why ubuntu does not appeal to the general public

[yoma819]

Dear All
after a long conversation with a friend of mine who owns a Pc repair shop, the topic of ubuntu linux came up!
He said to me that possibly 1 machine in a year comes in with linux problems.
now many of you may say that is because us linux users are tech savvy enough to fix our own Pcs.
but what about the less tech savvy public?
the public does not care about kernals and boot times, ext3 vs ext4 etc
what they care about seems to be this:

this is the start up screen:

http://news.softpedia.com/images/extra/LINUX/large/ubuntu910alpha6-large_000.jpg

very nice and aesthetically pleasing
however....
it goes from this lovely flash screen to diarrhea brown:

http://news.softpedia.com/images/extra/LINUX/large/karmicalpha1-large_002.jpg

what happens when we boot up windows 7:
http://neilkoster.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/windows7.jpg
we get something that looks alot prettier.
when a technophobe is presented with two pictures one of ubuntu linux and one of windows 7 they will inevitably choose windows 7 because by DEFAULT it is prettier.
so i ask the simple question what do we need to do to get a much more aesthetically pleaseing background and theme enabled as default?
cheers
yoma

[Azatos]

It could also be the fact that most popular windows programs don't run on linux out of the box.

[yoma819]

also true but most people wont even give it a try and i think making it more aesthetically pleasing as a default!

[DGortze380]

Look at Kubuntu
KDE4 is very similar (aesthetically) to Windows Aero

[yoma819]

yes true but why is the main distro not built in this way?

[crimius]

a lot of the people i know are simply afraid of it. they hear linux and images of command lines and hackers jump into their minds, after I show them how easy installing programs and other things are.

another reason is the program selection. many friends of mine are engineers, and as of yet I haven't come across a decent CAD solution. please enlighten me if you know of one.

[ElSlunko]

It could also be the fact that most popular windows programs don't run on linux out of the box.

I think it's mostly this.

[yoma819]

ah yes but what most people forget is that for every windows program that does not run on ubuntu there are usually other open source ones that do.
eg photoshop and the gimp!

[[]Milo]

This rather depends on how you define the 'general public'. Ubuntu is fairly widely adopted in terms of the range of people who use it or at least have it installed.

[Big Iain]

What utter mince you speak...

Windows is probably the most droll looking OS in history.

The reason for Ubuntu not being mainstream is lack of publicity

[Viva]

it doesn't?:confused:

[yoma819]

only 10 percent of the world dont use microsoft windows
that 10% inculdes mac users and all linux distros
it is a very narrow range of people that use it and one of the reasons is that it does not look professional to the technophobes which make up most of the computer consumers!
i think ubuntu needs to take a leaf out of apples book and start hiding the file tree and generally aim the os at more people!
mac have done this and managed to retain the usability of mac os as a linux distro in the sence that in the command line all function is still there it is just hidden from your average user who does not need it!
yoma

[crimius]

ah yes but what most people forget is that for every windows program that does not run on ubuntu there are usually other open source ones that do.
eg photoshop and the gimp!

and as many an accomplished graphic designer might tell you, though they are similar, there are rather large...holes in GIMP compared to the latest release of photoshop. now CS2 is almost exactly the same, but beyond that differences start appearing.

Milo]This rather depends on how you define the 'general public'. Ubuntu is fairly widely adopted in terms of the range of people who use it or at least have it installed.

I would define the general public as majority of english speaking computer users (don't mean to be limiting, but those are generally the people I interact with)

[ratcheer]

Look at it this way. If most people were using Ubuntu instead of Windows, most of us would probably be using something else.

Tim

[yoma819]

and why is that?
to make ourselfs feel special?
to make ourselfs look clever?

[doas777]

and why is that?
to make ourselfs feel special?
to make ourselfs look clever?

those are two of the traditional fundamental driving psychologies that prompt folks to get into linux (or to tech in general). most of us won't admit it in public, but we know deep down.

[yoma819]

yes which is a pitty as we are in the unique possition of creating something great but because of our own reservations we will let the chance slip by!

i have submitted to the ubuntu brain storm and would be grateful of a thumbs up when it has been okayed by a moderator and some suggestions!
hange of default background and theme in ubuntu:
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/22436
cheers
yoma

[uberdonkey5]

well, I agree with original post. Ubuntu could look fantastic.. look at nubuntu.. it is so cool looking. Not sure why they don't just have a really really great looking ubuntu standard, and then allow the same tailoring. I can bet 99% of regular ubuntu users NEVER use the standard ubuntu wallpaper, icons or windows. Indeed it seems half of them use conky and cairo dock.

