win7 is definitely the Best Windows OS to date.
That is true.
Of course comparing it to the previous Win OSs makes that an easy task.

The only reason I booted into Win 7 since Xmas was to unlock a USB drive that my daughters Window's had made unwriteable.

My opinion is completely contrary to yours.
But again it is just that .... an opinion.

I have found no reason to use Win 7.

My only hardware experience lately has been my daughter's purchase of a graphics tablet - a cheapie Silvercrest thing.

She unpacked, plugged it in, and did the usual insert CD and install software etc etc ........ only to find the tablet did not work.
After she gave up, after a few attempts, I plugged it into my Linux PC ..... and it worked.
She tested it, using GIMP on my PC, and was delighted that the hardware was functioning correctly.

Does that mean plugging in new hardware sucks on Win 7?
Nope, not in my opinion.
But certainly in that case it was a failure, while Linux handled the hardware without cause to install anything or otherwise do any of the alleged things posted in this thread.

Absolutely no conclusions can be drawn from my experience.

Neither am I about to make general statements based on that experience.

I use Linux because it does what I need; does it better than Windows ever did; is cost free; is not encumbered by an extremely restrictive EULA, which means I can treat the OS as if it is mine ..... not something with a restrictive licence, the terms of which caused me to look for alternatives years ago.

Those who do not have such preferences are best served to stick with Win, pay the fees, abide by the restrictive licence, and have their PC regularly serviced by their local PC repair person.

I wish them luck.

I prefer freedom and lack of restrictions.

gimme5minutes · 24-04-2012 1:58pm

syklops wrote: »

More sighing on my end.

Well actually the Assembly that is used is specific to the architecture, not the platform. There isn't anything inherently different in windows and linux assembly, aside from the fact that Linux utilises the int 0x80 interface to the kernel and has static syscall addresses, where as in windows the address of the functions can vary from version to version and has no direct kernel interface. Even then a bit of clever programming can get around that small issue.

obviously windows and linux assembly both run on the same architecture. but the assembly code will need to be written will be specific to each platform which is exactly what I said already. they both handle the same instruction set but they are different, not just syntactically but the code needs to be written differently to interface with different operating systems. so what are you sighing about, this is a fact, a device driver needs to be written specifically for an operating system.

No they arent. You can take code meant for the likes of MASM(Microsoft Assembler), and use it on jWASM, and most of it will work with no alterations whatsoever.

we are talking about the assembly used for device drivers, that is what we are discussing here. we are not talking about getting the cpu to add 3 to 5 and store the result in eax. we are talking about making device drivers work with an OS and be able to deal with the way the differents OSes will have completely seperate ways of doing things at this low level.

This is the funny bit. So the logitech mouse probably works because of some kind of standard then? Good to know.

for god sake he was talking about ms devices not working on linux because ms didnt use a standard. There is no cross platform standard for device drivers. every company will naturally have their own standards for their devices though which is why the logitech mouse works.

syklops · 24-04-2012 2:06pm

but the code needs to be written differently to interface with different operating systems. so what are you sighing about, this is a fact, a device driver needs to be written specifically for an operating system.

So why does NDISwrapper work then if they are so different?

gimme5minutes · 24-04-2012 2:44pm

syklops wrote: »

So why does NDISwrapper work then if they are so different?

is the clue not in the name - NDISwrapper. From wikipedia

NDISwrapper works by implementing the Windows kernel and NDIS APIs, and dynamically linking the Windows drivers to this implementation

as it says on ubunutu's documentation - https://help.ubuntu.com/community/WifiDocs/Driver/Ndiswrapper

Ndiswrapper can be a challenge to get working and even then the results are generally less than desirable.

If at all possible consider purchasing a replacement instead.

so its a hack that is wrapping the wireless networking related parts of the windows kernel and NDIS.

a device driver written for windows will not run on linux and vice versa. this is basic computer architecture fact. if you can get a device to work using a hack that wraps windows code then that is a good option if all else fails.

syklops · 24-04-2012 2:50pm

I wasnt asking why does it work. I was asking if as you say code for Windows is completely different to code for linux, why is it possible for a program like ndiswrapper to take windows object files and use them as linux drivers? The answer is because they are not so different.

