Linux isn't "free" Windoze

[Robocoastie]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

That expectation I think happens because Windows in a way made computers too easy to use. I'm only 37 keep in mind but I cut my computer teeth on an Apple2c and C64 where we had to load programs with floppies and in many cases program things ourselves. "Computer science class" was actually computer science class, not MSFT Office and IE class like it is in schools today. So people my age and older know what is happening when we click on the cute icon on the screen. People younger or older who didn't learn computers until the Win9x era don't know what is happening when they click it. They think IE and Media Player is part of the OS (if they even know what an OS is) because they've always had it.

The ONLY way the view of people you are lamenting about will cease is if Linux gets a serious hardware vendor who makes computers with an Linux distro on it as well as sells the periphals to work out of the box with them. Like Apple always has IOW. Asus could have been that vendor with its EEEPC line but with the addition of WinXP to those rigs and undoubtedly a special Win7 version when its ready their Linux line will remain a hobby toy.

Sadly, the strength of Linux is also why it fails in the non-tech marketplace - there's no incentive to make a buck off it. There's an incentive to make a buck with a MSFT running line because they'll even partly if not mostly finance you; despite the many anti-trust allegations and verdicts they continue to do that. This of course is also why Apple computers remain toys and not real competitors. If they opened the license and implimented a glitzy "Mac certified" campaign on hardware like MSFT does they'd rake in the dough I have no doubt about it. The purists would still buy the ones Apple makes too because it would be like owning a Porche, yea the Mustang could probably beat the pants off the Porche on the open road but it can't do it with the class of a Porche.

Rob

I've been on this Forum for some time now. Based on posts of many new users to Linux (Kubuntu), it seems there is an expectation that Linux is supposed to be a "free" Windoze OS. This view point often results in disappointment when their first experience with Linux falls short of their expectations.

• Linux is not "free" Windoze.
• All Linux distributions "are not the same."
• Just because "it worked in Windoze" doesn't (necessarily) mean that it will work in Linux.
• All Linux distributions are not equal (if you've seen one Linux distribution, you've not seen them all).
• Having had a less than favorable first impression with one Linux distribution does not mean that you will have the same with another (and vise-versa).
• That it works with one Linux distribution is no guarantee that it will work in another (and vise-versa).

Free your mind of Windoze. Don't let your experience with Windoze prejudice your expectations when you try Linux.

[Fintan]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

The purists would still buy the ones Apple makes too because it would be like owning a Porche, yea the Mustang could probably beat the pants off the Porche on the open road but it can't do it with the class of a Porche.

That is funny
A porsche would eat a mustang for breakfast on any road, much less open. By open I mean a raod with climbs and real curves and goes straight for any amount of miles.

You cannot compare macs and linux.
Macs are great, yet restricted.
Linux does not have a hardware design to fall back on, thus not restricted and so for my needs much better.

Go to a graphic designer and ask him / her. Price is of no importance, and he / she will tell anyone: give me adobe PS and IlLustratator plus all the very sexy video editing apps.
The equivalents under Linux just don't cut the cake.

The screen resolution of a mac monitor cannot be compared to anything on the PC-Monitor market.

I am digressing and know it.

Please do not put a mustang against a Porsche I have driven both

Just my 2.5 cents

[GreyGeek]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

One point that is often overlooked is that the msgs on this forum from newbies to Kubuntu (Linux) represent only those new users who are having problems, which is probably a small percentage of the total number of new users. So, some are inclined to believe that the general new user experience with Linux is bad when, in fact, it is good. The large majority, expecting a good experience and getting it, seldom log on and sing praises.

I have personally introduced many people to Linux and of those only a couple returned back to Windows, primarily because of hardware problems or because they needed an application which was available only on Windows and WINE or CrossOver wouldn't work. After all, how difficult is it to "relearn" how to point and click with a mouse? Kidding aside, they have a small hurdle to overcome in learning the names of Linux equivalents to Windows apps, and where they are located in the menu structure.