The transfer from windows to linux is easy in one sense (lots of things, like open office, operate in a similar way) but difficult in another sense.. using the commandline and the different philosophy behind installing programs and virus protection. Personally I hate kubuntu because of the start menu and it looks to me like a cheap version of windows. People need to see, immediately from the boot up, just because ubuntu is free, doesn't mean it is 2nd rate.

now when I use windows I get frustrated.. there is definately less control, and the software is too tied in to commercial interests and advertising etc.

P.S. Tim, you are very good looking for a man, he he

[hoppipolla]

yes which is a pitty as we are in the unique possition of creating something great but because of our own reservations we will let the chance slip by!

i have submitted to the ubuntu brain storm and would be grateful of a thumbs up when it has been okayed by a moderator and some suggestions!
hange of default background and theme in ubuntu:
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/22436
cheers
yoma

It was already changed very significantly (and for the better IMO) in Karmic, I love the new look. And what makes you think they won't revise it again for Lucid and beyond?

[crimius]

ubuntu definitely does have the potential to look better with an out of the box install, but i really don't think it shoudl head down the same road as Mac did and hide all the potentially harmful things a user could do in favor of a friendlier system. Also, though Mac OSX may be a *nix like system, it's not a linux distro since it is based off of BSD, which is not linux.

[ratcheer]

P.S. Tim, you are very good looking for a man, he he

Thanks. That is not really a picture of me, but of a gorgeous professional wrestler.

Tim

[RabbitWho]

It could also be the fact that most popular windows programs don't run on linux out of the box.

there you go.

[yoma819]

DEVIATION
lol

[Marti68]

Look at it this way. If most people were using Ubuntu instead of Windows, most of us would probably be using something else.

Tim
What a brilliant tread :)
I quoted Tim but a couple of people hit the nail squarely on the head.

IMHO and Personally speaking, I like Ubuntu's clean and simple start-up desktop. The way older kit flies along is breath-taking. compared to even a stripped out Win7.

There IS an element of speriority to Linux users. I'm not convinced that Windows apps are the issue as there are options for most. I use Open Office3 in my Win7 boot and recomend it to small businesses with limited start-up capital.

But rarely the OS!

Telling a businessman that Ubuntu updates the kernal on the fly (I was told) doesn't impress them when they try to set up a simple VPN or connect a mobile phone.

Tell me that is not going to impress a skilled user over the general public!

Oh, and spotify music out of the box...life enhancing :)

[starcannon]

yes true but why is the main distro not built in this way?
If Ubuntu is what your calling "the main distro", and if things that are given away are popular by pure merit and democracy, then it would in my mind, stand to reason that the current theme, colors, software suite, and the whole package in general, is indeed what the public wants. Marketing my friend is why most people do not want Ubuntu, or any other distro; its not even that they "don't want it" so much as it is that they have been told that what they really want is "Windows" or "OSX", they are never told that they want "Linux" indeed they are never even told that they don't want Linux for fear they would go see what it is. Most people are being told what they want, I mean really told what they want, brainwashed with advertising, bogus news articles, and complete immersion in every facet of their lives, from home computing, entertainment, work, kiosks, and on and on and on, even the devices that they use that actually run on Linux are marketed as being compatible with Windows and OSX, rarely is a Penguin on the box.

There is nothing wrong with Ubuntu for the average Joe, its just that the average Joe has already had his mind made up for him.

[Kunkles]

It's not publicized, although I did see a guy last week with an Ubuntu hat :D

[MadHatHost]

There is nothing wrong with Ubuntu for the average Joe, its just that the average Joe has already had his mind made up for him.

Indeed ... It's all about the marketing ("I'm a PC and Windows 7 was my idea") ...

As an anecdote to the "diarrhea brown screen of Ubuntu" ... earlier this week my wife picked up my new Dell Mini 10 that I just installed Jaunty on. I have yet to change the theme from the default gnome desktop. After opening FireFox and surfing for a few moments, she asked me where I got my "nice Windows Theme" and wanted to know if I could install it on her computer.

She liked the minimalist look of the task bar and icons. However, after learning that it was linux, she balked at the idea of me installing it on her computer ...

Win some, lose some ...

