What's the single biggest barrier to Ubuntu and Linux adoption? [Archive] - Page 2

wootah

June 12th, 2008, 02:39 PM

This was already probably said in this forum, but it's huge and I don't feel like searching for it :)

I think there are a few major barriers to Linux adoption that we take for granted because all of us have adopted (or were born with/learned through experience) a particular mindset:

1) Average users don't care about details, but just want to use a product.
What I mean by this is that when we get into a vehicle and drive it, we don't care or need know about fuel/air mixture ratios, timing, emission control, voltage regulation and planetary gear sets. This is an effective level of abstraction that has been correctly applied. Like myself, these kind of technicalities interest the hell out of me, but that is exactly what attracts me to Linux in the first place-- curiosity and the love of learning. Any way we look at it vehicles and computers are still just tools, and the mark of a good/successful tool is detail abstraction.

2) If it works fine, why change?
If events are proceeding in a normal fashion, for the most part, we don't have any incentive to change what we do. For the Windows world, people have gotten accustom to program crashes, freezes and BSODs. For the most part, they take this as an acceptable normal. Since Microsoft has managed to bundle everything an average user needs in order to use a computer (along with defining the standards for what a computer actually 'does'), the average user will find no need to seek out alternatives. Only when someone else mentions that something is actually wrong with the normal, will the average user begin to consider other options and shake themselves from the hypnosis of Microsoft's marketing.

Going out on a limb, I would say that the average person understands a computer to be no more than word processing, web browsing, email and simple games. I would also say that the average person thinks: computers = Microsoft, and that most of the older generation (those who are 45-50) understand/believe that most gaming is done on consoles which, imo, is ok and understandable.

Before continuing, let me clarify that I am talking about the average user. This is a concept that I think many people on this forum and in the field of computers don't fully understand because of what we know and where we come from. We have never really been average users because we have always been curious and technical. I believe that the people who best understand the average user are those that work in call centres for tech. support of computer companies (such as Dell) or as an IT guy out in the field. CIOs are also a good example of this. They are pretty much the middle ground between technical and the average user.

3) Businesses are too easily brainwashed by Microsoft propaganda and advertising.
Some of the crap that Microsoft advertises freakin' blows my mind. They have some of the best and most craftiest advertising I have ever seen for any product. They know and understand their target audience and they can pick them up with surgical precision.

One ad that stands out in mind, is one that is targeted directly towards CEOs that don't understand technology, but understand how to run a wicked successful business. This particular ad looks like a newspaper and has a specially crafted 'Wallstreet' style breaking headline mentioning a 'shocking' fact about Microsoft and how their products increase business product throughput and provide the 'competitive advantage' required to beat the competition. They change the wording to match their audience and they carefully craft their sentences and word choice. If Microsoft is going to target anyone, who better than the CEO who probably knows more about business than technology and is willing to buy something from one of the most successful companies in the world?

That said, it makes sense. Microsoft targets the CEO, the CEO says, 'Hey, we need this set of products because it will better the business by lowering TCO, increasing employee efficiency, and deliver better end results' to the IT Manager and the staff, and BOOM, we have MS Server 2008 with its ridiculously $$ license. In all fairness, MS is correct in some of their assertations. For the most part, it is easier to administer an array of Windows servers. The problem is that when they break, no one has a clue what to do because MS has craftily abstracted out the details in favor of easier administration. This is a major bonus for MS, because now they can charge wicked amounts of money for remote support by their 'highly trained specialists', and of course, the business will require 24/7/365 support just in case.

Sooooo, TCO initially looks lower because you need less highly trained staff, but once problems arise, your costs skyrocket with support, maintenance and fixing because no one has a clue what the hell to do. I remember reading this one report that made the bold claim that the TCO of Windows Server 2003 was lower than that of Redhat Linux Enterprise, but they quietly 'forgot' to include the major support issues and what exactly happens when <insert noun> hits the fan.

--

Anyways, this is me ranting for the day. Most of this is based on my studies from university and a few papers I have written, but I really don't care to cite it because, frankly, I'm lazy :) Take everything mentioned here with a grain of salt but also realize this is only one aspect of a massive debate/real world scenario that can occur.

wootah

June 12th, 2008, 02:46 PM

Linux is easier. Duh. Windows comes preinstalled, so it seems easier.

I've encountered far more Windows problems that can't be solved or even diagnosed than I have Linux ones. When that happens, the advice I usually get is "just deal with it" or "just reinstall."

Preinstalled Linux PCs still cost money. The price is usually comparable to preinstalled Windows PCs.

If people are clueless about security, all the more reason to get them off Windows.

Yes, well, Windows isn't for everybody either. There are plenty of people who still use Windows, though, even though Linux would better suit their needs and budget. They stick with Windows because they don't know any better or are afraid of change.

Argg! This is one thing that pisses me off. How the hell can you say that you are leading the market when the product comes pre-installed on the machine and they count that BEFORE it is sold to the customer?

For example, when Windows 95 was released they included Internet Explorer. So now every computer preinstalled with Windows (or when the user buys Windows) they have IE. Every sale and inclusion of Windows is a sale/usage of IE. If one million users buy Windows, then one million users have IE. Holy crap! What a great way to market IE as being the leader for browsers. Hell, I think there was an anti-trust suit for this very reason?

Imo, it's the same as saying that a door or a roof is the most popular item for a house because every freakin' house has one. ](*,)

Canis familiaris

June 13th, 2008, 12:50 PM

Argg! This is one thing that pisses me off. How the hell can you say that you are leading the market when the product comes pre-installed on the machine and they count that BEFORE it is sold to the customer?

For example, when Windows 95 was released they included Internet Explorer. So now every computer preinstalled with Windows (or when the user buys Windows) they have IE. Every sale and inclusion of Windows is a sale/usage of IE. If one million users buy Windows, then one million users have IE. Holy crap! What a great way to market IE as being the leader for browsers. Hell, I think there was an anti-trust suit for this very reason?

Imo, it's the same as saying that a door or a roof is the most popular item for a house because every freakin' house has one. ](*,)

Well said

toppknott

June 13th, 2008, 02:39 PM

For me & my brothers: games & gaming support.

---

I think the options are, in this order, of this significance:

1) Lack of awareness - "Linux? Never heard of it!"

"Oh, there's other stuff besides Macs?"

2) Hardware problems in comparison to other OSs.

"Ok I tried out this Linux, but this device isn't working like I thought it would, and my USB drive copies really slow."

3) The mindset of people - "Linux is for geeks!"

"My game won't work in Linux. What is sudo & why do I have to type all this code in some terminal? I don't understand any of it."

4) People generally feel no need to switch/aren't bothered by the OpenSource philosophy.

"Well Win XP works for me, I see no reason to change it up."

bruce89

June 13th, 2008, 04:35 PM

1) Lack of awareness - "Linux? Never heard of it!"

"Oh, there's other stuff besides Macs?"

2) Hardware problems in comparison to other OSs.

"Ok I tried out this Linux, but this device isn't working like I thought it would, and my USB drive copies really slow."

3) The mindset of people - "Linux is for geeks!"

"My game won't work in Linux. What is sudo & why do I have to type all this code in some terminal? I don't understand any of it."

4) People generally feel no need to switch/aren't bothered by the OpenSource philosophy.

"Well Win XP works for me, I see no reason to change it up."

TBH, these are all perfectly reasonable. People should use what they're comfortable with.

billgoldberg

June 13th, 2008, 05:47 PM

I voted "lack of awareness".

The software one doesn't fly with me.

How many people use only programs that have no linux counterpart?

The vast minority.

Considering that most people (non-geeks) use there computer only for browsing the web, downloading/playing media, email/chatting and some word processing.

billgoldberg

June 13th, 2008, 05:50 PM

TBH, these are all perfectly reasonable. People should use what they're comfortable with.

Not true, most of the time these are the people that can't properly manage their computers and are infected with viruses and various other malware that are bothering other computer users over the internet (and even attack companies, governments).

They should either take some classes to properly manage their computer or get hooked up by the local linux user.

Most of my friends using windows have some kind of malware running in the background, I told them but they can't even be bothered to install some free anti-virus software. These people would be better of with ubuntu or another distro.

bruce89

June 13th, 2008, 06:02 PM

Not true, most of the time these are the people that can't properly manage their computers and are infected with viruses and various other malware that are bothering other computer users over the internet (and even attack companies, governments).

I've always thought there are 2 targets for FOSS:

The basic user of computers.
The person who knows their way round Windows.

Intermediate users are not good ones.

a1z

June 13th, 2008, 10:46 PM

I still have to stay with XP because I need to edit large documents (doc, txt, rtf) and Ubuntu cannot open them while XP can after a short delay.
Any advice is appreciated.

Related thread:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=828585

Thanks!

markbuntu

June 14th, 2008, 12:00 AM

The biggest single barrier, orientation of distributions to developers instead of users.

Take the latest Ubuntu release as an example. Instead of offering stable versions of firefox pulseaudio etc. the distribution comes with a buggy beta instead. If you are aiming at widening the user base, the last thing you need to do is give them a buggy "critical" application right out of the box.

