Is the World Ready for Linux?

[Lemur]

There's been a lot of Linux chat on the boards in the last few weeks, and it seems that only Xiahou is a regular user of the OS, despite the warm and fuzzy feelings we all have for it.

ZDNet just published a lovely flame-bait article, titled "The World Just Isn't Ready for Linux." The number one reason they give is games, which mirrors many of the comments here at the Org. I'd be interested to hear reaction from my noble Orgahs.

Full text of the article below the spoil tag.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The world just isn’t ready for Linux

Posted by Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Windows Vista brings with it a new era of DRM and restrictive license agreements that aren't going to sit well with even your basic power user (let alone the uber power users that regularly read this and other blogs at ZDNet!) and some are looking for an escape route. These changes are making some users question their commitment to Microsoft. The obvious step is to make the leap to Linux.

But what's holding people back from escaping Microsoft's shackles and moving to a free and easy platform? My guess is that the platform isn't everything. In fact, it's only a small part of the equation.

I've been very impressed by the Linux distros that I've tried out. I'm currently quite partial to Ubuntu. It's got a lot of things going for it - installation is a snap (I'm guessing as long as you have the correct hardware), it looks good, and it's usable in that within a few minutes you can be surfing the web, writing emails and working with word processing documents and spreadsheets. It's also a fantastic platform for building a library of recovery tools to get your system up and running after a major problem. Life is good. Up to a point.

The problem with Linux is that as an operating system, it's great, but as a platform for your average desktop PC, it's leaves a lot to be desired.

Here are the areas Linux could improve on in order to transform itself from an operating system into a desktop platform:

• Gaming

Let's face it, for your average home PC user, gaming is pretty important aspect of PC ownership. In my experience, even people who really aren't all that into games still indulge the occasional new game.

Linux is pretty much a wasteland when it comes to games. Go through the top 10 PC games (or top 50 if you're feeling adventurous) and you're unlike to find more than one or two that will run on Linux. The sad fact is that, while there is plenty of interest in developing Linux as a platform, then it comes to gaming that interest just isn't there (for a number of reasons, which revolve around money and the number of users).

If you're a gamer and you want to go down the Linux road, the best you're going to achieve is a dual boot system.

• Software support

Going hand-in-hand with gaming is software support. Walk around any store selling software and see how much Linux-compatible software you can find. Not much. This needs to change. Consumers want to see stuff that they can buy that will work for them. Granted, there's a ton of stuff available for Linux as long as you know where to look, but for your average user that's not enough.

• Stop assuming that everyone using Linux (or who wants to use Linux) is a Linux expert

Let me draw an analogy with Windows. Even though Windows has been around for years and is almost universal, that doesn't mean people have mastered the basics. I still get emails asking me very basic Windows questions. The thing that amazes me when I get one of these requests (and I'll get at least one a week) is that these people have somehow found my site, figured out how to get in touch with me, and then written me a note asking me their question. Firing up Google and doing a quick search would have been much faster and got them the answers they were looking for much quicker. You can't assume that someone who uses a PC is an expert.
Linux needs to look like it's a simple choice, but at present, certainly from the outside looking in, it doesn't look that way. In fact, I'd say that the simplicity currently ends at the point where you install the OS. It needs to go further, much further.

• Hardware support

The one area of Linux ownership and use where it becomes apparent that there's an assumption that everyone who uses Linux is an expert is hardware support. Your average user doesn't have the time, the energy or the inclination to deal with uncertainty. Also, they usually only have the one PC to play with. Hardware just has to work. There's a very good reason why Microsoft spends a lot of time on hardware compatibility - it's what people want.

There are a number of other hurdles that those new to Linux have to jump and issues to come to terms with that aren't related to Linux as a platform. For example:

• Too many flavors

If it was a straight contest Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux, choosing Linux would be easier. Unfortunately, going Linux means choosing your OS from a huge number that inhabit the Linux ecosystem. So that makes the jump to Linux a bigger deal (it could be argued that Windows offers the same problem of choice, but with XP the choice was pretty simple - with Vista however, that might change).