[SLEEPER_V]

If Ubuntu is what your calling "the main distro", and if things that are given away are popular by pure merit and democracy, then it would in my mind, stand to reason that the current theme, colors, software suite, and the whole package in general, is indeed what the public wants. Marketing my friend is why most people do not want Ubuntu, or any other distro; its not even that they "don't want it" so much as it is that they have been told that what they really want is "Windows" or "OSX", they are never told that they want "Linux" indeed they are never even told that they don't want Linux for fear they would go see what it is. Most people are being told what they want, I mean really told what they want, brainwashed with advertising, bogus news articles, and complete immersion in every facet of their lives, from home computing, entertainment, work, kiosks, and on and on and on, even the devices that they use that actually run on Linux are marketed as being compatible with Windows and OSX, rarely is a Penguin on the box.

There is nothing wrong with Ubuntu for the average Joe, its just that the average Joe has already had his mind made up for him.

I disagree with this. This is what alot of Linux users believe, but for me, the reason is simple. Windows is easy and Ubuntu is not. For your average person, ubuntu is complicated. Its different and strange. Could they get used to it? Of course. I've been an ubuntu user off and on for a while, but the different repositories still get me. I still cant install a .tar. If its not a .deb, I cant use it. Windows I just insert the disk for the software I bought and it leads me by the nose. Ubuntu is intimidating and complicated to the average user. Maybe a windows like walkaround/introduction would be warrented.

Definatly change the default color scheme though. Instead of a blue(like kde and windows) maybe a green or a creme.

[Chronon]

a lot of the people i know are simply afraid of it. they hear linux and images of command lines and hackers jump into their minds, after I show them how easy installing programs and other things are.

another reason is the program selection. many friends of mine are engineers, and as of yet I haven't come across a decent CAD solution. please enlighten me if you know of one.

I don't really know of a free one. There are commercial CAD suites available for Linux, though. If BRL-CAD got some more attention on the interface side of things it could be interesting.

[Chronon]

I disagree with this. This is what alot of Linux users believe, but for me, the reason is simple. Windows is easy and Ubuntu is not. For your average person, ubuntu is complicated. Its different and strange. Could they get used to it? Of course. I've been an ubuntu user off and on for a while, but the different repositories still get me. I still cant install a .tar. If its not a .deb, I cant use it. Windows I just insert the disk for the software I bought and it leads me by the nose. Ubuntu is intimidating and complicated to the average user. Maybe a windows like walkaround/introduction would be warrented.

Definatly change the default color scheme though. Instead of a blue maybe a green or a creme.

Eh. You get used to whatever you use. I grew up with Apples and later Macs. Then I used Windows machines for quite a few years W95 through XP and got used to that. Now I am quite used to Ubuntu and play around with some other distros in VBox.

The initial hurdle that prevents so many users from trying it in the first place, I would agree, is marketing and fear of the unknown or unfamiliar.

[Unanimated]

i think it's mostly this.

+1

[Chame_Wizard]

1.FUD/Misconceptions: M$ is the main reason for the FUD), people think that *BSD/***Linux is for nerds/geeks only,a "hobby OS" and for hackers.*BSD/***Linux in general is "so called not secure enough" and have to behave like Winblows ETC ETC.


2.Fear of the unknown/unfamiliar/illiteracy : People only want to work with what they known,people think you have to do anything with the CLI,bad experience with BSD/***Linux and most people don't want a high learn curve.


3.Because of "2% market share" in DESKTOP,*BSD/***Linux isn't well supported by most games developer(guess why?),a lot of hardware and software companies are refusing to make apps for it.Not enough money for marketing,is NOT the real problem at all.


4.Diverse community:Most people in the *BSD/***Linux world have ego's(trolls,crazy die-hards,fundamentalists etc etc),there are a lot of distros(too much choices),no 1 simple standard for everything,developers aren't listening much top their end-user(noobs/beginer,advanced and power user/guru/professor level).


5.The idea of the FLOSS:Most people think because ***Linux is free,they think is not good as Proprietary/Commercially OS.With free they think as in free beer(FLOSS users are stealing!!!),but it's really free as in free speech.


I have nothing to say any-more.:guitar:

[yoma819]

i think something should be done about this asap.
it could look so more appealing

[SunnyRabbiera]

Yes but why must Ubuntu look like Windows or OSX in a practical sense?
I know Ubuntu's browns are not everyones cup of tea but I personally think that its good that Ubuntu is trying to stand out against the grain.
Both Windows and OSX favor grays, blues, shiny glassy colors but in the end they look practically the same, especially Windows 7.
Now yes maybe Ubuntu should consider more colors in its look, maybe favor more oranges but still keep to a unique look.