These days the internet browser is a critical application, so is sound, make or break sort of apps. Someone hears about Ubuntu and thinks OK, I will give it a try, So they download the latest release and start up a bug farm. After a few frustrating days or weeks of firefox and flash crashing and the pulseaudio doing weird stuff with their sound they say "the hell with this" and go back to windows. The help they get in the forums is mostly just some obscure heiroglyphical stuff they need to type in a terminal, a what?

There are a zillion graphical apps out there that people put a great deal of time and effort into to make things easier for people but they are generally ignored by people giving help in the forums. This is just plain stupid. I used terminals when they were actual terminals. I have absolutely no desire to use one if I don't have a critical need to.

"Well it helps the noobs learn." That is just a crap argument. All that command line cryptology does is overwhelm the noob because now he thinks "How am I ever gonnna learn all this crap?" When in fact he really has no need to.

So go ahead, help people out, but there is no need to show off your great knowledge of the command line. Just point them to synaptic instead and let them figure it out themselves. Let them get comfortable instead of dragging them to the deep end of the pool right off the bat.

If Ubuntu was thinking more of the users than the developers they would not have put firefox beta or pulseaudio in this release. They just were not ready and it has been almost 2 months and they still aren't fixed because now all the effort is on the next release and if something just happens to fix some existing bug it will be backported.

This entire methodology is a failure if you expect some dramatic expansion of the user base anytime soon.

aysiu

June 14th, 2008, 12:14 AM

mhousel

June 14th, 2008, 12:24 AM

For me at least, it is that the tools that I use for my work are from National Instruments and they don't run under Linux (LabWindows/CVI, LabVIEW, Teststand, etc.)

I think that this would fall under the last poll item related to commercial software.

I'd like to move away from Windoze if possible, but that is a big stumbling block.

bruce89

June 14th, 2008, 10:46 AM

I'd like to move away from Windoze if possible, but that is a big stumbling block.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people think they "have to" move away from Windows. It really is not the case.

markbuntu

June 14th, 2008, 08:57 PM

The terminal isn't for showing off or for hazing new users. It's useful for troubleshooting problems (actual error messages instead of "it just disappears"), and it's consistent across user interfaces and releases.
...

Well yes. that's true, if you use unix..

But it is not especially helpful to new users trying to escape the evil empire to just tell them to sudo blah blah blah with no explanation or any other information about what that command actually does or how it fixes their problem.

It does nothing to help anyone learn anything and actually dumbs down the entire process because then people think " I will just post my problem and someone will tell me the magic words to fix it."

It is basically treating these people like monkeys and it is insulting.

I see this all the time, especially in the absolute beginners forum.

aysiu

June 14th, 2008, 09:25 PM

I have to disagree with you.

When I had problems as a new user, people fed me commands to copy and paste and I as grateful that those commands fixed my problems.

After the problems were fixed, I had the proper state of mind to try to understand what's going on. When you're in the middle of a problem and everything seems to be going wrong, the top priority is getting things fixed. Understanding can come later.

Those interested in learning (and I've seen people do this) always have the option to say, "Thanks for helping me fix this. Now what did those commands actually mean?"

cardinals_fan

June 15th, 2008, 05:46 PM

Take the latest Ubuntu release as an example. Instead of offering stable versions of firefox pulseaudio etc. the distribution comes with a buggy beta instead. If you are aiming at widening the user base, the last thing you need to do is give them a buggy "critical" application right out of the box.I agree with this. Stability should be the focus.

There are a zillion graphical apps out there that people put a great deal of time and effort into to make things easier for people but they are generally ignored by people giving help in the forums. This is just plain stupid. I used terminals when they were actual terminals. I have absolutely no desire to use one if I don't have a critical need to.

"Well it helps the noobs learn." That is just a crap argument. All that command line cryptology does is overwhelm the noob because now he thinks "How am I ever gonnna learn all this crap?" When in fact he really has no need to.

So go ahead, help people out, but there is no need to show off your great knowledge of the command line. Just point them to synaptic instead and let them figure it out themselves. Let them get comfortable instead of dragging them to the deep end of the pool right off the bat.

I can't easily tell people the GUI way of doing things. I don't use Ubuntu, GNOME, or graphical tools on my desktop, and I don't know where to find Synaptic in the menus or whether you have to click 'Screens' or whatever in GNOME to change the resolution. I help people in the Absolute Beginner Talk section because I know what it's like to be helpless with a new OS, and they're generally grateful for an easy command line way of doing things.

PgTips

June 15th, 2008, 06:28 PM

I think the biggest obstacle is not about which OS to use because folks who "want" to use a computer will use one regardless of operating system although they may be influenced in their choice of computer by whether or not it has a recognisable "brand" name. This Brand Name may be either the name of a computer or operating system with the likelihood that a well-known brand may win the day.
The biggest obstacle in my view is one that applies equally to all operating systems and indeed all computers viz. "State of the Art"

What do I mean by that?

The current "State of the Art" is that "Computing is for Geeks"!

What this means is that using computers is perceived by, still, a lot of people as being a skill that is reserved for people who can master "skills"! A hell of a lot of folks who could make good use of computers for stuff other than simple web-surfing, mindless games are being denied such access simply by the lack of suitable interfaces between them and the systems.
Let me give you an example; John Doe has a computer at home that he uses to play a few games, watch a DVD or two and do a little web-browsing and maybe get into a chat room. Mrs. Jean Doe (his wife) also has a laptop she uses in a similar way but likes to do a little processing of photos that she takes on her cheapo digital camera. The kids have their own lappys that they use for homework and the other stuiff kids do. John also has a printer and a few other peripherals that he thinks it would be nice to share but he is real confused by all the jargon and strange numbers he seems to be expected to know and understand. All he really wants to do is "Plug and Play"! At most he would like a simple GUI which might display all his resources on the screen and allow him to specify by "Point and Click" just what connects to what. Better still he would really love computers to listen to what he says and just "do it!"

The, so-called, competition between Winders and Learnux should not be about which OS is better or which should "win". The real competition should be about developing an operating system that is truly about interfacing the computer to the human in the simplest way possible. The operating system should be transparent. Applications should "just work" and be intuitive! The OS, Apps, System and equipment should almost disappear into the background of the task at hand.

Why cannot I simply buy a system off-the-shelf, take it home, plug it in and say to it "I want to write a letter to John Doe in Felixstowe. Dear John, ........................Yours Sincerely" and have the damn thing take my dictation, print the letter and the envelope without all the crap of clicking on whatever word processor, print manager etc.etc.

Now OK, someone out there is going to point out that I can already do that! But!

And here's the BIG BUT! I want this hypothetical box to do all the other stuff equally intuitively. If I want to play a DVD or listen to some music I want to do that without having to worry about Codecs, Streamers and other "techie geek" stuff.

People get into cars and drive them all over the place without having to worry about engine management or even understand how the machinery works - especially automatic transmissions!

Just to put my view into some perspective, I go back to the early days when there were magazines like "Byte" and we quite literally made our own computers and were amazed by 4-bit microprocessors and considered 256 Bytesof RAM to be massive! I am also a radio ham and was for many years involved in radio communications professionally so I can understand some of the urge to retain "Geekery" but surely we have gotten beyond all that?

One day, I hope, using a computer will be a simple as getting a screwdriver out of the toolbox and just doing a task with it. Until then i can quite understand that a huge number of folks will still stay away from computers in general let alone worry about operating systems.

Having said all that, I do like UBUNTU a lot and got Hardy to work on a rather elderly laptop (Samsung GT7000, 450Mhz, 256M Ram) without too many problems - its not particularly fast but browses the web, plays music, runs OOo Office apps at reasonable speed (faster than I can input) and does a host of other stuff as well and I'm typing this on it!

It's just a "commodity" after all and someday soon it will be just another "consumable"!

In the race of life it is always worth putting a bet on the nag named "self-Interest" because he will always be in there trying hard

Linc1

June 16th, 2008, 09:51 AM

Well for me, I have been trying to totally adopt Linux for a couple of years. But I keep ending back on a windows machine for the very same reason. I need an open source solution to Outlook that doesn't give me errors all the type. I need my PDA to work and sync everytime without having to play games with it and it taking down my network connection while it is connected.

Maybe this can be done, but I still have issues. My work around is to use Virtual Box and run XP in a window... Windows in a window.. I like that. But it still means that I am stuck having to rely on windows still.

Linc

change_mode

June 16th, 2008, 12:16 PM

There's a linux substitute for pretty much everything, but not for games. WINE is good, but it can never reach 100% compatibility and even then it's too difficult to set up for the average computer user.

So right now, DirectX is pretty much what keeps Windows at the top. Without it, Windows would be obsolete.

ruetheday

June 16th, 2008, 01:05 PM

I really feel linux has a chance at becoming a regular fixture in our lives.