Anyway, our discussion is started to look like:

"Yes it is"
"No it isn't"
"Yes it is"
"No it isn't"
"Yes it is"
"No it isn't"
"Yes it is"
"No it isn't"
"Yes it is times a thousand! Jinx! No comebacks!

So in the words of Duncan Ballatine, I'm out.

BostonB · 24-04-2012 3:28pm

The answer to why don't people use Linux is, this thread.
For others why do people use Linux is, this thread.

Lol

c_man · 24-04-2012 3:32pm

bpb101 wrote: »

what wrong with linux that you wont use it.

I really don't feel like fiddling around with drivers and such just to set up a pair of speakers properly. That kinda stuff, coupled with the gaming issue.

I have a lot of respect for Linux, I just find it too fiddly for anything approaching "home" use.

croo · 24-04-2012 6:56pm

c_man wrote: »

I just find it too fiddly for anything approaching "home" use.

Unless it's running your phone, tv or multimedia centre perhaps?

PS. I often wonder why there is a windows forum on boards... I mean it is sooo easy to use I cannot understand how anyone is having any questions or problems.

humbert · 24-04-2012 9:21pm

Why not linux is a bit like asking why not Dvorak. If Windows didn't come with 99% of PCs it would be long dead.

BostonB · 25-04-2012 8:28am

humbert wrote: »

Why not linux is a bit like asking why not Dvorak. If Windows didn't come with 99% of PCs it would be long dead.

Dunno about that. It still sells in vast quantities. I reckon most of the people who build their own PC's put Windows in it too.

croo · 25-04-2012 8:46am

BostonB wrote: »

Dunno about that. It still sells in vast quantities. I reckon most of the people who build their own PC's put Windows in it too.

Are there any numbers available?

BostonB · 25-04-2012 9:18am

croo wrote: »

Are there any numbers available?

I couldn't find a breakdown which I assume you are looking for. Retails vs OEM sales with PC's. In total the figures are about 400m or about 4 billion in revenue.

ChubbyHubby · 25-04-2012 10:14am

croo wrote: »

Unless it's running your phone, tv or multimedia centre perhaps?

People don't need to configure and fiddle with settings/drivers on their phones. It's usually preinstalled and preconfigured. Same with bought in multimedia centres. People who build their own are obviously people who wants to fiddle with this stuff. Plus you usually only spend time doing it once and don't have to worry about setup and compatibility with other devices in the future. No real need ever to update kernel etc. It's a little different to pc home use.

PS. I often wonder why there is a windows forum on boards... I mean it is sooo easy to use I cannot understand how anyone is having any questions or problems.

Different skillsets on different type of users. Also, things becomes easier the more exposed you are to it. Linux is not hard to use or setup once you've had enough exposure to it either but it can still remain a pain in the butt to get everything working. End of the day, personal preference even if linux is more stable/better/nerdier/sexier/makes you feel manlier.

ChubbyHubby · 25-04-2012 10:25am

I've used unix and linux systems in college and in work since the mid 90s. They make great servers and development desktops but I don't find them to be great home pc desktops. There are too many apps and games I use that are on windows only. Home pcs don't need the stability and I can't really remember the last time I have my old xp laptop crash on me because of the OS and not some hardware problem and my main pc is on windows7 which never crashes. Girlfriend is much more familiar with windows. Linux does not offer me anything I can't already do on windows.

Johnboy1951 · 25-04-2012 10:41am

ChubbyHubby wrote: »

I've used unix and linux systems in college and in work since the mid 90s. They make great servers and development desktops but I don't find them to be great home pc desktops. There are too many apps and games I use that are on windows only. Home pcs don't need the stability and I can't really remember the last time I have my old xp laptop crash on me because of the OS and not some hardware problem and my main pc is on windows7 which never crashes. Girlfriend is much more familiar with windows. Linux does not offer me anything I can't already do on windows.