[mivo]

Yes but why must Ubuntu look like Windows or OSX in a practical sense?

I have been handing out quite a few Ubuntu Live CDs over the years, or inspired friends or people I work with to download the ISO. A common observation has been that many people comment negatively on the brown ("boring") theme. Many a person's evaluating of Ubuntu stopped there. Perhaps shallow, but first visual impressions matter.

A while ago I started to give away OpenSuSE Live CDs, and the feedback has been better, so I focus more on that because it is hard enough to get people to look at Linux at all. Those aren't statistically relevant samples, just the observations of one person, but still, it is noticeable.

I don't understand Canonical's refusal to include a few extra themes and offer them during installation or when the Live CD boots up. This would take little space, require relatively little effort, and possibly have great benefits. Choice is a strength of Linux, and yet Ubuntu offers none when it comes to OOTB themes.

[XubuRoxMySox]

yes true but why is the main distro not built in this way?

Because a zillion other distros fill that need (not the least of which is Kubuntu). I've played with a handful of KDE distros to discover what all the fuss is about with KDE, and in my opinion the best current distros for newbies who are completely unfamiliar with Linux are PCLinuxOS and Mepis. I like Mepis even though it is "older" because it's based on Debian Lenny so it's rock-stable.

I like Xubuntu on my 5-year-old Dell not only because it's fast and runs great, but it's absolutely gorgeous too! Prettier than Windows, too.

-Robin

[linux-hack]

It wont change anything... People are afraid of linux cause they say its juste for profesionals, and it's to hard to use.. Ubuntu became famous for one reason (userfriendly envirenement) we must change the habits of the users not the look of the main system.

If you want a rely nice and shiny distro try OpenSuse

and the diference between linux and widows is that linux is free and you can change it how you want (themes,icons, ....) more power, security, stability and most of all freedom.

What we must do is show to the world that linux is not juste for professionals and it can be uses by everyone. Learn them how to use it and helping them with there bad habit (WINHOWS)

[jrusso2]

Two reasons

Too complex to get drivers and non repository apps to work.

Not being able to run apps they already purchased or like.

[madverb]

No one likes change...

[tsali]

This might be a good idea for a new installer module -

"Theme Selector"

At some stage in the install process, the user could be presented with 3 or 4 theme choices (default human, blubuntu, green, dark, etc). Maybe it could be even simpler...like asking the user what their favorite color is, then building a theme around it.

This lets the user choose what his first impression will be like.

[noelvh]

Let me start by saying I love Ubuntu, but hate the poop brown look. To me this is not good looking at all. I fix this in 2 minutes after I boot it for the first time. In no way is this what people will not use linux for.

"When I talk about Linux with people the first thing they say is what is linux". So I think we assume that people know about linux and that is not true.

I do think that Vista, and Win 7 are the best looking M$ OS todate. One of my big problems with a M$ OS is you had to pay money to make it look better. For that matter you have to pay money to change most things on a M$ os.

With Linux you can change every thing for free.

I think Linux need PR to get it out there. M$, and Apple have money to market there products, and Linux dose not. Just imagine if you had a Linux store next to the Apple store in the mall. The first problem would be they would not be making money to pay the rent on the store, as Linux for the most part is free. Now lets say they charge for the OS, it would be cheap, and not make enough to pay the rent. Now lets say the preinstall Linux on hard ware and sell that. Now they would start to make money. the only issue would be what hardware to use, and maintain, the vendor's warranty on the hardware. If you were to sell Lenovo that would be ok but lenovo is very costly, and we have just become apple.

So for a new user to linux there is risk, both in time and money.

I for one would love to sit out side a apple store with my 5 year old laptop and sing the song "any thing you can do I can do better, any thing I can do you can do for a ton of money".

This is a brain wash issue, people are brain washed into thinking that if it costs allot, and dose not work that well its great!

Now if some one comes to me and tells me Mac never has issues I have to laugh as I know that is not true. It has less issues than windows, but all OSs have issues.

I have no money with two young kids in private school, and after care. This is what got me into linux in the first place. With little money I wanted a faster OS, with the same hardware, and I got it Ubuntu.

