spiroth10
February 15th, 2007, 11:39 PM
first off, I'd like to say that I'm a linux guru, and I just migrated from Slackware 10.1 (my former fav. distro) and I'm very impressed at ubuntu. From all the distros I've tried out (pretty much the major ones... Red Hat, Suse, Slackware, gentoo... even some BSDs)
I have to say this one has impressed me the most. Sure, there isn't half as much customization as slackware or gentoo (or lfs... but thats going too far), but in Ubuntu, I feel there is hardly a need for it. everything just works -- 85% of my "customizations" in the past were for this purpose alone.
now, I'd like to say that Ubuntu, as it is now, is (in my opinion) the pinnacle of linux for the desktop user. And I firmly believe it is. It caters to those the linux -- and Unix based OSs in general -- communities never did in a new way to boot. Not to the masochistic geek like me but to your average joe. Many distros have tried, but you were the only ones to actually do it.
I say that If we ever want to go to Best Buy and see a row of Linux computers, we have to make another, tougher push.
The problem is not one of quality with linux, but of The big monopoly that is microsoft's deathgrip on the hardware industry. We, the whole linux user community, need to find a way into that market on the mainstream. Microsoft can be brought down, and quite easily to boot. They've built a fine wall, and a big one, but every wall has a weak point. if we can find somewhere into the hardware business, we have won.
No offence, but Mark Shuttleworth has the power to do great things for linux (and even make $$$ off it in the future.) It has been a long battle, and finally Linux has it's own super-rich backing. Not so much as microsoft, but enough.
We cannot count on them just dying out, if we ever want the PC industry to be decent again, we must act. We must create an assembly of mainstream, uber cheap linux PCs -- charging only for the base hardware. Maybe that means there'd have to be a loss lead taken -- maybe that means there'd have to be some dirty, underhanded tricks involved.
all I'm saying is that Novell and Intel are under Microsofts mantle, but what about AMD and Redhat/Fedora for that matter? What About Ubuntu and Via?
People are not going to switch to linux. They will deal with whatever problems microsoft hands them because most users don't care. All the other guys I know think about football, not their operating system of choice. Most people don't even understand what an operating system is.
And the everlasting problem of commercial software support would also immediately end should Linux attain a reasonable market share (30-45% at least). If software manufacturers can make more money, they will, as a rule. Should 90% of the userbase be BSD/Unix, and 10 windows, no matter what contracts they have with M$ it's either lose money or go out of business.
If tommorrow, everyone in the world used linux, software companies would drop microsoft hands down, without a second thought.
sure, maybe this rant is a bit over the top, but I think that linux (and others) can easily take off.
to be honest, I can see a resurge in BSD based operating systems coming about after linux's rise and imminent fall. BSD is more extensible in that you can update the core of the OS without a complete reinstall. Sure, I know, kernel recompiliation. I've done it, and let me tell you, it is not easy to get everything working again. EVERY DRIVER HAS TO BE REINSTALLED/RECOMPILED FROM SCRATCH -- do you think the average user will do this? Buying/upgrading to windows vista from XP is FAR simpler, and even faster.
we don't need to cater to the masochists -- they already have what they want.
but for now, BSD and open source in general are not important. I say that a move needs to be made on the mainstream Desktop PC market soon. Linux is more than polished enough for a true desktop OS nowadays. I've been here since the release of Xfce 3.0, and let me tell you it's come a long way.
long enough to dominate the desktop market like it has the Server/Developer market. With apps like GNOME, KDE, and Beryl, windows vista looks like a shack after hurricane katrina.
Time to end this rant, I suppose. I'd like to say that my real motivation against microsoft (and apple too) is the extremely high prices nowadays (vista is expensive, and Apple rapes you for crappy hardware) and more importantly the bugs, sloth, and mammoth RAM consumption of Vista.
