Linux is NOT Windows

[Louigi Verona]

Guys, just wanted to share this - absolutely thrilling article!

http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

[Saga Musix]

yep, Linux != Windows because MPT doesn't run natively on Linux.

[psishock]

well....people arent even expecting to be equal in the first place , that why 2 different approach to operating system.

win is designed to be user friendly out of the box, it is suited for general needs, its for people who dont want to mess with geeky stuff in their life, but use comp for work, and use the (third party) programs to create stuffs or have simple fun.

linux is more geeky, you have pretty much every control that you can imagine, but needs to setup a tons of stuffs, and gather a fair amount of info before you should even start. Who likes to mess with OS and hardware all the time, set and customize every inch of the system, its the ideal choice.

from article:

The myth of "user-friendly", and Inefficiency and friendliness, etc

its no a "myth", that IS user friendly approach. They forgot to mention that in almost every important software you have the options to change gui elements and set shortcut keys to whatever the user likes to.

also, they picked MSWord and asked how many professional coders use it for programing example? O for gods sake =) its a word processor specially designed for office work, for secretaries to print out documents, to organize document proportions for easy printing, insert clip arts, graphs, and do similar =).
Programmers are picking a tool that will suit their needs, just like musicians or graphic artists example. Nobody is expecting them to use an office program for their work.

[Saga Musix]

Actually, it's not like that. You can take a completely not tech-savvy person, install Ubuntu on their pc that they only use for checking emails and doing some online shopping, tell them "i changed the look of it a bit, but it's still windows" and they won't notice anything. Modern linux desktop managers are on par with Windows and OSX, I'd say.

[psishock]

i know, even you dont have to install anything, but use a Knoppix edition or something. Its a lot easier if you have everything ready, that is 4 sure =). But we're talking about not tech-savvy persons who dont have preinstalled anything and need to start from somewhere. If we decides to install win, it can be a "sit back and relax" procedure, and afterward he have a fully functional system. With linux, he might dont even know where to start to look for the modular parts, no to speak about the softwares for every day work. He need to start nerdy stuff, roll the forums, manuals and instructions.

[Saga Musix]

That really depends on the linux distrubtion you use. Those different kinds of "linux flavours" exist for a reason. Of course, Arch Linux might not be a good choice for beginners. But something like Ubuntu or Linux Mint is just like Windows for those not so tech-savvy people IMHO.

[Sam_Zen]

At least people should be told that they have a choice.
I dunno how it's elsewhere, but here no retailer will ask a customer who wants to buy a PC :
"What OS do you have in mind ?", or "Windoze of Linux ?"

[psishock]

...i dunno how it's elsewhere...

usually no OS at all. Or something very basic like FreeDos or similar. You can get win with install and drivers for extra cash. If you want linux, you're at your own. Nobody seems to like to do extra work for no profit.

[uncloned]

people just think

Mac or PC

practically speaking though - using the browser and the "cloud" the difference will diminish between them two for most people. It will be come style like smart phones - get a certain level of smartphone and all brands do more or less the same thing.

[Louigi Verona]

Jojo: Ubuntu seems non-tech-user-friendly if all you do is browse. Anything else you would want to start doing you might run into things that require tampering with the system.
For instance, if you want to seriously do music, you would have to install a linux real time kernel and then configure it for your system.

[LPChip]

For those non-techy's, you can install msdos, tell them its linux and they'll believe it too...

[Saga Musix]

Jojo: Ubuntu seems non-tech-user-friendly if all you do is browse.

Yeah, and what else do completely non-tech-savvy persons do?
There's office software, image manipulation, media players and other things coming with Ubuntu. That is really enough for your average "i am not a power user" person. I am not talking about people wanting to make music. You're going wayyyyy too specific here.
And btw, some computer shops here also offer commercial linux installations (most notably SuSE).

[Louigi Verona]

Yeah, but this is not true, man - in order to play videos you have to install codecs first. By default Ubuntu does not allow you to play much. And this is not super easy - you have to know what package to install and that requires some googling already.
Next - chances are your network might not work because the modem manufacturer made a driver only for Windows. So you'll have to compile some drivers or find a package or whatever.

[Saga Musix]

Seriously, that completely depends on your computer. I never had to compile anything to get linux working. Under ubuntu, I just had to confirm that I want propriertary codecs and voilà, music and video worked! Linux Mint is a nice media-centered Ubuntu derivate which already comes with codecs and stuff installed. It's sure worth a look.

[Paul Legovitch]

When I bought my laptop (first PC I ever had), I read a linux magazine and installed mandrake 9 (then 10) in dual boot with XP. All was explained in a few pages in french and was very user friendly (with video codecs, usb modem suported). A very good experience, lots of very good apps, but in the same time I also used XP a lot (offline but with an access to my linux home partition). XP runs very smoothly and so does linux, I love them both for what they have to offer. Windows has modplug, linux has the best window managers, why switch or choose ?

It's not just about "Why should I want Linux?". It's also about "Why should Linux want me?"