Noel

[sadaruwan12]

I disagree with this. This is what alot of Linux users believe, but for me, the reason is simple. Windows is easy and Ubuntu is not. For your average person, ubuntu is complicated. Its different and strange. Could they get used to it? Of course. I've been an ubuntu user off and on for a while, but the different repositories still get me. I still cant install a .tar. If its not a .deb, I cant use it. Windows I just insert the disk for the software I bought and it leads me by the nose. Ubuntu is intimidating and complicated to the average user. Maybe a windows like walkaround/introduction would be warrented.

Definatly change the default color scheme though. Instead of a blue(like kde and windows) maybe a green or a creme.

You r a dud bump

[sadaruwan12]

Eh. You get used to whatever you use. I grew up with Apples and later Macs. Then I used Windows machines for quite a few years W95 through XP and got used to that. Now I am quite used to Ubuntu and play around with some other distros in VBox.

The initial hurdle that prevents so many users from trying it in the first place, I would agree, is marketing and fear of the unknown or unfamiliar.

Good come back, I really agree with you it's all about marketing. People at canonical doesn't press there product in to the minds of the not
enlightened if they did there will be some people who'll be craving for Ubuntu.

And who the hell say Ubuntu is difficult it just we've to get use to it then it's like bread and butter. In my case I use both saids Win and Linux at my work place every day.

I got used to winXP a lot then came Vista(TRASH) I skipped that and now Win7 have to get used to it and it's much more better than Vista.

I was with Ubuntu from the very start I saw hoe the interface got enhanced by every release and why should Ubuntu follow mac's interface it's not Ubuntu identity.

OK,if some want it's o look like mac go ahead change it the way you want no ones blocking you like in Win or Mac. To get the you can find many Ubuntu to mac guides on the net just google u'll see and you want to keep the look even if you format use remastersys tool and create a full distro for your self.

It's not hard it's very easy even installing a tar you have to have patient if you don't then I pity you. For the average user this is more than enough to use 'cos they hardly do a CAD drawings in there PC's.

I love the new GNOME look and I think it's very sexy If want I'll change it.

Even in win7 some one don't like the theme they can change it same in Ubuntu only difference is you get to see the changes and to make them right in to the OS.

And no one have to be a big shot techi to use Ubuntu not 'cos it's one of the easiest distros but we've one of the worlds grates community forum thats willing to help any newbie and we love to help them.

If you want to be *nix user my advice is make google you best friend and learn to be patient and to read very carefully.

[sadaruwan12]

Let me start by saying I love Ubuntu, but hate the poop brown look. To me this is not good looking at all. I fix this in 2 minutes after I boot it for the first time. In no way is this what people will not use linux for.

"When I talk about Linux with people the first thing they say is what is linux". So I think we assume that people know about linux and that is not true.

I do think that Vista, and Win 7 are the best looking M$ OS todate. One of my big problems with a M$ OS is you had to pay money to make it look better. For that matter you have to pay money to change most things on a M$ os.

With Linux you can change every thing for free.

I think Linux need PR to get it out there. M$, and Apple have money to market there products, and Linux dose not. Just imagine if you had a Linux store next to the Apple store in the mall. The first problem would be they would not be making money to pay the rent on the store, as Linux for the most part is free. Now lets say they charge for the OS, it would be cheap, and not make enough to pay the rent. Now lets say the preinstall Linux on hard ware and sell that. Now they would start to make money. the only issue would be what hardware to use, and maintain, the vendor's warranty on the hardware. If you were to sell Lenovo that would be ok but lenovo is very costly, and we have just become apple.

So for a new user to linux there is risk, both in time and money.

I for one would love to sit out side a apple store with my 5 year old laptop and sing the song "any thing you can do I can do better, any thing I can do you can do for a ton of money".

This is a brain wash issue, people are brain washed into thinking that if it costs allot, and dose not work that well its great!

Now if some one comes to me and tells me Mac never has issues I have to laugh as I know that is not true. It has less issues than windows, but all OSs have issues.

I have no money with two young kids in private school, and after care. This is what got me into linux in the first place. With little money I wanted a faster OS, with the same hardware, and I got it Ubuntu.