If they get mobile linux (ubuntu) available on phones, the stability, and free features alone would get people off windows mobile 6, and one toe into linux. I would change right now.

what turns me off is how say adobe for instance, change their development tools, then the back end gets fatter, and the front end runs terrible. Even in windows. (What was wrong with flash 5? it was the best)

Program and hardware makers should look at the end user, and say:

"we will make a version that runs on all platforms of computers, because "you" are the user. And you paid for it...Use it where you want. You and the developers are who pay to make this work. That goes for the person using photoshop a tablet driver, or someone viewing content of a flash video."""

This might be walking the thin line, but i really think Microsoft should be looking at a version of silverlight for linux. with quicktime and real out there,

it is time to make the computer, a user preference machine, instead of Program dictatorship.

Lets hope Microsoft's dream of cloud computing, opens them to new ideas. This shouldn't be a dream.

I am done... if you want to have the coolest custom interface in town run Linux
and if you want out of the box, consumer grade then there are others.

Open source? Apply Linux Daily as needed!
May cause *** splinters, carpel tunnel, absolute bliss, or total brain pain.

woodsrider250

June 18th, 2008, 12:21 PM

aysiu

June 18th, 2008, 12:42 PM

Other:

Need to be a Linux junkie to do anything with it that doesn't work out of the box. Any retard can run an installshield .exe or install an IE plugin. I'm a 10+ yr Windows sysadmin, and can figure this stuff out....After a ton of research. Ubuntu has gotten better with this. .DEB's have helped.
I've never been a Windows (or anything) sysadmin, and I haven't had a hard time figuring it out. Synaptic Package Manager is loads easier to me than scouring the internet for setup.exe files to download.

bufsabre666

June 18th, 2008, 12:52 PM

Other:

Need to be a Linux junkie to do anything with it that doesn't work out of the box. Any retard can run an installshield .exe or install an IE plugin. I'm a 10+ yr Windows sysadmin, and can figure this stuff out....After a ton of research. Ubuntu has gotten better with this. .DEB's have helped.

everything worked off the bat for me and ive just tuned my skills from there, thats why there is the add remove under the applications menu, basically whatever you need is in there, no hunting for exes at all, how is that harder?

no research needed

wootah

June 18th, 2008, 12:53 PM

gvnmcknz

June 18th, 2008, 02:05 PM

Having to use Terminal, & other esoteric ways of getting fairly simple things done.
I appreciate it's powerful, but if you're a bit unsure it's rather scary.
I've been using home computers from the mid 80's,
Sinclair ZX80, Commodore, Amigas, Atari ST, PCs (Windows 3.1 upwards),
EeePc now with Ubuntu.
I actively seek out Open Source software.
Linux throws me back to Noob status.
I will persevere, I do "get it", I find the community support aspect very positive.

gvnmcknz

cardinals_fan

June 18th, 2008, 08:49 PM

lisati

June 18th, 2008, 09:03 PM

I voted "other" - it's hard enough to educate people with basic computer skills, let alone adding a change of OS into the mix.

Example: turning off the power at the wall without bothering telling the OS to shut down.
Example: not allowing the anti-virus on a windows machine to get past the firewall (ZoneAlarm has a "remember answer" option on some of its popups)
Example: Not bothering to read the program documentation, even though many programs computer with a "help" facility that's available from on-screen menus.

I'm sure others can come up with more examples.

Bubba64

June 18th, 2008, 09:43 PM

I started on Dapper a couple of years ago, having not ever used any other programs. I bought a computer to go with a return to college, so I was motivated to at the least have a ease of travel in internet access, writing papers, and printing them. If you start with a non OS I suspect it may be harder to adapt, then just starting with a OS. Personally I really like that you can have a clean desktop not a bunch of icons.

kylemallory

June 19th, 2008, 09:39 AM

Single biggest barrier? A Killer App.

There are countless articles and studies on the adaption of operating systems and their success being attributed to "a killer app" that brings people to use that particular OS.

Linux and Ubuntu is full of "copy cat" applications, that are all trying to make up for lost functionality. There needs to be a fresh, unique application experience that will drive a majority of users to switch to Linux/Ubuntu in order to use that application.

wootah

June 19th, 2008, 01:06 PM

aysiu

June 19th, 2008, 01:22 PM

It doesn't matter if Linux gets a "killer app" or not. Open source, by definition, cannot have a "killer app," since the code is free. Once an app is "killer" enough, Mac OS X and Windows can easily port that "Linux" application to their platforms as well.

That's the main difference between proprietary platforms like Mac OS X/Windows and open platforms like Linux. Proprietary says "Hey, I have cool toys. You can't play with them, though, unless you follow my rules." Open source says "I have cool toys. You want to make cool toys, too? Take a copy of my toy and do whatever you want with it."

prince_of_hackers

June 19th, 2008, 04:56 PM

I've not had too much trouble getting Linux hardware support, in fact, it is generally easier to get new hardware working under Linux than Windows. Although, if you want to play games, you need to make a careful selection of video cards to be sure of proper driver support.

My biggest barrier for switching any of my customers to using Linux is application support - while common applications like word processing and internet browsing are well supported, most of my customers want to be able to go to Wal-Mart, buy a program off the shelf, and be able to install it themselves and have it work right out of the box, no questions asked.

Also, a lot of my customers would switch to Linux if they could be assured that all their programs would be available under Linux - while Linux may have an equivalent, or probably even a better alternative, often it isn't "just the same" from the customer's point of view.

My best way to combat this so far has been to try and get customers to switch under Windows to open source applications that are available in their exact same form under Linux - OpenOffice.org is the most obvious of these. If they are already used to the program under Windows, they won't notice the underlying OS switch anywhere near as much.

Tuxoid

June 20th, 2008, 08:45 AM

We already support more hardware out of the box than anyone else, we are closing the gap quickly on the remaining areas. I think the biggest problem currently is that when people buy a machine it comes with Windows, 99% of people won't switch unless there's a really good reason. We don't currently provide a truly better desktop, it's a Windows that doesn't crash not a better alternative. So long as the things we highlight are that we suck less than Windows, why would people go for a Linux desktop?

We have the chance to really do something innovative and do it quickly, we just need the will to do so. Take technology like Tracker or Beagle, with a bit of investment we could have that integrated so deeply in all of the desktop that nobody could compare.

Offer people something truly better at zero cost and they will switch.

I'd say investments are needed to give us the final few drivers (Intel are onboard, ATI are joining up reportedly and we are doing nvidia ourselves. that leaves wifi which is also being worked on) and we need to work on not being merely onpar. Finally we need to really take security seriously, not doing so has caused many issues for Windows (and it will for Apple) we have the chance to do it right from the word go and we can fix everything up faster since we have the freedom of access to the source.

We also need to calm the waters we aren't going to beat Windows just yet, we simply can't - I know we'd all like to but it will take years and we need to not push an inferior solution on people or they won't believe us when it no longer is the case. I've been a fulltime Linux user going on 9 years now, I'm accustomed to waiting, what I have seen is that every year we do better and better, eventually we will win - no doubt about it. Open technology has to much going for it to lose the battle for technological domination as a whole, the desktop usecase is just a very hard one to hit, I suspect it will be the last bastilion to fall - Servers, workstations, embedded devices, applicances, all have switched to our technology, the desktop will come in it's own sweet time.

I'd think that you'd be interested in a Usability project I am working :)

Anyway, yes, Linux needs to compete with desktop innovation, not mimic the Microsoft or Apple desktops. For this to happen, Desktop developers need to be absolutely radical in innovating in the field of ease of use. I think part of Apple's strength is its unconventional yet easy-to-use desktop (or as it's know as, the Aqua Interface). Instead of question the effectiveness of some things, Apple has decided to question things, that most interface designers, would consider taboo to question. Most interface designers would believe that questioning the design of task bars, would destroy a system's Usability. Where most do believe this, Apple does not. They use a visibly different task bar than Microsoft Windows, a different menu set-up, different organization of desktop icons. While there are some Usability researchers, that state that OS X is dysfunctional, with ease-of-use, many users swear by the Apple interface. In fact, some Windows users, switched to a Mac, just because of OS X's interface. I'd love to see a Windows or Mac user look at a Linux box, one day, and say, "Wow, that's just downright different. What is that?"

Apple is really great with being different for the sake of being easier. If Linux was to follow the same philosophy, we'd have far better chance.

btw, just in case anyone is actually interested, I am not revealing any information on what I'm working on. for three reasons:

1. I lack the necessary trust in the free software community for people to believe I can do more than just talk on the Ubuntu forums

2. I have not even begun to do any programming to actually create anything usable (I only have mock-ups and technical documents)

3. Part of me feels as this is a pipe dream

aysiu

June 20th, 2008, 11:07 AM

Tuxoid

June 20th, 2008, 05:00 PM

I found the use of live CDs that also install quite innovative. I found package managers and repositories quite innovative. I found workspaces quite innovative (so did Apple - that's why they copied it for Mac Leopard and then claimed it was something new... "Spaces").

Of course Linux innovates. People don't care about innovation, though, if it's from a platform they haven't heard of.

I'm sorry...