Then, there is the occasional new Linux user who decides to return to Windows simply because they prefer it or are unable or unwilling to change their habits. Most are unaware, or unwilling to believe, that by staying with Windows they are putting their personal info (SSN, CC#'s, etc..) at risk. They are happy to pay periodically to have the viruses cleaned out of their Windows system, or to have a fresh reinstall done. Being a typical Windows user they are unaware that their PC is probably part of a bad guy's "bot farm" (by some estimates 95% of all Windows users are infected, and bot farms are 99.999+% Windows PCs.) but seem unconcerned, if they know, that bot farms (hence Windows PCs) are the source of essentially ALL spam, DOS attacks, etc..., affecting their fellow Windows users, but generally not affecting Linux users.

[Robocoastie]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

You know the point I'm getting at. No matter what car is used in the example someone will disagree so it matters not. In case you need it spelled it, which it seems you do, the point is no one disputes the classiness and engineering of the Porche but many do vehicles with a FORD name on it, even if whatever car you use in the example can actually beat the Porche. Sheesh.

The rest of your points are exactly the point I was making. It takes an incentive to make a buck to develop top of the line software and hardware like the ones you mentioned. And as much as I love Linux (and apparently you do as well since you are here) it lacks that incentive.

The purists would still buy the ones Apple makes too because it would be like owning a Porche, yea the Mustang could probably beat the pants off the Porche on the open road but it can't do it with the class of a Porche.

That is funny
A porsche would eat a mustang for breakfast on any road, much less open. By open I mean a raod with climbs and real curves and goes straight for any amount of miles.

You cannot compare macs and linux.
Macs are great, yet restricted.
Linux does not have a hardware design to fall back on, thus not restricted and so for my needs much better.

Go to a graphic designer and ask him / her. Price is of no importance, and he / she will tell anyone: give me adobe PS and IlLustratator plus all the very sexy video editing apps.
The equivalents under Linux just don't cut the cake.

The screen resolution of a mac monitor cannot be compared to anything on the PC-Monitor market.

I am digressing and know it.

Please do not put a mustang against a Porsche I have driven both

Just my 2.5 cents

[digitalhead]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

I've seen and heard it hundreds of times and worded several different ways... "Linux still has a long way to come..." referring to it becoming mainstream. What gets me is that the exact same things were said about Mac and it stopped suddenly when OS X was released because it was far more shiny and usable than ever before. This happened because Apple is using an OpenBSD core and teamed up with some Linux related projects, such as the KDE team, to create the feature-filled glossy-finished operating system it is now. So when Mac essentially turned into a new Linux distribution, it became mainstream, but Linux itself has a long way to come... to become what? More like Windows? Leave it to Windows users (and zealots) to say such things, and in the end, make it become a reality. There was a test on this administered to the public not too long ago (can't remember where). There was a computer setup with Kubuntu using the latest KDE 4 desktop and nearly everybody thought it was the new Windows 7. This actually sickens me. Why use Linux to get away from Windows if everybody around is trying to turn it into Windows?

I am a registered Linux user (#486373) and a registered Kubuntu user (#26459). I use Linux on all of my computers and nothing but Linux because it's not Windows. Granted, I would take a Mac in a heartbeat, but once I got tired of how restrictive it is, I would just install Kubuntu on it anyway.

Also, if Linux was as widespread as Windows, the virus threats would be targeted at Linux instead of Windows, thus causing "99.999+%" of bot farm computers to be Linux based. Much like the flu and cold virus, a computer virus is targeted at the largest mass, whether it's Windows, Linux, or Mac. Wherever there are more computers to be infected, that's where it will be sent.

I think I've said more than my 2 cents worth, so I'll just leave it at the fact that I honestly don't believe Linux has far to come, but instead it's users and hardware manufactures that would have to put the effort into it. When Windows was released, it was said that they set computing back by at least 7 years, Linux is one way to avoid that backward fall unless Windows users have their way and turn Linux into just a clone of Windows.

[Troberg]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

Please do not put a mustang against a Porsche I have driven both

I had a Firebird Formula, not that different from a Mustang, and I ate 911's and 928's for breakfast. Better torque, better tires, better suspension, better weight distribution and better driver. They had no chance. The only cars that really whipped my butt was a Viper and an old supercharged Camaro with a 454 engine.