I can truthfully say that Windows does not offer me anything I can't already do on Linux.

That does not make either OS more suitable for anyone else.

Most users I have observed do not use any apps on Windows for which there are no equivalents on Linux.

humbert · 25-04-2012 11:38am

BostonB wrote: »

Dunno about that. It still sells in vast quantities. I reckon most of the people who build their own PC's put Windows in it too.

I would not contest that at all, but the number of people in that position is small and so will never affect Windows' dominance.

If everyone had to choose what operating system to put on their PC upon receiving it then the numbers of non-windows users would increase steadily. Hardware manufactures would have to worry about sales by only supporting Windows, as would software manufacturers.

Linux is free and very open, so people don't need a good reason to use it. They just need the choice and no good reason not to use it.

BostonB · 25-04-2012 11:58am

humbert wrote: »

...no good reason not to use it.

Eh? Lots of reasons. They don't need to for a a start.

Like I said earlier the biggest exposure consumers had to Linux was on the netbooks. But these days they all seem to have Windows. That seems to suggest that simply rolling it out to consumers isn't going to win them over. I've never seen stats on that though so I'm only guessing.

Groinshot · 25-04-2012 12:03pm

Can I make a point here, that asking for help on a linux forum is like talking to a brick wall.
"I'm having trouble with X and Y"
"try man -x, man -y"

"Eh..."
"Ok, try do such and such(bunch of terminal commands) and attach a log file"
"eh, how do I do that?"
"main such and such"
*sigh*

croo · 25-04-2012 12:26pm

BostonB wrote: »

Like I said earlier the biggest exposure consumers had to Linux was on the netbooks.

I would say their android phone is more likely the biggest.

There are many people happily using linux on the tvs, routers & other devices in their homes. They might not know it, or in the case of routers rarely if ever need to interface with it, but they are using it.

I'd say the home PC is a beast of the past and fighting over what OS is on it doesn't really matter any more. With games consoles, smartphones & tablets. I would bet that relatively few of the home pcs that expire in the future will be replaced - by PCs.

croo · 25-04-2012 12:42pm

BostonB wrote: »

I couldn't find a breakdown which I assume you are looking for. Retails vs OEM sales with PC's. In total the figures are about 400m or about 4 billion in revenue.

yeah I was curious about the sales of retail, boxed, windows. Usually the hardware requirements on the next windows version are considerably greater than the last generation of hardware so upgrading the windows OS is not, in my experience, a great idea. But I wondered how many try it, I would have thought in the grand scheme of MS sales is a fairly small number!?

BostonB · 25-04-2012 12:48pm

Windows 7 and 8 run fine on older hardware. Better than vista and arguably better then XP.

BostonB · 25-04-2012 12:54pm

croo wrote: »

I would say their android phone is more likely the biggest.

There are many people happily using linux on the tvs, routers & other devices in their homes. They might not know it, or in the case of routers rarely if ever need to interface with it, but they are using it.

I'd say the home PC is a beast of the past and fighting over what OS is on it doesn't really matter any more. With games consoles, smartphones & tablets. I would bet that relatively few of the home pcs that expire in the future will be replaced - by PCs.

Be that as it may. I think you can take it as given that this thread was about the Desktop OS.

bpb101 wrote: »

...
People who use windows and mac. what wrong with linux that you wont use it....

humbert · 25-04-2012 2:25pm

BostonB wrote: »

Eh? Lots of reasons. They don't need to for a a start.

Like I said earlier the biggest exposure consumers had to Linux was on the netbooks. But these days they all seem to have Windows. That seems to suggest that simply rolling it out to consumers isn't going to win them over. I've never seen stats on that though so I'm only guessing.

I suppose managing 14,000 posts in 5 years doesn't leave much time for reading posts before replying to them.

Not needing to use Linux isn't a good reason not to use Linux.