I did not mean to sound as if I didn't think Linux isn't innovative at all. LiveCDs are a godsend. They allow to truly sample an Operating System. Package managers are far better than any installation method on windows or OS X. You can literally say, "It's right there!".

I don't use Workspaces that much, but it allows for greater organization.

I also in gnome that the task bar is so big compared to the Windows task bar (since Gnome's bottom panel has the task bar taking up nearly the entire bottom panel).

Linux rather needs to be a User Interface radical. Do not let on widget unturned; analyze every single piece of the User Interface, without letting the urge to copy what's popular get to develops or users.

starcannon

June 20th, 2008, 05:16 PM

I chose "Other":

I believe the main reason that Ubuntu, and Linux in general is still stuck in the dark corner of the room is because OEM's as a general rule are not using it.

Dell has a few, but you better know they are there, and how to find them, which implies your already in the know about linux to begin with, not many new users are going to be gained that way.

The other big builder oem's as far as I know don't really have a linux desktop offering.

Those that do come our way try to install the OS themselves, for most of their computing lives many of them may have only ever dealt with restore disks or partitions, or simply taken it in to a shop for repairs. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, end-users are not system installers; that is not a derogatory comment either, I drive a car, I am not a mechanic, I pay a professional to fix my vehicles.

So in a nutshell, until Linux starts shipping and being marketed to the masses on big name oem machines that will come with full restore CD's and or restore Partitions, I don't see things changing all that much.

Just my 2cents on the subject, and at the rate of inflation I probably owe someone an apology.

cardinals_fan

June 20th, 2008, 08:26 PM

I'd love to see a Windows or Mac user look at a Linux box, one day, and say, "Wow, that's just downright different. What is that?"
I use Xmonad. It looks downright different...

Tuxoid

June 20th, 2008, 09:55 PM

I use Xmonad. It looks downright different...

The tone I was suggesting from the average user in the conversation was of interest. I cannot say if an average user would find Xmonad an attractive Window Manager, but I looked at the Wikipedia Page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMonad), and I think it lacks the extensive interface of Gnome, KDE, or even Xfce. In the screenshot, I cannot see a Menu used for the access of Applications. How is this is done? The menu, required for accessing the system's Applications, has traditionally been in a blatantly obvious location, on the screen, to avoid near all possible misunderstandings, of how to go beyond using the minimal interaction, the bare desktop offers.

To average users, they want it to look like, that it is probable, that they have the knowledge, to go and use an interface, without a fear of possible disappointment, in the form of frequent reading of Documentation.

markbuntu

June 20th, 2008, 11:07 PM

I agree that things should work out of the box for a particular release, but you must remember that 8.04 is a Long Term Support release! They knew Firefox 3 was going to be released this week and that everyone would be updated and things would be fixed.

As for pulseaudio? Maybe they made a mistake, who knows?

Who knew?
the developers?
Who else?

A lot of people are fed up with Vista and Microsoft right now and all Ubuntu offered was a bug farm that could have been EASILY AVOIDED.

Don't get me wrong, I love linux and Ubuntu in particular but there seems to be a basic disconnect between the public face and the reality of what is offered, between the developers words and the expectations of the public that those words engender.

sagor71

June 20th, 2008, 11:13 PM

i am sorry to bother you guys.i had a post before and can see seven replies but cant find and read. please help.

mvdberg112

June 21st, 2008, 12:40 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by StumpyMcDonut View Post
Another thing is the insistence by a lot of Linux users to do absolutely everything via the command-line. Its fine for someone to see a tutorial with a step or two in the terminal (you get that with Windows) but seemingly doing everything via that method is really off-putting. Honestly, start using the available GUI options for your tutorials guys, even if its only for unzipping a tarball, and even if its slightly slower because it will seem easier that way. We love it, but sadly the terminal way has to go GUI is the way 95% of the population will want to do things, and that is what should be concentrated on.

Well, this is a problem because unfortunately linux is not windows and it depends heavily on command line, it has nice frontends but even with the best one, the flexibility and power of the cli is unrivalled and is one of the reasons linux is so powerful, for example... suse has YAST, the best frontend for config related stuff period, but then even with that, you will still need cli for some stuff, even that kind of stuff that does not respond giving the case you use a frontend (again, yast)... like video cards and the like.
..........
One of the beautiful things OSS has is variety, and by locking for example.... desktop enviroment we're are limiting the very freedom linux enjoys.... as for the package management...... well, we have a more powerful option... the add/remove software entry in the apps menu....
For me the biggest difference is that not the whole system follows the same logic for installation and configuration. Every application and system module has its own configuration manual. Uniformity is very important.

It is possible to write a graphical interface for these kind of things. Windows has a graphical interface for every type of driver, new, old and future! I remember that when a wireless came on the market, it did not need a new piece of software from Microsoft. The driver from the manufacturer fitted seamless into the current interface. It did come with a client app to create wireless specific profiles. Although, it was possible to make all these setting through the driver properties.

Regarding the command line interface: I cannot see the need for a CLI (although I love to use it!) to manage a PC. To do advanced scripting, or do some types of complex data manipulation, yes, then the Linux CLI is superior over the current GUIs. However, installation and configuration do never need complex and powerful CLI commands by neccessity. For example, look at this sound manual: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=205449
It suggest to use the following CLI commands:
aplay -l
lspci -v
sudo modprobe snd-....
sudo nano /etc/modules
sudo apt-get --purge remove linux-sound-base alsa-base alsa-utils
sudo apt-get install linux-sound-base alsa-base alsa-utils
sudo apt-get install gdm ubuntu-desktop
sudo apt-get install gdm xubuntu-desktop
aplay -l
sudo apt-get install build-essential linux-headers-$(uname -r) module-assistant alsa-source
sudo dpkg-reconfigure alsa-source
sudo module-assistant a-i alsa-source
cd /usr/src sudo tar xjvf alsa-driver.tar.bz2 cd modules/alsa-driver
sudo ./configure --with-kernel=/usr/src/linux-headers-$(uname -r) --with-cards=<enter driver name here e.g. via82xx> --with-oss=yes
sudo make
sudo make install
mkdir src cd src
mkdir alsa
cd alsa
sudo apt-get install build-essential linux-headers-$(uname -r)
wget ftp://ftp.alsa-project.org/pub/drive....12rc2.tar.bz2
tar xvjf alsa-driver-1.0.12rc2.tar.bz2 cd alsa-driver-1.0.12rc1
sudo ./configure --with-kernel=/usr/src/linux-headers-$(uname -r) --with-cards=<enter driver name here e.g. via82xx> --with-oss=yes sudo make sudo make install
alsamixer
sudo alsactl storeSee how many CLI commands. The most are not of a complex type at all! And the more complex ones, could be relatively easy be implemented in an unpack & install shield. As a matter of fact, for many aspects this can already be done graphically, like apt-get. Why are we not using that? If we do not MARKET the GUI that we have, nobody will BUY it!

Marketing is four P-s: Product, Place&time, Price and Promotion; even when the price is 0, as with Linux, it still needs the right promotion and the product still needs to be good; tutorials and guides on forums are part of this promotion.

The whole recompilation and re-installation of the ALSA is an non-technical user unfriendly process, but fairly standard process, although the variables change per situation. This means that an installation system needs to detect which the right variables are. If there is a logical reason for a value to be this or that, then it is possible to write an algorithm for it. That is what an end-user needs.

Yes, the Linux package management is superior over Windows. I really love it!
However, when something is not listed, and downloaded in another format, it is not just double-click and follow the instructions. This is so much easier to handle.
This applies especially for the Linux hardware drivers structure: the package manager does not install drivers (or does it? I could not find it).

The question we need to ask us: what do we need to do, to make all the Linux features intuitive graphical? And to make all tutorials graphical?

eryksun

June 21st, 2008, 04:17 PM

Systems grow by accretion. Linux is accessible to engineers, scientists, coders, sysadmins and geeks with too much free time -- maybe 5% of the general population at most. To make Ubuntu accessible and attractive to another 20% or so of the market, some common things need to be made easier.

It has to be top priority for every LTS release that all of the following systems work flawlessly and be completely integrated with each other:

Login Manager - GDM
Application Framework - GTK
Compositing Window Manager - Compiz Fusion
Window Decorator - Emerald
Taskbar - Avant Window Navigator (AWN)
Widgets - Screenlets
Video Server - X.Org
Audio Server - PulseAudio
Media Codecs - GStreamer
Video/ALSA Drivers (including webcams/scanners)
Power Management (including Suspend/Hibernate)

For an example of systems not playing nice together, IMO, every time I log off, or when Compiz crashes, Gnome briefly loads its window manager Metacity. This causes complete havoc with window positions, sometimes sending screenlets to some limbo land off screen. If I've chosen a Bling'd desktop I should never see Metacity. It's just a mess having two Window managers interacting on a single system.

