Fear of Linux [Archive] - Ubuntu Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Fear of Linux

hksduhksdu

August 4th, 2006, 03:48 PM

gilgongo

August 4th, 2006, 04:18 PM

Well, it worked for Microsoft.

I think. No, actually, I don't understand your point. Sorry.

FenrisAbraxas

August 4th, 2006, 04:30 PM

I suddenly thought of the reason why people are fear of installing Linux in general:

Lenovo to Load Linux on ThinkPad Laptop
from eweek.com

It's about the name.

Think about this, if you are going to get a PVR(Personal Video Recorder), what OS do you think it has? WinCE? Linux? or what? why do we think this way? Make up a name for this little OS if it is using Linux, for example, Diablo or Heaven or Vister, or whatever name you come up with, just don't make people think it is Linux, then they would remove their fear of it.

Regardless of how good Linux is nowadays, regardless of how Ubuntu can be installed without hassle and software are installed by one-click, they will just think "but what if I need support? or what if I need to touch that little stupid console???"

Wrong!!!!

It's Vister, it's an OS designed for this PVR! Then when they want support, they call the PVR manufacturer instead of blaming Linux!

Just a thought and wondering where do I put this post so I post here, sorry if posting in the wrong place.

Excuse me admins and mod's but....... WTF?!

I don't understand anything at all... The OS NAME (Linux) make users tremble and hide in a corner? Or is the horrible console?

Probably you don't know that VIRUS and DESKTOP HI-JACKER are words that put fear into the souls of windows users and they still buy it.

I don't really get your point so i will just say this:

let's change Linux name to something like doors, or tables! that will boost the sales and adoption of doors (linux)! yes! great idea!

andb

August 4th, 2006, 05:08 PM

petersjm

August 7th, 2006, 09:38 AM

And if the public found out about the support here, well, it would be all over for MS ;)

That's true. This place rocks! If it wasn't for ubuntuforums.org I'd have gone back to Windows within 2 hours of installing Ubuntu! As it stands, I removed my Win partition a week after switching to linux!

FenrisAbraxas

August 7th, 2006, 03:27 PM

Wait a second, and ask yourselves, what do the non-computer users I know think of linux? And you know, he's right. Most people say, I could never use that! its too complicated. And it was. 5 years ago. But it takes time for info to trickle down. Ubuntu is easy enough for my grandmother to use (Yes I said it! I brought my grandmother into it all! Next will be mom and pop!)

All in a name? Linspire is trying to change that, and doing a pretty good job. Shame someone isnt pushing to get ubuntu onto commodity boxes. And if the public found out about the support here, well, it would be all over for MS ;)

But... it's not the name... c'mon it's not that linux == only_geeks, the problem is linux == Different.

The main problem with linux (as far my PERSONAL experience goes) is compatibility:

There are no Flash for Linux, or what about hmmmm, BattleField 2, or the Printer that hit the stores tonight and it says in the box "Designed for Windows XP".

I hear people chanting "but there are equivalents for Linux try cups! try cedega! try (something for flash)" BUT people don't people have the time to "re-learn" a new app, doesn't matter if it's identical, they don't want to emulate a game they want to play the game without having to edit cedega.conf (or whatever it is called) they don't want glitches everytime a new patch is realeased. You know what i mean?

They are affraid of the change, most user doesn't what a console is, they just find it cryptic and don't want to re-learn because they think it going back in time (because some users learned DOS and the almost null usability it used to have).

So, no, the name doesn't matter as long as Macromedia doesn't make a Linux Flash Version (just to name something) if the game and driver companies doesn't make thir software to run NATIVE in Linux people will always be afraid to try something new :).

That's my OPINION but you can always search the forums, people will always ask, "theres an equivalent to X app?" or "does X game runs on Linux?".

Crossover office, cedega and WINE as you should know aren't 100% compatible with all windows Apps.

If codered, iloveyou and blaster did not scare people out of windows Linux will not scare new users :).

KDayz

August 7th, 2006, 05:13 PM

I suddenly thought of the reason why people are fear of installing Linux in general:

Lenovo to Load Linux on ThinkPad Laptop
from eweek.com

It's about the name.