Noel

I love you I feel like kissing you

[sigurnjak]

This talk about Photoshop is something i do not understand .
http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/design/?promoid=DTEMS
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/compare/

How many average users have Photoshop installed i do not know and how many actually need it . What i do know that just about every one i did see with one , it is hacked version .
I know 2 people that actually paid for theirs . It seems to me that lots of windows users have no problem assuming that photoshop is their god given right, and when they ask me to reinstall it they never have original DVD and say their buddy installed it .
Also when i point it to them how much CS4 costs there is very awkward silence in the room and then they move on ,with understanding that their buddy will be back to install it .

Gimp is just fine for home user and so is Picasa . It would be nice if F-spot showed my photos in a way similar to Picasa and offer to load my photos to an Ipod , but that is wishful thinking .

As for Ubuntu UI , it is just different until they spend some time with it , but lots of people expect everything to be like their old , infected PC junk and have no intention of learning something new .

I have given up on Promoting Linux until folk ask me how come my PC never gets any viruses . Then i offer them options : 100 bucks to fix windows or free Ubuntu . I usually make 100 bucks . ;)

[Tipped OuT]

I love you I feel like kissing you

Try using the Multi-Quote option so you don't spam threads with a million posts, that could have been just one.

[coffee]

I think the big issue is, people learned how to use a "windows" computer, not to mention the overly saturated add presence MS has built. I agree that people will go for what they know, and if not that what they are told (commercials) they want.

Also on the rare occasion we see BSD/*Linux in a tv show or movie it is on some techies rig. While this is at least a plug that something else exists it does not show the 'general public' that anyone can use it.

I think that the lack of cross-platform applications (windows-linux) is a subconscious reason for not trying out new things. I mean if people sat down and realy considered the number of people actualy using BSD/*Linux for personal computing they would realize "If I can do it on Windows then there must be a way they are doing it on ???"

coffee

[mivo]

I have given up on Promoting Linux until folk ask me how come my PC never gets any viruses

My Windows PCs never had viruses or malware either. Why? I use Adblock+, NoScript, a free and AV program, and I do actually use my brain before I click links. I don't open unknown file attachment, and I don't download porn or "warez". There, the big secret of not contradicting viruses.

Someone whose Windows PC had as many viruses as a $10 prostitute and then switches to Linux is a security risk too. I just hope these people never use a distro with an actual root account or try to install SSH or LAMP.

[mivo]

I agree that people will go for what they know, and if not that what they are told (commercials) they want.

Windows comes with most new computers and you don't always have the option of "no OS" or "Linux" instead of Windows. It doesn't affect the price either, because of these bundled software that can be a pain to remove (McAfee comes to mind).

And to be honest, if I were selling PCs, I would bundle them with Windows too, because Linux is a support nightmare, especially with those 6-months releases that break systems, the limited hardware compatibility, etc. I'd not want to deal with customers who call the next day and ask why iTunes isn't working.

I think that the lack of cross-platform applications (windows-linux) is a subconscious reason for not trying out new things.

Well, Firefox, OpenOffice, Pidgin, Thunderbird, Songbird, VLC are six cross-platform applications that probably cover 90% of what the vast majority of average users do with their computers. I think it's often more successful to recommend these programs to Windows users. Much easier to switch an OS if you can keep using the software you are familiar with.

But they are not problem-free. Many Linux distros come without restricted codecs, no flash, no Java, and can't even play DVDs out of the box. People have to manually install them, which is already a big turn off. Flash and Java can be a pain. Not to mention driver issues, like ATI no longer supporting cards that were sold as recently as one year, wireless issues, fan troubles, inefficient battery usage, etc.

Windows 7 just works for most people without any additional tweaking, and it looks beautiful out of the box. It strikes a nice balance between the bloated and "too much" looking KDE, and the too simplistic Gnome. And it isn't brown when you just installed it.

Did I mention that Ubuntu really, really needs a theme selector when you install it? Right. I have. For years now.

[SLEEPER_V]

You r a dud bump

English, do you speak it?

[noelvh]

I love you I feel like kissing you

I hope you are not a dude, as that would be gross


Noel

[zagz]

This talk about Photoshop is something i do not understand .
http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/design/?promoid=DTEMS
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/compare/

How many average users have Photoshop installed i do not know and how many actually need it . What i do know that just about every one i did see with one , it is hacked version .
I know 2 people that actually paid for theirs . It seems to me that lots of windows users have no problem assuming that photoshop is their god given right, and when they ask me to reinstall it they never have original DVD and say their buddy installed it .
Also when i point it to them how much CS4 costs there is very awkward silence in the room and then they move on ,with understanding that their buddy will be back to install it .