Another example is themes. Currently to theme the entire system I have to setup separate themes for GDM, GTK, Emerald, AWN, screensaver (forget about tweaking the screensaver options without dropping into a CLI), system sounds, each of the screenlets separately, and nearest that I can tell Compiz Fusion, which has a million configuration options, has to be themed manually. Choice is good, but this is too much. Additionally the 'Sounds' tab of 'gnome-sound-properties' is a theme option (however minimal it is... please add more theme-able sound events) and has no business being in with the hardware setup.

IMO, the app 'gnome-appearance-properties' needs to be expanded as a general Theme Manager (call it 'gnome-theme-manager') to integrate the whole process. From this central point I should be able to save/preview/load all of these settings as a single theme with the click of a single button. Lots of themes should be installed by default, providing a whole range of possibilities that go way beyond the overly simple options on the 'Visual Effects' tab: None, Normal, Extra (which has nothing selected on my system because of my custom configuration...let's hope I don't accidentally click on one of those radio buttons, making Compiz lose all of my custom settings...good grief). Moreover, if I'm saving a theme, it should include only the settings and binaries (graphics, sounds, screensavers, etc) that I have opted to be included with the theme, all in one nicely ordered zipped up package that I can easily share with the community. Then a relatively small number of creative, ambitious people, but not necessarily technical geniuses, can create a rich, bling'd out experience for hundreds of thousands, nay, millions of lazy users, which AFAIK is the way the world works. :)

Another integration example is GStreamer, which has a ton of audio/video filters (video deblocking, color saturation, equalizers, volume normalization, mixers, etc) which rival ffdshow on Windows. However, a GStreamer application has to include explicit support for filters.

IMO, this is just wrong headed. Users should be able to easily enable and configure filters on a per application and system-wide basis. So, for example, the PulseAudio program pavucontrol has tabs for Playback, Output Devices, and Input Devices. This program should be expanded to a general multimedia configuration program, with 12 sliders per application or device: volume, bass, and treble for audio I/O and brightness, hue, and saturation for graphics and video I/O. The sliders become visible when the user clicks on the application name -- as well as a button that opens a page for configuring custom I/O filter graphs. Currently running programs should be sectioned off at the top of the list, but the list should show every application that has a stored configuration. Additionally system wide filters should be configurable for the devices listed in the Output Devices and Input Devices tabs: driver interfaces for video/audio chipsets, webcams, and scanners.

The average user hasn't a clue how to use many of these filters (many require expert knowledge in Digital Signal and Image Processing, e.g. taps for a custom FIR filter), but anyone can apply a preset, and the system should come with a selection of reasonable presets. For each application, an end user should be able to apply one or more of these presets with a simple checkbox list that has up/down buttons for adjusting the order in the overall graph. Moreover, just like with themes, a creative user should be able to export custom presets as a file that can be shared with other users.

IMO, at the heart of all this system integration is Gnome; all these separate projects need to be coordinated through Gnome to create a consistent, clean, integrated and well thought out user experience. Canonical has to stop all the parallel development (mostly Kubuntu). It's a waste of time and resources and only confuses and puts off the very users they're trying to attract. I absolutely do not want to see all those KDE apps in the default Ubuntu repositories. Having two toolkits on one system is inconsistent and ugly. Focus on working as the glue tying the parts of the system together with Gnome, and ditch KDE! The Kubuntu community should fork from Ubuntu as a separate OS and Kommunity. (okay Kubuntu users, flame away...)

cardinals_fan

June 21st, 2008, 05:03 PM

i am sorry to bother you guys.i had a post before and can see seven replies but cant find and read. please help.
This is the wrong place for support questions. Stick them in Absolute Beginner Talk.

It is possible to write a graphical interface for these kind of things. Windows has a graphical interface for every type of driver, new, old and future! I remember that when a wireless came on the market, it did not need a new piece of software from Microsoft. The driver from the manufacturer fitted seamless into the current interface. It did come with a client app to create wireless specific profiles. Although, it was possible to make all these setting through the driver properties.

I have to disagree. My wireless usb adapter, which supposedly supports XP, works very poorly (if it works at all). The GUI that it comes with it is utterly useless - it has a couple buttons, and when they don't work, I'm screwed. The Microsoft wireless GUI is slightly better, but it doesn't configure the adapter properly and the connection is lost periodically for no reason. It usually takes me many hours of fiddling, reinstalling the drivers, and swearing at the stupid wizards before the adapter works (at a very poor speed). In Linux, here's what I have to do: modprobe rt73usb (this step isn't even necessary on most distros)
ifconfig wlan0 up
iwconfig wlan0 essid *myessid*
dhcpcd wlan0and on BSD:
ifconfig rum0 up
ifconfig rum0 ssid *myessid*
dhcpd rum0
Which way is harder?

Kronie

June 22nd, 2008, 12:45 AM

The only reason i switched to ubuntu is just to try it out... i dont know why are there so many linux vs MS hollywars, but i find both OS pretty similar to one-another. except that 85% of compuiter games on market are made for MS platform... i dont really care if linux is open source and win is not. the main reason people hate other platforms is because they afraid to learn the new platform.. most of windows users who yell that linux sux never actually seen how linux looks, same with linux "win haters"..

kaligus

June 22nd, 2008, 05:16 AM

Short answer:

GAMES, money and time spent maintaining and upgrading windows for decades.

LONG answer:

I have 2 ubuntu servers (antiques by normal standards <1GHz 768MB ram, etc.), 1 Ubuntu desktop, and 1 win2k (medical software that refuses to run on anything else though I have made headway with vbox :)) ).

My reason for not 'makefs /hda0' is to stay fresh enough to to help everyone else, and I really like trillian and dislike pidgin, havent found anything that quite works like trillian (it does run fine under vbox but is a bit annoying).

My wifes reason for not switching... plain and simple GAMES!!

My father-in-laws reasons for not switching are that he has spent soooo much money and time keeping his system running that it is a kick to the side of his head to throw that away.

(long story cut short that almost converted him)

He had a presentation to do which needed to be distributed in ms office format of a couple of versions ago, his weiners-vista refused to help him out... open office worked great, they got a vacation to Canada out of it. He actually told me that he couldn't "throw away the ~25K$US, and thousands of hours" spent making/keeping it all work.

His wife, actually loves using my ubuntu but then she goes home and well we get right back to the amount of money he has spent. The games she plays at home are the first thing she runs for here on my ubuntu boot.

EDIT: Ubuntu/XP is in process of becoming Ubuntu as soon as I reboot :) and the 2k may be adding another linux server because I figured out how to make the medical device work with vbox on my main machine. Now hopefully either wine or vbox will rid this house of winnduhhz totally!

theOtherMarino

May 22nd, 2009, 05:55 AM

Hello,

Unfortunately... a mix of lack of hardware support and a lack of stability. Yes, I know some will scream if I dare say that but after 6 years using linux (red hat, suse and ubuntu for the last 3 years), I can say that stability is not that sure. I've had some memorable crashes/problems. Here are the last ones.

My computer has a MSI K9VGM-V mobo. Guess what? The AER driver can't handle it, and there is no way to plug ANY video card either in the PCI express port or an AGP port. I've tried six video cards. NOPE! I know, I should have read some compatibility support forums (http://www.linuxquestions.org/hcl/showproduct.php/product/3742). I did not. I'm f... I knew there were driver issues with video, sound, etc. cards, but I had never imagined it with a motherboard.

When I upgraded to Jaunty, three packages broke. Why? I do not know, as nothing during the process told me so. No terminal command could solve that. Read the whole story here: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1147434&page=2 I finally had to manually modify some system files. I imagine a newbie facing this kind of problem.

And now, second effect of my jaunty upgrade, I have no keyboard no mouse at login screen. That's not an harddware problem, for both work with a live CD.

And I'm (rather) skilled, but imagine a newbie facing that:

Gtk-WARNING **: cannot open display: at /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/FrontEnd/Gnome.pm line 54.
debconf: unable to initialize frontend: Gnome
debconf: (DISPLAY problem?)
debconf: falling back to frontend: Dialog
xserver-xorg postinst warning: overwriting possibly-customised configuration
file; backup in /etc/X11/xorg.conf.20090521233742

Some other people have been facing this problem - I found their threads on the net, but no solution has been found yet.

...Except to reinstall Ubuntu, which is not an option in my case.

Regards,

Marino

lukjad007

May 22nd, 2009, 06:04 AM

I'd say first it's the lack of awareness then the mindset of people.

VioletsPie

May 23rd, 2009, 01:04 PM

Let's not kid ourselves, to use Ubuntu you have to be somewhat of a computer nerd. Most people don't even know what a driver is and never reinstall the OEM windows. I mean, burning an .iso or a CD at all is intimidating to a lot of people.

Most likely Ubuntu and linux's market share will grow with the newer generation being more computer-saavy (I know a lot of you old gurus will cry foul!) as well as the recession.

lukjad007

May 23rd, 2009, 01:43 PM

You can simply order a Free CD. That doesn't take much knowhow. Also, you can purchase it preinstalled. That also is not hard.

aysiu

May 23rd, 2009, 02:59 PM

Let's not kid ourselves, to use Ubuntu you have to be somewhat of a computer nerd. Most people don't even know what a driver is and never reinstall the OEM windows. I mean, burning an .iso or a CD at all is intimidating to a lot of people. You're not talking about using Ubuntu. You're talking about installing and configuring Ubuntu.