Think about this, if you are going to get a PVR(Personal Video Recorder), what OS do you think it has? WinCE? Linux? or what? why do we think this way? Make up a name for this little OS if it is using Linux, for example, Diablo or Heaven or Vister, or whatever name you come up with, just don't make people think it is Linux, then they would remove their fear of it.

Regardless of how good Linux is nowadays, regardless of how Ubuntu can be installed without hassle and software are installed by one-click, they will just think "but what if I need support? or what if I need to touch that little stupid console???"

Wrong!!!!

It's Vister, it's an OS designed for this PVR! Then when they want support, they call the PVR manufacturer instead of blaming Linux!

Just a thought and wondering where do I put this post so I post here, sorry if posting in the wrong place.

I think thats the stupidest excuse ever to not install linux.

audioboxer217

August 12th, 2006, 03:04 PM

I am going to have to agree with Fenris. The only thing stopping most people is the lack of support from third-party vendors. Specifically, bigname vendors like Adobe and EA (from Fenris's post). I personally don't mind configuring cedega to run BF2 but I have several friends who would not want to do that, they just want it to work, Natively.
I am glad to see Linux slowly going mainstream by getting onto PCs straight from the Manufacturer. I only wish it was Ubuntu on those new computers.

airtonix

October 19th, 2006, 01:55 PM

yep, the power of words is strange......know a dragons name, and you have control over it until you or it perish.....lol

Indeed, the main thing mainstream conformists fear is non-conformity.
----
[school-kids] : "GET HIM, HE's ...he's...different"
----
[town-crier] : "There is nothing to fear!"
[town-folk ] : "Huzahh!"
[town-crier] : " Except maybe fear itself"
[causual guy in background] : "Awwwwe....Nuts"

AusIV4

December 20th, 2006, 10:26 AM

I think there are two main problems keeping people away from Linux:

Software support - as great as the software for Linux is, the GIMP still isn't as good as photoshop. The Office suites still leave something to be desired. There is no iTunes for people who use the music store. Most games don't run natively, if they run at all. There are a lot of applications that can keep people tied to Windows. Macs solve most of those problems, as there is a Photoshop for Mac, MS Office for Mac, iTunes was made for Mac, and the most popular games are ported to Macs.

Fear of change - I don't think I'll ever get my mother away from XP. It took her ages to learn to use it, and she doesn't want to learn something new.

Of course, most issues holding Linux back are chicken or the egg issues. There would be more software support if there were a larger user base, but there won't be a larger user base until there's more software support. It would be easier to find technical support for Linux if there were more demand for it, etc.

I got past all the software issues, and I was more afraid of staying on Windows than changing, but I'm also enough of a nerd that I know I can provide my own support. For the most part, Ubuntu is ready for the average user, but getting a wireless card to auto-connect is not trivial, nor is getting an SD card reader to work, or making the volume controls on your keyboard function properly. Ubuntu is getting there, and I do reccomend it to my friends and family, but if they get past the first two issues, I know there will be some issues I have to help them overcome before they can get the most out of their computer.

Extreme Coder

January 3rd, 2007, 05:08 PM

Even though I don't know why it is posted in this section of the forums, I will state what I think:
I think that Ubuntu should concentrate on making things work WITHOUT the need for a terminal. I'm in no way a anti-terminal(I even like it), but it leaves new people with the impression of being DOS or Unix like, i.e. something very old. It also leaves the impression of being NOT professional.

Extreme Coder

maddog39

January 6th, 2007, 12:03 PM

There are no Flash for Linux, or what about hmmmm, BattleField 2, or the Printer that hit the stores tonight and it says in the box "Designed for Windows XP".
You're totally wrong about flash:
http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash

AND, if you go into FireFox and you view a page in which requires flash, it will prompt you to install a plugin, install it and FF will download/install flash automatically.

As far as printers, they're still a problem, none of mine work still. As far as games, most of my games have native linux versions but things like Half-Life/2 and its child games like CS:S and so forth are able to work in Wine/Cedega.

matt221984

January 22nd, 2007, 04:13 PM

You're totally wrong about flash:
http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash

AND, if you go into FireFox and you view a page in which requires flash, it will prompt you to install a plugin, install it and FF will download/install flash automatically.

As of the date on his post, the latest version of flash available was 7. As of now flash 9 is available. I would say about 25% of sites were using flash 9 and didnt work for me before this week.