One point that is often overlooked is that the msgs on this forum from newbies to Kubuntu (Linux) represent only those new users who are having problems, which is probably a small percentage of the total number of new users. So, some are inclined to believe that the general new user experience with Linux is bad when, in fact, it is good. The large majority, expecting a good experience and getting it, seldom log on and sing praises.

Yep, and, unlike most Windows users asking questions on the internet, they get good help.

Really, one of the most common complaints about Linux is the lack of official support, yet, the support one gets online for Linux is much better than the crap you get from MS. MS is fine if you can't login because you forgot caps lock, but throw them a serious problem and they just say "reinstall", or, in one case I encountered "It's a known problem. Just remove all the cards from the machine one by one until it works, then put them back in again and it will work. If it happens again, just repeat the procedure." (and this was after I told them it was a laptop...). The Linux community, on the other hand, gives top notch technical support of a quality I wouldn't expect anyone but the developer behind the code to deliver.

[blackbelt_jones]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

For most people, everything that we "know" and believe about what an operating system is supposed to be is taught to us by Microsoft Windows. Many many people believe that "user-friendliness" is the only thing that matters. User-friendliness is the ability for a brand new user to intuitively use software without prior training, and it's definitely a fine thing, but is it the only thing that matters? If you're going to be using a computer for fifteen or twenty years, doesn't there come a point when how the software responds to a new user doesn't matter as much? If learning a little bit about commands and settings and alternate desktop environments can get you using your computer in more powerful and efficient ways, isn't that a positive value? Go to the Linux Hater's Blog, and you'll find people talking about learning as if it's a failure, and intrusion, an outrage. If an instrument that doesn't force you to learn anything is a better instrument, that would mean that the greatest musical instrument of all time is the kazoo. The violin, the piano, the guitar, are all for losers.

[Fintan]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

Go to the Linux Hater's Blog, and you'll find people talking about learning as if it's a failure, and intrusion, an outrage. If an instrument that doesn't force you to learn anything is a better instrument, that would mean that the greatest musical instrument of all time is the kazoo. The violin, the piano, the guitar, are all for losers.

If we had cars based on that principle we would be in real trouble

[kevinc]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

Linux certainly isn't "free" Windoze. From its roots in Unix designed to network computers regardless, to improve productivity and to be secure, stable, Linux has improved and continues to improve. Windows was made for what? To help everyone, or to make money, gain fame (and lawsuits) for one company without regard for treading on toes?

Linux today, 2009, is doing well. Despite the marketing disadvantage, Linux is growing rapidly and is being used in many applications such as servers, intranets, internet, home computing, educational institutions and business, among many others. XP had about seven years, then Vista came out and look at the reviews, look at what many are saying about the future of windows. Windows has just about stagnated with very little improvement. Some reviews even claim new versions are slower, not to mention the record number of bugs with each new version.

Some people find Linux difficult, but many find Widows difficult. I don't know anyone who uses Windows - either a new user or an experienced user, who doesn't have problems with it, lots of problems. How many times computers don't open properly, don't shut down properly, freeze, die in the middle of some application. There's no doubt in my mind that the majority of problems people have with computers are software - the microsoft operating system called windows.

Linux is totally different. Run a stable version like Intrepid Ibex, Debian Lenny, etcetera and you have reliability, stability, security, speed, not to mention the upgrade options, the expansion options and the ability to add software or write your own to do whatever you lean towards.

If you enjoy computers, run Debian Sid, or Kubuntu Alphas or other versions of Linux and help improve the best OS.

[RealG187]

Re: Linux isn't "free" Windoze

• Having had a less than favorable first impression with one Linux distribution does not mean that you will have the same with another (and vise-versa).

When I first tried DSL is disappointed, I could not use USB Drives or Cds* and it was hard just to mount a floppy. But Ubuntu does this automaticaly.

* When I put in a burnt MP3 CD (as DSL plays MP3s outta the box) in the root directory I seen a few MP3s from one album when in Windows I would see a bunch of folders and if I would access folder one/folder two I would see the same MP3s that showed up in the root folder. This is hard to explain, but I could only see one folder but it appeared as the root folder.