You don't have to be a "nerd" at all to use Ubuntu.

RichardG891

May 23rd, 2009, 03:18 PM

I voted other. It's ease of use. And if you can't install and configure your stuff, you can't use it. Try installing a Brother (non-postscript) printer using their drivers... It's easier than it used to be but I still have to create two filesystem directories as root, because the install routine can't. And manually edit /etc/printcap. I used to have to log into cups through localhost:631 as well to register the printer (gnome's own printing module very good now), and set up USB access permission. My Mum and Dad are retired and been using XP for years (with help, mind) but they can email and web browse, and upload photos from their cameras, and scan and print documents. With every release I ask myself, could they handle ubuntu without being hand-held. Not yet. I've just been messing about with the latest PCLinuxOS and Linux Mint releases and they probably could with those. It's getting better all the time. I guess the answer is to ask what it is that most non-tech people actually want to do with their computers, and automate the set-up, and write straightforward GUI wizards. Once they've been bitten by the bug, then show 'em a command line (I like Guake myself).

aysiu

May 23rd, 2009, 03:50 PM

Try installing a Brother (non-postscript) printer using their drivers... I did. I just installed a Brother HL-2040 the other day, and it was a matter of plugging it in and going to System > Administration > Printers and selecting New Printer. Everything was autodetected, and the test page printed out just fine.

Surely if a peripheral does not support Linux, you'll have a tough time getting it to work. That is why I would urge people to buy Linux preinstalled and then buy only peripherals they know are Linux-compatible.

My wife and I tried to switch her parents over to Mac, but one of the reasons we couldn't was their Canon printer, which had only Windows drivers. Does that mean Macs are difficult to use? No. It means Canon didn't support Mac for that printer model.

And I'm guessing Brother didn't support Linux well for that model you tried.

utnubuuser

May 23rd, 2009, 04:05 PM

I just finished reading through "Ubuntu - The complete reference 8.04" by Richard Petersen. An awesome Ubuntu reference book.

It is a very complete reference book, and in reading it, I couln't help but notice that for every topic covered, the real power of Ubuntu/Gnu/Linux is in the command line.

When the power available in a terminal is fully GUIed, we'll see considerably wider adaptation.

In Linux, for every task one could do using a GUI, several more powerful/versatile command-line apps/options are available.

Ubuntu and all the Linux OSs suffer from lack of GUIification. It does no good at all to have that kind of power at your disposal if you can't access it. The average "home-user" will never take the time to learn the intricacies of the command line with all its options and arguments and that is where Linux truly shines.

The GUI is the HomePC. - Ubuntu and most Linux OSs all have adequate to good GUIs, but compared to OSs that have focused only on their GUIs since the 80s, Linux is playing catch-up.

It's almost as though we need an app that can load a command-line app, in a way similar to how we now use Windows apps through WINE, and present it and all it's features through a GUI, instead of looking to developers to GUIify each and every app, - luckily, if there is any OS up to such a task, it's Linux.

ktmom

May 23rd, 2009, 08:27 PM

The variety of operating systems reflects the variety of users. No one OS is ever going to rule the world and that is as it should be IMHO

utnubuuser

May 23rd, 2009, 08:50 PM

So 95% market share and the accompanying anti-trust behaviour doesn't qualify as "ruling the world"?

Considering that this was accomplished with an inferior system, it's quite a feat.

jack24

May 25th, 2009, 02:27 PM

The problem is recursive. People don't use it, so people think it's unusual and don't want to take a chance with it.

Even my family won't switch. I put Ubuntu on my wife's laptop and she had problems at work, so she wanted to switch back. She did, however, decide to stick with open office even though her company gives her the microsoft stuff. She said she liked it and wanted to stick with it.

At work, the IT crew keeps everybody in a state of panic about using anything other than microsoft and using exactly how microsoft (and they) say to use it. I used to think they were being nasty, but now I really believe they're scared and clueless themselves. They can replace a batter or reload excel, but other than that they use warranty/lease tech support.

Hardware is a problem, though. It's often difficult to connect a new phone, camera, printer, etc. to Ubuntu. I don't mind putting an hour or so into it every now and then, but it bothers other people. I do notice, that they'll spend an hour or more on the phone with tech support trying to get hardware working with windows, but I guess they don't mind that for some reason.

In my uninformed opinion, it's just a delay. If I can use and prefer Ubuntu, anybody can. At one time, IT at work chastised me for using Firefox instead of IE. A year later they installed Firefox on every machine and discouraged people from using IE to prevent viruses and other problems. Someday they'll see that Linux is more reliable, more adaptable and has better support.

jack

Chame_Wizard

May 25th, 2009, 02:49 PM

People thinks:"Oh my god,Windows is the best and there is nothing that can't beat it." It's just stupid and sad at the same time

a Dutch term:" the farmer doesn't eat,what he/she don't taste." It means: people doesn't know things,so they will ignore it.For die-hard/sheep/brainless/hardcore Winblows users,Linux is completely something 'alien' for them and inferior(cause they never use something else).

iiiears

May 25th, 2009, 03:19 PM

I agree with much of what has been said.
Language translation software that works well for forum posts and source code. The strength of GNU/OSS is the ability to seamlessly coordinate people from around the globe, Users, Developers, everyone.
The biggest barrier is language.

Andrew_Grant

May 25th, 2009, 03:45 PM

It just isn't that easy to use for most people. My wife loves working on my computer (Kubuntu 9.04) but shouts when anything goes wrong (frequently). On her Windows and Mac computers, if anything goes wrong she just fixes it. Linux, for me, is still too far into the land of only for those interested in computers.

Ethelbert2

May 26th, 2009, 06:09 AM

Firstly of course most people don't even think or know about "operating systems" any more than they know what electronic communication system works the phone lines. It is just "the computer" and it does stuff.

Since "the computer" comes with Microsoft on it, that is the OS they have but they may not even be aware of it (for all the advertising) and still the computer "does stuff" - and then, like my mother, they gradually learn how to do various tasks. Anything complicated they either pay for "a man" to come and "fix it" or someone in the family (like myself) who knows a little more - will have a go. They think "the computer" has gone wrong, not the OS.

They may eventually realise it is possible to change the OS but it is too late and they certainly don't want to learn other things when learning that one is complicated enough. (It would have to be in-your-face bad to induce a change and it is not. I do not disparage Microsoft's OS as such - it is excellent, at least the XP version and works well despite some occasional hassles - Vista is a pig but probably 7 will be good. Just a complete ripoff by a monopoly that has the market trapped. Security issues are actually handled quite well - all the updates go on virutally in the background and usually without hassle)

Cost would be a factor if people even realised that the OS was a cost. But most get a computer with a pre-install - "the computer" is what costs and OEM prices for Windows are much cheaper than the box costs.

But changing is difficult even when you know Windows.

I am curious enough to try Linux, particularly for an old computer I have. But it is a frustrating hassle. Please do not take that as a criticism of all the huge voluntary effort - what is there is amazing but how does it have to go to appeal to ordinary people is the issue.

There are too many types - which do I go for? They all have different problems. Many are complex to load and present daunting screens from the beginning. Others are easier like Ubuntu.

Some hardware, for all the boasts about drivers, is hell to get going. I first tried to years ago and gave up because a simple thing like a modem required hours of learning and explanation even to understand why it would not work. The wifi card I had, involved mass complications starting with not even being seen. Ordinary people do not grasp "drivers".

I have recently come back to try again and the wifi card (rtl 8185) is still a hassle though I just (finally) discovered a GUI version of Ndiswrapper that makes it very easy. But FINDING that has taken days. Incidentally, for all the command line soldiers, it just is MUCH easier to do things visually. It is the reason Mac and then Microsoft took off. It is not called Windows for nothing.

So finding drivers and installing them is beyond most users and beyond what they want to think about anyway (on Windows, your new bit of gear comes with an easy disc - point and shoot.)

So that is the biggest issue.

But knowing there is a choice is a factor. Linux does not have the installation market sewn up. However if machines do come with Linux (and appropriate hardware that works) they will be accepted as "another kind of computer".

But Linux also lacks identity. There is far too much variation, which is fun for the experimenters but for mainstream use creates a lack of focus. Development needs a strong leadership and strategic direction which a commercial entity like Microsoft has. Ubuntu halfway gets there creating a visible BRAND - and is the one most of us outsiders start on and with fewest hassles on newer machines.

For those like me that will mess with installation and even learn to enjoy it - a minority - there is still another hassle. Linux will not run several critically important applications. This will not affect everybody like the other issues, only those that need certain tools - but it is killer factor.

Optical character recognition which I use a lot is almost non-existent. Photoshop, despite its price, is unequalled and for graphics and photography is essential. The GIMP is brave but not there. Many games of course also need Windows.