I will have to agree with hksduhksdu in principle.

When people I know hear I am using Linux, even if they have heard about Ubuntu, automatically they assume I am more of a geek than they originally thought because I am using Linux. I even know technical people (windows fanboys) who really have no clue how user friendly it has become.

The fact still is that aside from the enthusiast, not many mainstream users are hearing about what is happening with Linux these days.

I think that on the surface, distros that are geared to the average user like Ubuntu really need to drop the Linux name. The more technical people like us obviously know it is linux, and the non technical people dont really need to know. OS X is based on BSD... but Apple doesnt advertise that on their front page because most people dont need to know that. I also think the website could look a little more commercial. People also associate free with crappy. Not much in life is free, and usually it isnt that great.

Yes they need to work on driver support, yes they need to work on printing and wireless.

Maybe this already exists, but I think there should be a database of hardware compatibility for Ubuntu and I also think the developers need to take a serious look at hardware manufacturers and find one who is willing to work with them to build at least one desktop and one laptop that is 100% guaranteed Ubuntu compatible right out of the box. Even if they just created a Ubuntu Certified program or something that provided little "Ubuntu Edgy Compatible" stickers like MS has to smaller hardware companies that were interested in distributing the OS with workstations. I just think it all comes down to making it look more professional. In the end, all most people care about is can I use the internet, can I email, can I listen to music and watch videos, and can I use my hardware with the computer.

Anyway, that's my rant.

TheMono

January 22nd, 2007, 04:20 PM

I actually agree that the name linux is unimportant.

That is an interesting idea, to drop it completely. I mean, you would not go out of the way to hide that it is Linux, but if you just changed ´Linux for Human Beings´ to ´Software for Human Beings´ or somesuch, it could actually have an effect.

In the same way that it has been decided that the GNU of GNU/Linux can be dropped, I think that would naturally imply that you could drop the Linux part as well.

Tundro Walker

April 19th, 2007, 04:34 AM

I actually agree that the name linux is unimportant.

I'd like to say that, too, but it kept ME from switching for a long time. I always used Windows, because..

1) FORCED INCEPTION -- It's what I grew up with. Parents used it at work, brought it home, so I used it at home. When I joined the work force (you guessed it) every place I worked at was using Windows. Linux was still a hobbyist or server-only OS back in the 80's / 90's when Microsoft captured the market place by storm and beat the pants off Apple through shipping lower cost (albeit oft-buggy) software that could perform on generic PC hardware. Meanwhile, Apple had better software and hardware, but it was all proprietary and more expensive. Most Business owners are short-sigted, looking only at immediate impact, and are not techno-savvy, so techno decisions are even harder to make. So, whole industries bought up Windows since the cost of inception was lower than with Apple. And now they're bitten in the butt as their Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) has exploded, due to needing hardware/software upgrades to support buggy OS.

2) PARANOIA -- Until I got fed up with Windows and started actively looking to switch OS' last year, I still thought of Linux as a powerful car engine that programmers loved tinkering with, but didn't care about putting a nice exterior (GUI) on it to promote user-friendliness. Linux has this mystique of being "elitist" and programmer-oriented, because all Windows users hear about is how some guy had to be a whiz to get Linux working, or how someone had to slog through tons of txt config files to tweak it out. But, that's because the "elitist" distro's are usually the most vociferous..."look what I did..I'm a bad-a**! You Windows users could never do that!" My earlier experiences with Linux just 2 years ago was with Red Hat, which my brother installed on a computer. It had GNOME GUI, but it was difficult to navigate (foreign), and I was annoyed to find out I had to use the terminal to get some stuff to work. (Seriously, Windows users think any OS that needs to use a command-line for some stuff is simply a step backwards.)

3) FEAR -- You lived your whole life in the US. Now, hop on a plane, cause we're gonna ship your butt over to China to live. (Bad example, but you get it). You're whole life has been in Windows land. All your hard work is in proprietary windows formats (music, documents, games, etc). It's difficult to just say "hey, let's scrap all that and start new". Or, "hey, you can still use it, but you have to jump through a lot of hoops to get it working, and even then it might not work."