To be honest, I think if apple dropped their prices, and made a deal with vendors like circuit city and best buy, it would blow microsoft away instantly. But they are unwilling to step down from their high horse of "High End". Linux users are the only ones with enough balls to do it.
and if this topic gets locked, I won't be surprised.
I have to say this one has impressed me the most. Sure, there isn't half as much customization as slackware or gentoo (or lfs... but thats going too far), but in Ubuntu, I feel there is hardly a need for it. everything just works -- 85% of my "customizations" in the past were for this purpose alone.
now, I'd like to say that Ubuntu, as it is now, is (in my opinion) the pinnacle of linux for the desktop user. And I firmly believe it is. It caters to those the linux -- and Unix based OSs in general -- communities never did in a new way to boot. Not to the masochistic geek like me but to your average joe. Many distros have tried, but you were the only ones to actually do it.
I say that If we ever want to go to Best Buy and see a row of Linux computers, we have to make another, tougher push.
The problem is not one of quality with linux, but of The big monopoly that is microsoft's deathgrip on the hardware industry. We, the whole linux user community, need to find a way into that market on the mainstream. Microsoft can be brought down, and quite easily to boot. They've built a fine wall, and a big one, but every wall has a weak point. if we can find somewhere into the hardware business, we have won.
No offence, but Mark Shuttleworth has the power to do great things for linux (and even make $$$ off it in the future.) It has been a long battle, and finally Linux has it's own super-rich backing. Not so much as microsoft, but enough.
We cannot count on them just dying out, if we ever want the PC industry to be decent again, we must act. We must create an assembly of mainstream, uber cheap linux PCs -- charging only for the base hardware. Maybe that means there'd have to be a loss lead taken -- maybe that means there'd have to be some dirty, underhanded tricks involved.
all I'm saying is that Novell and Intel are under Microsofts mantle, but what about AMD and Redhat/Fedora for that matter? What About Ubuntu and Via?
People are not going to switch to linux. They will deal with whatever problems microsoft hands them because most users don't care. All the other guys I know think about football, not their operating system of choice. Most people don't even understand what an operating system is.
And the everlasting problem of commercial software support would also immediately end should Linux attain a reasonable market share (30-45% at least). If software manufacturers can make more money, they will, as a rule. Should 90% of the userbase be BSD/Unix, and 10 windows, no matter what contracts they have with M$ it's either lose money or go out of business.
If tommorrow, everyone in the world used linux, software companies would drop microsoft hands down, without a second thought.
sure, maybe this rant is a bit over the top, but I think that linux (and others) can easily take off.
to be honest, I can see a resurge in BSD based operating systems coming about after linux's rise and imminent fall. BSD is more extensible in that you can update the core of the OS without a complete reinstall. Sure, I know, kernel recompiliation. I've done it, and let me tell you, it is not easy to get everything working again. EVERY DRIVER HAS TO BE REINSTALLED/RECOMPILED FROM SCRATCH -- do you think the average user will do this? Buying/upgrading to windows vista from XP is FAR simpler, and even faster.
we don't need to cater to the masochists -- they already have what they want.
but for now, BSD and open source in general are not important. I say that a move needs to be made on the mainstream Desktop PC market soon. Linux is more than polished enough for a true desktop OS nowadays. I've been here since the release of Xfce 3.0, and let me tell you it's come a long way.
long enough to dominate the desktop market like it has the Server/Developer market. With apps like GNOME, KDE, and Beryl, windows vista looks like a shack after hurricane katrina.
Time to end this rant, I suppose. I'd like to say that my real motivation against microsoft (and apple too) is the extremely high prices nowadays (vista is expensive, and Apple rapes you for crappy hardware) and more importantly the bugs, sloth, and mammoth RAM consumption of Vista.
To be honest, I think if apple dropped their prices, and made a deal with vendors like circuit city and best buy, it would blow microsoft away instantly. But they are unwilling to step down from their high horse of "High End". Linux users are the only ones with enough balls to do it.
and if this topic gets locked, I won't be surprised.