• The whole OS Holy War thing

Too many people I've spoken to feel that making the leap to Linux means that they have to become some sort of fanatic or join a cult. The face of Linux as portrayed by the extreme fans just isn't wining it much support. It comes across as hokey, uninformed or just raging against the machine (usually Microsoft).

One thing is for sure, 2006 will be the final year of Microsoft dominance at the PC Doctor HQ. I'm already investigating ways to incorporate Linux into the system. The first systems are likely to be file storage systems (seems crazy to pay for an OS for a system that I'm not going to interact with all that much). From there, I don't know how things are going to pan out. Yet.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

My only experience with linux was when we had to modify the kernel for CS class and I didn't realize that you didn't have to use the command line interface. I will forever associate linux with watching it recompile in frustration hoping it was going to work this time.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Linux could be usefull for business purposes, but One Reason why it not popular anymore is proably cause it can't really run Games and other reasons.

[doc_bean]

He's right.

The bottom line is that Linux just isn't user friendly. Sure they have fancy GUIs now, but those hardly do anything. Need to install or update something a bit out of the ordinary ? You need the to use the terminal. The terminal is hell for the average user. Hell, I'm pretty PC savvy (we've had computers around the house all my life, I had my own personal 486 when i was a kid, I remember windows (3.1) as something new, I used DOS regularly) and I consider it hell.
There is no way the average user can or will deal with the terminal. They teach people how to work with windows, they have books on that, and that's *easy*.
Then there's the file system. Better and more effective than Windows, sure, but not nearly as transparent and easy as windows explorer.


Hardware support is hit and miss. Mostly miss. I tried installing it on an older computer this week and ran into all sorts of trouble. I installed it on my new rig today but had to use a separate USB dvd rom to be able to do that because the P965 isn't supported by the kernel ! You just can't let the average user deal with this kind of ****.


I disagree somewhat about the software support, aside from games. Freeware is big. Freeware is huge. Who still buys regular software just for fun ? People used to pirate everything, now they just use a freeware version. Linux benefits from the freeware revolution.


Overall I do see a future for Linux. PCLinuxOS seems pretty focused on making Linux easy and accessible, and succeeds pretty well in my humble experience. Most hardware gets detected at least and they run a rather lightweight (compared to Kunbutu Edge) version of KDE. Plus it's the only distro I know that has a ready to download Linux on an USB stick solution (www.pendrivelinux.com). *If* Linux can become more accessible than it will succeed. Problem is that i fear most Linux users don't see this as a problem

Oh yeah, and a lot of Linux users are insufferable snobs.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Freeware and pirated? Of course m8, who wants to pay couple hundred dollars, like for Windows for example, when you can get it for free or pirate it for free??

[doc_bean]

I have a genuine XP.

One of the reason I'm not going to switch to Vista anytime soon is that I don't want to waste 200€ on a friggin' OS. I could get a Wii for that kind of money (well almost).

I actually think that if Linux would become much more popular in the near future it would be because of Microsofts' 'genuine software platform' if it actually works

BTW piracy encouragement is against forum regulations

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

I have Windows XP Home Edition SP 2 I presume.. Same here m8, I'm not wasting 300-500 dollars on getting it. I can get a brand new comp (without the warrity) for 500 :) :)

[MSB]

A certain IT technician told me that learning how to use Linux is like learning how to use a computer again. If Linux could do everything that Windows can do I would get it, but sadly it doesn't so I don't.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

If it could play games and such, I'll certainly get it also, but it doesn't, so same goes for me also.

[Husar]

I'm not going to argue about that piracy bit here in the thread.
My dad tried several versions of Suse Linux and we often tried to install things together. We never even got the network or internet working, there were a few driver issues and despite it being so much better than Windows, the games and other software that were in the package often crashed. That was the end of my dad's linux dreams.

And the evil Microsoft company now works together with Novell to improve interoperability of Suse Linux and Windows, lookie here.

[whyidie]

The answer is a rather obvious no. While you will always have enthusiasts who really want to understand and harness the full power of a technology, thats not where the masses reside. And they never will.

Ford, GM, Toyota, and the majority of major auto manufacturers don't expect their user base to be able to finely tune and drive their vechicles. Neither do the folks in the consumer electronics industry. Why would we think the average consumer in the OS sector will be any different ?