4) CULTURE SHOCK -- The learning curve is one thing, but getting used to a new culture is another. I mean, in Windows, everyone just agrees that it could be better. But in Linux land, you have individual distro's "fighting" over which is better. This is usually just friendly competition, but the "elitist" crowd of some distro's doesn't make it look to friendly. Add in the fact that some Linux users treat Windows users like crap, so why would you want to join a club that thinks you're a "noob" or idiot?

5) IDEA THAT QUALITY COSTS...SPEND MORE FOR MORE -- This is just how a lot of folks are programmed these days. They equate spending more with higher quality. But, big business, no longer keeping quality or customer interests in mind, are just trying to find the fastest ways to make the most consumers part with the most money. They keep up the guise that "you get what you pay for", because it works to the benefit of their bottom line. You don't pay anything for Linux (or very little), so it must obviously suck. I mean, who in their right mind would just GIVE AWAY something useful. In growing up, this was a hard lesson to learn. IE: it didn't matter how good of advice I had, if I gave it away for free, people wouldn't listen, or they'd act inconsiderate or condescending in recieving it (EG: "English, Doc...I haven't got all day to listen to your little technical drivel."). But, the minute you start charging somebody $100/hr as a consultant for the same advice, they're all ears.

6) SPOON-FEEDING MADE EASY -- Windows users put up with Windows, because when they go use someone else's computer, they know it's going to most likely have MS Office on it for word processing, spreadsheet, etc. It will have a "Control Panel", and a "Quick Launch" bar in the lower left by the "Start" menu. It will normally have Internet Explorer on it. Microsoft has done so much to standardize and spoon-feed the users, that it's not even funny. Some folks think that users should take the time to pick up a book and learn about what their using, or get familiar with it more. But, the average Windows user (speaking generically here) is neither computer savvy or interested in becoming so. They are iPodders, who just want a simple interface to get their end result. They want to learn as LITTLE AS POSSIBLE to get their computer to do what they want. Computer-savvy folks have a hard time grasping this, because computer-savvy folks like working with computers. It would be like teaching a computer-savvy folk pig farming so they can put bacon on the table. Most folks don't care about pigs, pig farming, and don't WANT to know about it. But, if they have to learn some of it to get some bacon, they'll learn AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE. Microsoft made pig farming bacon easier then Linux in the beginning, and Apple was more expensive to pig farm with. With all the spoon-feeding, it's hard for a Windows user to want to come over to Linux, because every screenshot they see of it has a totally different menu layout ("no standardization?!"), and instead of just blindly d/l'ing 1 package and installing it, you have to take 2 weeks weeding through "distros", figure out what's different, etc. Growing up your whole life having everything spoon-fed to you, and then suddenly getting all these options tossed at you is like going from the kiddie pool to the deep end. Most folks don't care enough about their computer to spend time weeding through distro's, setting up desktops & GUI's, and installing different apps, and even if they did, they'd get annoyed at going to someone else's computer and the GUI is different, the apps are different, and it's like having to learn a new OS again.

~~~~~~~~~~

So, in a way, I kinda agree with this guy. Linux has a sort of "too technical for human consumption" mystique about it. If they'd drop the "Linux" part and just call it "Ubuntu", it might turn more heads. But that would be a bit blasphemous, since Linux is the foundation making it possible.

The irony of it all is that, even though Linux has built up slower, it's become more solid, because, for starters, it was based on a proven model (Unix), and also when you remove profit from the equation and the curtain that hiding source-code, you get all kinds of folks trying new things out, causing it to evolve in more of a Darwinistic fashion.

Does Windows work? Sure. But the things that work in Linux are usually more elegant, robust, and useful for the user, because there wasn't a last minute crunch to brute-install a feature before a tight shipping schedule. There wasn't some stupid Project Manager or non-technical business person breathing down the programmers' necks while producing the stuff. There wasn't a priority to bloat the software with spyware that slowed the users computer down just so the company could track user activity. There wasn't a business person deciding to hobble the program in certain ways, so instead of selling one good product, they could sell different "tiers" of a less hobbled product to try to squeeze more profit out of it. There wasn't some bone-head hell-bent on keeping schedule that they decided to cut corners somewhere (QA testing, Usability testing, Bug Hunting, etc) and just ship with a few bugs, which can be fixed with a few patches after-the-fact.