I put forward the hypothetical situation where PCs don't come preloaded with Windows, so more people would try Linux, as it's free. Therefore there would inevitable be more awareness about Linux.

On the point about netbooks, which is unrelated to my hypothetical situation, I would say that most people's knowledge of Linux comes from friends who have used it or reading about it on the web. I would not think that people would judge Linux based on their experience with a netbook any more than based on their phone or TV or media server.

Also, to suggest that because Linux was used on netbooks and netbooks were not popular means that Linux would not be popular if it came installed on PCs is a bewilderingly nonsensical argument.

ChubbyHubby · 25-04-2012 2:45pm

humbert wrote: »

Not needing to use Linux isn't a good reason not to use Linux.

Sorry but why is that? Because Linux is the bee's knees? Microsoft is evil? Why must everyone use Linux even if they don't need it?

I put forward the hypothetical situation where PCs don't come preloaded with Windows, so more people would try Linux, as it's free. Therefore there would inevitable be more awareness about Linux.

I can argue that maybe more people will buy a mac. Microsoft will probably price the home edition a lot cheaper so buyers will ask shop to preinstall with cheap Microsoft OS.

Most people really don't care what OS it is as long as it does what they are buying it for such as checking email, web surfing, edit docs/picture, watch movies, listen music. Most people also don't want to install any OS or reinstall it with Linux/windows and they wouldn't really know how to or care to find out. That's sort of the reality why people don't use linux.

Johnboy1951 · 25-04-2012 2:49pm

Groinshot wrote: »

Can I make a point here, that asking for help on a linux forum is like talking to a brick wall.
"I'm having trouble with X and Y"
"try man -x, man -y"

"Eh..."
"Ok, try do such and such(bunch of terminal commands) and attach a log file"
"eh, how do I do that?"
"main such and such"
*sigh*

I can only presume that you mean a forum of a Linux distro ...... and all I can say is that if that is the attitude you regularly meet then it is past time you changed the distro you are using.

In my experience a RTFM response, is a rarity.

Of course if the problem is not explained ... such as "I'm having trouble with X and Y" .... it is no wonder it gets strange responses!
People have more to do with their time than trying to figure out what some lazy poster, asking for help, omitted.

There is always the alternative to pay someone to do the work for you .....

BostonB · 25-04-2012 3:09pm

humbert wrote: »

I suppose managing 14,000 posts in 5 years doesn't leave much time for reading posts before replying to them.

Not needing to use Linux isn't a good reason not to use Linux.

I put forward the hypothetical situation where PCs don't come preloaded with Windows, so more people would try Linux, as it's free. Therefore there would inevitable be more awareness about Linux.

On the point about netbooks, which is unrelated to my hypothetical situation, I would say that most people's knowledge of Linux comes from friends who have used it or reading about it on the web. I would not think that people would judge Linux based on their experience with a netbook any more than based on their phone or TV or media server.

Also, to suggest that because Linux was used on netbooks and netbooks were not popular means that Linux would not be popular if it came installed on PCs is a bewilderingly nonsensical argument.

Why can't you have a normal discussion without making personal digs

Not needing anything is a good reason not to have it. Be a it car, iPhone whatever. Thats its free isn't always enough of a reason either. Obviously or free software would be dominant, and it isn't, not on the desktop.

I didn't say netbooks weren't popular I said linux on netbooks wasn't popular. hence netbooks are all windows these days and netbooks are still popular. At least they are still being sold in the shops. But I don't see any of them with Linux.

You can buy PC's with no OS. People choose not to. You can buy them pre-installed with Linux. People choose not to. Its just not popular. So that idea defunct. There's obviously more to it than that.

croo · 25-04-2012 7:55pm

BostonB wrote: »

Thats its free isn't always enough of a reason either. Obviously or free software would be dominant, and it isn't, not on the desktop.

Do you mean free of open source? There is plenty of software that if free & Free (open source) that is popular .. even dominant. The one the springs to mind is Firefox. Or do we only speak of OS now?