Simple database tools with a GUI are not available (I like one called Approach - now abandoned by IBM sadly though why they did not do a Linux version escapes me) MySQL is not an answer because you have to learn a lot of SQL stuff and so on.(And Oracle has now hoovered it up too - most likely to kill it off or absorb it into Oracle)

Wine website is full of applications that don't run properly like Photoshop, so that does not help either.

Linux is excellent in many forms but none will be mainstream without addressing these issues.

I really WANT Linux to work so all this is frustrating but religious chanting about it being the best will not make it so..

k2t0f12d

May 28th, 2009, 07:01 AM

What's the single biggest barrier to Ubuntu and Linux adoption?Installations

gn2

May 28th, 2009, 07:06 AM

Inertia.

spcwingo

May 28th, 2009, 08:02 AM

I believe the reason lies in human nature. Humans are creatures of habit and therefore, most resist change even if it is better, for their own good, etc. For example, my wife asked me to remove Vista from her laptop. I asked if she would like to try Ubuntu. She agreed on the condition that I dual booted it with XP. She loves the ease of customization, speed, and small size of Ubuntu. But, no matter what she still only boots into XP even though it is slower, less able to customize, and less secure...but, to each their own.

rsandu

June 18th, 2009, 08:36 AM

Hello,

From my experience as a sysadmin, I know that non-technical users give little importance to the actual OS (if it is friendly enough) or Free Software philosophy.

What really matters are applications.

People need a pre-defined set of features and choose the overall solution (OS + application combination) that offers them more hassle-free, even the solution is suboptimal.

For example, an accountant needs some features in a spreadsheet and will not switch from Excel to OpenOffice.org Calc if he doesn't have the complete set of features. The underlying OS is a secondary issue here.

There are still many Windows applications that do not have a direct equivalent into Free Software world, for example AutoCAD, CorelDraw! or programs for easily syncronizing Thunderbird contacts with a common mobile phone.

Răzvan

HoldSteady

June 21st, 2009, 04:24 PM

The old knock on Linux was Flash. Now the knock is poor battery life / power management in comparison to OS X and Win 7. Just this week, I tried to hibernate my desktop Hardy system for the first time, only to be treated to a blank screen and a unresponsive system that forced me to reboot. Seriously, it is the first thing mentioned now when the topic of Linux comes up in the general tech world (think PC Mag, Tekzilla, etc.) - especially now that virtually everyone has a laptop (possibly only a laptop). I may have missed it, but this serious threat to the expansion or even survival of Linux doesn't seem to be on the agendas of the big boys (Does Linus have a passion of eking out more life from a battery? Does Shuttleworth?).

Sublime Porte

June 21st, 2009, 10:17 PM

I think one of the major barriers, is fear of incompatibility. Users fear that they're going to choose something which will be incompatible. One of the greatest things about choosing the 'PC' over the 'Mac' all those years ago was that it managed to capture a huge marketshare, and everyone (everyone who had a computer anyway) had one. So if you had a Mac, you were plagued with this disease of incompatibility. Meaning anytime you got a hold of some good software, or someone wanted to share a disk with you or documents, if you had a Mac you most likely couldn't use it.

This is the general mindset of people.

Windows == Compatibility
Everything else == Incompatibility

Tipped OuT

June 21st, 2009, 10:42 PM

The biggest fear is something unfamiliar and not having any real knowledge about it. I find most Linux users are more on the geeky side, and know how there computer works. Not everyone is like that, and so a whole new operating system, is like putting them in an alternate universe, which is scary.

So people tend to not want to try something new, and just stick with they already know and works.

Sublime Porte

June 22nd, 2009, 02:16 AM

The biggest fear is something unfamiliar and not having any real knowledge about it.

I'd say that's a barrier to people trying it in the first place, but not to adopting it. I've seen many people quite taken by Linux, but would not adopt it, not because it's different or unfamiliar, but because it's "incompatible".

Hishighness

June 22nd, 2009, 10:42 AM

For me personally, it's because I can't run all the programs I'm used to running on Windows. Wine is awesome, but it doesn't work for everything. I don't want to waste time learning some new program even if it's just as good as good or better than the one I'm used to using. And some programs won't work at all.

I like Ubuntu's flexibility, and the Live CD option has been a lifesaver ever since my computer died on Thursday.

Sublime Porte

June 22nd, 2009, 11:11 AM

it's because I can't run all the programs I'm used to running on Windows

Yeh compatibility definitely shoulda been an option in the poll I think.

Anyway, just to let you know, after a while of using Linux, you'll just adapt, and then if you ever have to use Windows again for some reason, you'll be thinking the opposite "I can't run the apps I normally run on Linux".

Sure there's a lot more apps for Windows, but most of them are trashware anyway, and really not necessary for most users. And the amount of software for Linux is growing at a phenomenal rate.

texpat

June 22nd, 2009, 02:15 PM

I think the problem with getting any kind of serious market share is businesses.

Not people who can't use the 24 channel rap box or those whose ultimate gaming experience relies on Windows. If you want real market share, go convince businesses to set up Linux instead of Windows workstations. We'd be talking about tens, even hundreds of installs per shop.

Of course there'll be entry barriers: getting users to cooperate, and convincing department heads that support won't be an issue among others.

bakedbeans4life

June 22nd, 2009, 03:14 PM

Microsoft and their money. They can buy and sell entire countries.

Choice?

SuperSonic4

June 22nd, 2009, 03:15 PM

Knowledge and Ignorance: Many people don't know what Linux is

wtfbrb

June 23rd, 2009, 12:29 PM

No quickbooks, no mapping software (maptitude or arcmap), no quick easy db program like access (for almost everything I do I use php/mysql but for quick easy stats or lists nothing beats access). GIMP <> Photoshop by any stretch of the imagination. I voted software doesn't live up to commercial, I'm not talking about general use of windows I mean all the commercial apps used for business do not have anything close to an equivalent open source. If Linux really wants to compete WINE needs to be able to run all the latest business software because there is so much development money in business software an open source "equivalent" can't possibly keep up.

oldsoundguy

June 23rd, 2009, 12:42 PM

IMO, the biggest drawback is the failure of the system on HARDWARE out of the box. Having to fight to get your video working properly and your audio functioning (and then losing it on an update), yet alone the battles with wireless cards, second hard drives or the even rarer hardware associated with a Media Controller/Personal Video Recorder and the like. (I know a large portion of the fault lies with equipment manufacturers and not the system, but having to spend an inordinate amount of time in terminal is NOT user friendly!)

The second is the availability of programs for business that work as good as or BETTER than Windows. Granted, there are programs out there, but they look like and work like a weak attempt at doing the job. (many exceptions, but not enough, yet!)

Businesses .. both large and small .. far outnumber gamers in the amount of computers purchased and running each year. Time to concentrate on invading the office BIG TIME.

madjr

June 23rd, 2009, 12:55 PM

-1st: biggest barrier is awareness by a long shot

people never seen it or heard about it.

-2nd: not finding an easy pre-installed solution at most stores (you got to search or ask for it most of the time)

-3rd: lack of a geek friend to help in the transition. come on people, adopt an avg. joe/mom or pop

-4th: some incompatibilities on hardware/soft (not such big deal could always get a workaround or double-boot, but again view 3rd)

in conclusion:

Pre-installed / advertised everywhere would bring in 1, 3 and 4 !

mantisdolphin

June 23rd, 2009, 11:30 PM

Not enough big slick games in the league of Fallout series, Blizzard games (Starcraft II! Diablo III!), Oblivion, KOTOR I and II, Bethesda games and Bioware games generally. The porting of Neverwinter Nights has been, to my mind, the only bright spot in the bleak, small shop shareware gaming world that is Linux.

Back in the day I bought Heroes of Might and Magic III from the now defunct Loki (games for Linux) company. I didn't even like MnMIII all that much, but I love the idea of supporting games that play natively in Linux.

I would think the game studios, just from porting already designed and marketed games, would be able to see a decent return on investment from the Linux gaming community. But I must be wrong because no one does it--there must be a greater return on investment from creating all sorts of so-so games for the Windows platform with the occasional "hit" game. The Windows market is so huge that game publishers can count on enough doofuses buying crap to cover the costs of dud games.

I wish someone would port some of the old Microprose games (Orion series, Master of Magic) or old Star Control games to Linux. Copyrights are a be-otch.

Linux is great for tweaking, for the Conky, for the freedom, for the configurability, for the variety, for learning about computers, for web surfing, for writing, for spreadsheet stuff (Office apps are fine), for photo/graphics (Gimp and Inkscape--but still not Photoshop level). I wish sound production and editing were a little easier. Yes, Linus is great and long live the Open Source/GNU/GPL way.

Installation and fonts are a lot better now than back in the late 90s when I was installing Debian/Gnome on 386 and 486 machines to see what worked. Linux has matured wonderfully since then. I'm distro hopping presently between Ubuntu, Crunchbang, and Puppy, thinking about checking into Arch (maybe the Chakra project).