All kinds of stupid stuff like that gets removed from the equation, so you end up with programmers who can do what they love...spend as much time as they want exploring new ideas, writing code and making it as elegant and efficient as they like.

The sad part about this is, if you ask a regular person if they'd pay money for a programmers work that is elegant, fast, efficient, and does what the user wants, most anyone would say "heck yeah!" And, it works out for a while like that. But, as programming becomes a business, more and more business folks get involved, and they replace the ideal of quality code with one that dictates "reduce costs and increase profits".

Wow, this is turning into a rant...I'd better stop now.

kingtiger01

February 19th, 2008, 04:32 AM

You know i completely agree with your last post. i mean myself, reading it. it dawned on to me, when was the last time i heard some guy/girl off the street say "hey, you know Gimp is so much better than Adobe Photoshop" or something to that effect.

and truthfully, in almost 30 years i have not heard but 2 people from the every day population say anything in positive conjunction to Linux.

and forbid anyone for saying it in front of them in fear of Criticizing and a hour long argument just to end in to people thinking each other is a complete idiot on the matter.

Let truth be said, i think people A.- Fear linux because of its name, and the reputation the Media/Cooperations have given it over many years.

B.- have become lazy to the fact that they would have to actually do something more than Pop a disc in click install, next and finish.

C.- are Influenced by price and *Flashy* Advertisement to think its a better product, so much for that some one would buy something thats known to have bugs beyond all belief and compatibility issues they cannot fix no matter how hard they try (can anyone say V.I.S.T.A)

and

D.- Are wrapped up in the idea that they are just "Fine" the way they are no matter what.
__________________________________________________

that been said, look at how many users bought MS Vista and complained. now how many went to another OS, that was made by some one other than MS. name the count, cause id really like to see.

yet, they will scream and complain like some massive warriors got a sword to there throat, if they forsaken Ipod they bought for $300 wont work with there Linux based OS!

i mean you cant burn the candle both way and expect it to not burn into the middle.

At least when i first installed a Linux distro for the first time, i got it installed, didn't have to spend 3 hours searching for drivers for some 3rd party, Generic hardware that has no support by the manufacturer, that they buried with six newer versions that are worse off than mine!

Linux as a whole is Some more than to be said, if Developers want to make it better, make it unified, make a OS thats So simple, but yet So elegant that a 60 year old or six year old can get on it, spend 3 hours surfing the web with no more than 2 clicks the intire time, force installations of updates in the background with no user input and make it for everything is hidden from there reach so they cannot access it with-out the knowledge to do so. so if they really want to do something they will have to learn having the need to know how.

Windows wasnt always so successful because it was cheap, it was always successful cause you could just pop a disc in, install the os, pop another in right after and install a app/game with 2 clicks and be done. no more tinkering, no more modifying no more anything..

ive been using Ubuntu since i found it in 2003, i may still have a windows box for nothing more than gaming. but to be honest, i love Linux, and i would never use another OS again in comparison.

am i the Guru that sits in a garage Programming till his eyes water from not blinking for several hours. No,

im that average tech Savvy guy that has always had a eye to the future to make my life and everyone else's better.

what makes it possible...Linux

mcp_dk

April 22nd, 2008, 01:55 AM

I suddenly thought of the reason why people are fear of installing Linux in general:

Lenovo to Load Linux on ThinkPad Laptop
from eweek.com

It's about the name.

Think about this, if you are going to get a PVR(Personal Video Recorder), what OS do you think it has? WinCE? Linux? or what? why do we think this way? Make up a name for this little OS if it is using Linux, for example, Diablo or Heaven or Vister, or whatever name you come up with, just don't make people think it is Linux, then they would remove their fear of it.

Regardless of how good Linux is nowadays, regardless of how Ubuntu can be installed without hassle and software are installed by one-click, they will just think "but what if I need support? or what if I need to touch that little stupid console???"

Wrong!!!!

It's Vister, it's an OS designed for this PVR! Then when they want support, they call the PVR manufacturer instead of blaming Linux!

Just a thought and wondering where do I put this post so I post here, sorry if posting in the wrong place.

Just go: "no no it's not just Linux. This is Ubuntu. Designed for your pleasure and convenience." No need to make it sound like a Microsoft Product.