On the opposite end of the spectrum, I couldn't imagine having to do my job on a Windows OS. If I am troubleshooting a problem I need a command line in a robust (bash at the moment) shell. Obviously DOS doesn't cut it.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Those posters who think Linux is hard to use or configure are recycling rumours from the past. It's got a lot, lot better in recent years.

The GUIs are very easy to learn, especially KDE which is practically Windows-like.

The barriers to Linux at present are all about inertia. Most people get Windows on their machine when it arrives and most people aren't keen on re-installing a new OS. This is not because it's Linux - how many people do you know who are comfortable with re-installing Windows?

Linux is also not just one flavour - there are many distributions, and this can confuse the unwary. Sad to say, there are still people in the Linux community that can be very disparaging to newbies, or worse, dual-booters.

People see Windows all the time, and despite its clunky interface, they're used to it. Add in that the majority of people want to be able to play games - and the default stays that way.

Inertia is a tough thing to beat. Look at Warman's thread on spyware and viruses - why would anyone put up with that badly designed an OS? Customer machines coming to Geezer with 40,000 malware on them?

Linux is still developing and is not ready for primetime just yet. When it is, it will still have to face the steep hill of inertia. Mind you, Microsoft is doing its very best to force people away with Vista mind-control.

I used to use Linux religiously, but found Mac OSX. It's not open-source of course, but the integration of hardware and software on an Apple rings my bells - as well as being beautiful. In the creative world, it helps to have an Apple too.

I keep a weather eye out for Linux progress however, and wish it well.

[doc_bean]

Those posters who think Linux is hard to use or configure are recycling rumours from the past. It's got a lot, lot better in recent years.

Have you tried running it on a P965 motherboard recently ?

The GUIs are very easy to learn, especially KDE which is practically Windows-like.

Sure, but it's like Windows 3.11 (or 95) sooner or later you're going to have to use the terminal (as you had to use Dos). Besides KDE eats up more ram than XP.

Linux is also not just one flavour - there are many distributions, and this can confuse the unwary. Sad to say, there are still people in the Linux community that can be very disparaging to newbies, or worse, dual-booters

.

Speaking of dual booting, why can't I install 2 Linux distros on my HD. Why does it get all screwy then ? Keen to take space from Windows, not to keen to share space with its 'brothers'.

People see Windows all the time, and despite its clunky interface, they're used to it. Add in that the majority of people want to be able to play games - and the default stays that way.

What's clunky about Windows XP ?

Inertia is a tough thing to beat. Look at Warman's thread on spyware and viruses - why would anyone put up with that badly designed an OS? Customer machines coming to Geezer with 40,000 malware on them?

Linux is still developing and is not ready for primetime just yet. When it is, it will still have to face the steep hill of inertia. Mind you, Microsoft is doing its very best to force people away with Vista mind-control.

I used to use Linux religiously, but found Mac OSX. It's not open-source of course, but the integration of hardware and software on an Apple rings my bells - as well as being beautiful. In the creative world, it helps to have an Apple too.

I keep a weather eye out for Linux progress however, and wish it well.

Like I said, Linux definitely has potential, but it's no where near as user friendly as XP and has no where near its amount of hardware support. Windows is still a decade ahead here.

[Husar]

I agree with doc_bean.

My dad and I have no problems installing Windows, we both did it several times, I had not problems dual-booting XP and Vista either(except that Vista would set a 3 second timer only for the boot menu).
That said, I also mentionend that Linux on my dad's PC crashed a lot more often than XP, and he had it on there for just a few weeks.
When he(my dad) had a problem, there was this Linux programmer system admin guy who earned his money with Linux networks, well he could do a lot in Linux, but guess what, he used the console and typed faster than I could read.
My point is that I do not want to study Linux or learn all console orders or know each and everything to program my own drivers in order to use it. I always got our network to run with Windows, 98, ME, XP, but trying to do that or get on the internet with KDE seemed just impossible, it simply wouldn't connect.

I never tried Linux on my own system for these reasons.

[Papewaio]

Just a reminder, piracy is frowned upon at this site.