Gimp is just fine for home user and so is Picasa . It would be nice if F-spot showed my photos in a way similar to Picasa and offer to load my photos to an Ipod , but that is wishful thinking .

As for Ubuntu UI , it is just different until they spend some time with it , but lots of people expect everything to be like their old , infected PC junk and have no intention of learning something new .

I have given up on Promoting Linux until folk ask me how come my PC never gets any viruses . Then i offer them options : 100 bucks to fix windows or free Ubuntu . I usually make 100 bucks . ;)


The only person I could see paying out for photoshop is a professional ie someone who is going to get that money back by using the program.

[mivo]

The only person I could see paying out for photoshop is a professional ie someone who is going to get that money back by using the program.

Actually, a couple of friends bought Photoshop, even though I tried to talk them into using Gimp. I hit a wall. :) They prefer how PS works, and had used a pirated copy for a while, but wanted the "real" thing. Their reasoning, in both cases, was that it is their hobby and they use the software for years to come. It's reasonable. I mean, I buy 1-4 games a month and a number of books, and in the end, I probably pay just as much if not more than they do (money per hour of entertainment).

My ex (who is a hobby artist only) also didn't get friendly with Gimp. She even started to snap at me when I mentioned it too often. ;) Photoshop was too expensive for her, so she ended up buying something from Corel. It was still around $200.

[river226]

all in all i think it's because Ubuntu and open source software are not yet up to par with the rest of the community. while it is true linux, and open source software dominate in some key areas (especially servers), the desktop is the one area where they tend to be the weakest.
Gimp is a fine program, but no one who takes photoediting seriously, takes gimp seriously, like many similar open source projects it's a few steps behind where people want it to be. it's like wine, which will unlike never be able to replace windows, especially for the newest software, cause it's playing catch up.
to add more to my point, driver support is far below that of windows on many things, especially on the computer i am writing this on. i have dual boot set up, first time i have been able to do it with ubuntu was with karmic, and i'm not even sure if it's because karmic handles my comp better then jaunty/intrepid or i had an better cooling setup. and when i remove the fan i use to cool my laptop ubuntu overheats my computer in no time, not to mention other driver problems.
fact of the matter is that ubuntu and linux is still a bit away before it can completely take down or compete mainstream against Windows, but Karmic is definitely showing we are a short distance away...

also publicity around linux isn't exactly stellar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qj8p-PEwbI

[3rdalbum]

i think ubuntu needs to take a leaf out of apples book and start hiding the file tree

Most complained about Mac OS X 'feature': Hiding the filesystem.

mac have done this and managed to retain the usability of mac os as a linux distro

It's not a Linux distro. There's no Linux. There's not even very much GNU.

in the sence that in the command line all function is still there it is just hidden from your average user who does not need it!

The average user doesn't need to use a Linux command-line. At least not on Ubuntu.

You'll also find that many Mac users open up terminal.app to do mostly the same sorts of things that Linux users do.

[3rdalbum]

My Windows PCs never had viruses or malware either. Why? I use Adblock+, NoScript, a free and AV program, and I do actually use my brain before I click links. I don't open unknown file attachment, and I don't download porn or "warez". There, the big secret of not contradicting viruses.

I had all that (the anti-virus program didn't have a realtime scanner; if I wanted my computer to run as slowly as a netbook I would have bought a netbook).

I still managed to get zlob.downloader.

Also you're probably underestimating the stress that new users go through when trying to choose an anti-virus program, get it installed and stop it from annoying the heck out of them.

[mamamia88]

frankly most people use what came on their computer and it serves them fine. you have to setup linux yourself. if something doesn't work out of the box you can be in big trouble and spend alot of time getting it to work. for most people it's simpler just to use windows.

[73ckn797]

only 10 percent of the world dont use microsoft windows
that 10% inculdes mac users and all linux distros
it is a very narrow range of people that use it and one of the reasons is that it does not look professional to the technophobes which make up most of the computer consumers!
i think ubuntu needs to take a leaf out of apples book and start hiding the file tree and generally aim the os at more people!
mac have done this and managed to retain the usability of mac os as a linux distro in the sence that in the command line all function is still there it is just hidden from your average user who does not need it!
yoma

I have found that there are many graphical apps to do what can be done using a command line. If more of those were installed by default, it might make the experience a little easier for some and, it seems, it would make Ubuntu more appealing to more average users.