BostonB · 26-04-2012 12:59am

croo wrote: »

Do you mean free of open source? There is plenty of software that if free & Free (open source) that is popular .. even dominant. The one the springs to mind is Firefox. Or do we only speak of OS now?

Desktop OS. Server OS would be a different story.

But you raise an interesting point. The browser is an interesting parallel. Its not pre installed but is successful.

But theres a plethora of angles to consider for the browser and the OS. I don't there are simple answers.

PrzemoF · 26-04-2012 8:50am

The thread is more alive than I'd expected it to be

Anyway, for an average linux user is not important if linux has 1%, 5% or 75% of the market. The most important is that the vendors are joining linux foundation (even nvidia did that), releasing hardware specs and helping to develop drivers. The rest is just a matter of time...

I bought a tablet some time ago - there are 3 symbols on the box: ms flag, apple and ..... happy Tux.

Resistance is futile...

Johnboy1951 · 26-04-2012 9:14am

There appears to be underlying assumptions running through this thread which it might be worthwhile reconsidering.

1.) "Linux" appears to be regarded as some other form of MS Windows (from the corporate sense).
Unlike Windows and others, Linux does not need particular 'market share' to be successful.
It is already successful, beyond the wildest dreams of the originator.
It continues to develop at breakneck speed.

So maybe the criteria for 'successful' should be reconsidered ..... it is not the number of desktop PC installations, IMO.

2.) Everybody who uses Linux wants to promote it above every other OS ...... while true for a vocal minority, there are millions of users who rarely get into discussions about the OS.
Personally I do not care what OS my brother/neighbour/uncle Tom are using. It does not impact me in the least.
Because of the advantages I might see for those people, I will inform them of the alternative; even offer to set it up ... provided they have a commitment to deal with the differences, I will help them make the change if they choose.
If they are happy with what they use presently, have no interest in OSs generally, then they have no reason to change, and I have no reason to get involved.

In essence I fail to see the benefit to anyone of threads such as this, with fans of both trying to 'score points' off the other.
'Linux' is not another Windows; Windows is not another Linux.

'Vive la différence'

IMO, people should choose what suits them, accept its consequences, and be happy that they have made the right choice For Them!

The only thing that bothers me a bit, is that (a lot of/the majority of) people are not aware they have a choice, and thus cannot make informed decisions.

So, IMO, the only thing needed is the promotion of awareness of choice .... not the promotion of any particular choice.

Everybody posting in this thread is aware there are choices, hence I see no benefit in the majority of the content of the thread.
(I apologise if that seems harsh, it is only my personal perspective)

Groinshot · 26-04-2012 10:17am

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I can only presume that you mean a forum of a Linux distro ...... and all I can say is that if that is the attitude you regularly meet then it is past time you changed the distro you are using.

In my experience a RTFM response, is a rarity.

Of course if the problem is not explained ... such as "I'm having trouble with X and Y" .... it is no wonder it gets strange responses!
People have more to do with their time than trying to figure out what some lazy poster, asking for help, omitted.

There is always the alternative to pay someone to do the work for you .....

Yeah, that was the response I got when learning Ubuntu, from the Ubuntu forums.
I was just giving an example, not saying that was how I phrased a question.
Over the worst of it at this stage, and have gotten the hang of it, but only after breaking it multiple times.

BostonB · 26-04-2012 10:24am

Kinda agree with Johnboy1951. Though the thread wasn't about Linux being successful it was looking for reasons why people who don't use it, don't use it, (as a desktop os is implied IMO). As such there really wasn't any reason for some who uses linux to reply.

I guess the answer to that is why should you care what other people use. I certainly don't. I'll use what ever OS is convenient and/or most useful at the time. I don't really care what other people are using. I've always enjoyed poking around on any computer, since I first used a 386, Dragon 32, Atari, OS6, OS/2 back in the day. Never really understood the intense fanaticism to one OS or platform.

Why not Linux

Comments