I tried the recently released Fedora 11 LXDE version and it was just a little too squirrelly. I don't quite grok ext4 yet nor how it's supposed to play nice with other ext3 distros on my harddrives. I keep coming back to Ubuntu because I'm not a developer, nor am I a talented or trained hacker/tweaker (getting Puppy to print through a wireless network on a crappy old HP1000 Laserjet through CUPS took enough of my time--printing in Linux is something of a minor miracle in my opinion.) Ubuntu does a lot of stuff that saves me hours having to reinvent wheels and whatnot.

Laysan_A

June 24th, 2009, 12:52 AM

Well, I said it was hardware compatibility, and that's true, but that's been a huge given forever. Microsoft, after all, (if the leaked internal memos are to be believed) makes it their business to change the standards every so often just for this purpose (to make it harder for the competition).

However, I do think that a reliable wine is almost as important. I haven't logged onto windows for months now, and I don't miss it, but some things just don't work as well with the current software available. I admit, too, that I just like some of my old favorites in windows.

As long as windows continues to be the dominate force in the marketplace, the inability to run windows based software in linux, as it runs in windows, will always be an obstacle to linux adoption. Wine should be given more resources if that is an important goal, and it should be an important goal, since it would in effect solve the highest obstacle of hardware compatibility, too.

stinger30au

June 24th, 2009, 01:59 AM

If you had to choose the biggest barrier to Linux / Ubuntu adoption, what would you choose?

the simple fact of the matter is there is millions who dont know linux exists

Sublime Porte

June 24th, 2009, 06:09 AM

Well, I said it was hardware compatibility

Personally I've found hardware compatibility to be pretty good. I've got about 7 machines that run Ubuntu, and only one of them actually needed any tinkering to work (to get proper screen resolution), the rest worked flawlessly without intervention. In contrast, installing XP on some of those machines involves hours on end of downloading drivers and updates. Yes once upon a time hardware compatibility was a major problem, but not today. Doesn't mean it'll work ootb for everyone, but it's pretty good overall for the majority of users.

blur xc

June 24th, 2009, 02:21 PM

I didn't read every post so maybe this has been already stated-

Having to come to internet forums to find tech support. I'm a touch on the geeky side, and I like learning new things, so I don't mind spending countless hours reading posts trying to figure stuff out. But to a lot of people with a problem will be turned off by help the tells them to "try" 10 different confusing things and have none of them end up working.

I've had trouble making google earth work- and after many hours of searching forums and archives I finally found a solution that worked, but I still don't have a solution to fix the usb ports in Virtual Box.

BM

Sublime Porte

June 24th, 2009, 11:25 PM

but I still don't have a solution to fix the usb ports in Virtual Box

Are you using the open source version which comes in the repos? If so, it doesn't have USB support. Download the full version from virtualbox site.

Ojustaboo

June 25th, 2009, 05:41 AM

Biggest problem I see is as follows.

With windows, someone that knows very little about their PC goes to a shop and browses their software. They buy it, insert the CD/DVD and the installation starts and 99% of the time the end result is the software working.

With hardware it's probably 80% of the time it's working, but a simple visit to their web site and downloading an update and all is fine.

For those situations where it's not fine (or they feel out of their depth), the average non techy user can either phone up a help line or consult a friend. The vast vast majority of these helplines, support pages and friends know absolutely nothing about Linux. That is it's biggest downfall.

Only a couple of days ago I got LOTRO working under wine, logged into the game and told my kin (clan/guild) I finally had it working under Linux. The general response was either "why?" or (jokingly) "geek". When games as a rule just work under windows, what is the point of trying to get the average user mucking around with Linux and wine.

Almost without exception every home user I know with any kids (and a vast majority without) play some windows games. Yes there are numerous great games in Linux. But they want to play what they see their friends playing, or what they can buy off the shelf in Asda.

It's taken me nearly a week of playing around to get LOTRO to run in an acceptable way under Linux. I still have a few niggling problems and I still don't have anti-aliasing working and I have to turn Pulseaudio off before starting the game

Then there's sound card issues. In windows, I simply selected something like Digital out from the soundcards icon and my sound card optical out port was enabled and I get surround sound in most games. Under Linux I had to tick IEC958 to get it working (I first had to go into preferences to get the switch to show up). Even then I don't get 5.1 sound in games (well haven't yet).

Even those few hardware and software sites that do have Linux help on their web pages, unlike windows where t's a matter of downloading the latest patch exe and double clicking, it will usually involve you going to the command line.

Then there's the overwhelming opinion from most Linux users that office 2007 is better than any Linux alternative and that Photoshop is miles better than Gimp. When you can buy office 2007 for around £65 and use it on up to 3 PC's the price isn't that much of an issue (a student can get the whole office 2007 professional edition for £40)

I enjoy using Linux and have moved over to having Ubuntu as my main op system. I still have a partition with windows on it as I own the CS4 suite. If I'm 100% honest, if I didn't like tinkering around with shell scripts and system files, Linux wouldn't be for me.

It's come on in leaps and bounds but still has a long way to go. That's without all the confusion over the many different distros out there (and the fanboy attitude each distro inevitably gets from certain followers)

Sublime Porte

June 25th, 2009, 10:38 AM

At present Linux is not the ideal platform for games. Simple as that.

But I really think you overstate the amount of game usage on computers. A lot of people never ever play games, and most business computers are not used for games. Also consider that Mac OSX supports very few games, yet it's not really a barrier to it's adoption.

Not saying it isn't important, it definitely is, and Linux has a lot of offer gamers and game developers in the future, but at this present point in time, it simply isn't feasible.

The way it will come about is like this:

People adopt Linux -> Game producers want to tap emerging market -> Linux ports appear.

Linux needs to get a bigger marketshare, before game developers will bother. It might seem like a chicken and egg dilemma, but it's not really. Linux must be adopted by non-Gamers for now, simple as that. Game developers don't really care if gamers use it, just if people are using it. When more people use it, they'll develop for it. Then the train will be at the gamer's station, and they will jump on board.

philcamlin

June 25th, 2009, 10:39 AM

not meny people care for terminal and stuff

like the rest of my family they want something that does what they want and then they go on with their day.

ubuntu does the same so i dont know why its less popular like the support is there :popcorn:

M$ doesnt have a support forum like this

AoSteve

June 25th, 2009, 11:50 AM

I didn't read through the thread, nor am I going to. But I think I have a pretty good barrier here...

I love Ubuntu, Linux in general when comparison to windows. However, teaching my wife and my two little brothers how to run a linux operating system is ... difficult.

My wife (27) is picking up on it really well and actually admits, "It's better then vista!"

My first little brother, (17): And I quote, "How the heck do I use paint?"

My other little brother, (15): I quote again, "Where's windows?"

user11

August 7th, 2009, 11:19 AM

Biggest barrier is obvious, it's PC games that are locked into Microsoft's stronghold. I think we forgot an important lesson that was well learned back in the 80's, what drives a product into the consumer's hands is nagging kids. If game developer's made releases that can work on OpenGL, we would see Linux spread like wildfire once people started to learn that they can play their favorite types of games without crashing constantly as in the directX format.

Tipped OuT

August 7th, 2009, 04:57 PM

These are the main three. Deny it if you will.

1. Hardware problems in comparison to other OS's
2. The mindset of people - Linux is for geeks!
3. Lack of awareness - Linux? Never heard of it!

Most people haven't even heard of Linux, and if they have, they'd get the intention it's for geeks (which it kind of is). No one I know that's not a geek, wants to be a geek, or be viewed as a geek. And then you have the hardware problems, due to bad drivers and lack of support, it's also a problem.

musicisbest

August 7th, 2009, 04:59 PM

The biggest barrier IMHO is having to relearn ways of doing things. A lot of average users don't have the patience to learn a new (better) program; nevermind a new OS. They know how to use "XYZ" software, are comfortable with and any benefit gained by adopting something new is not worth the effort and frustration of learning something new. Not to mention the time involved.

The fact of being free doesn't matter for many; case in point: piratebay, isohunt, demonoid etc.

The biggest barrier to Linux: it's different. The fact that that is its biggest strength is lost to most PC users.

Also, recursive acronyms. :)

RANT ALERT!!!

Average PC user:

What the hell is G-N-U? It's pronounced Guh-noo'? Really? A recursive acronym? WTF???

Most geeks, myself included, get a kick out of puns and word play. Average Joe PC User thinks it's retarded.

oldsoundguy

August 7th, 2009, 06:20 PM

I think if news articles stopped making it sound like a free version of Windows that has no problems whatsoever, then our retention from the uptake would increase dramatically.

On the opposite side of the press coin, IF the press would report the EFFECTED operating systems .. and those NOT effected .. for every major attack such as the recent DOS attack on Twitter and Facebook, there would be more CONVERTS to the basic system.
Granted, some machines will not function out of the box under ANY Linux build because of the nagging hardware issues (not always the fault of the Linux code writers .. but most newbs do not know that .. and really do NOT care where the blame for inoperative items falls. They just want it to work!)
Golden glowing reports of just how good the Linux system is should be tempered .. but it should be tempered with the "you are changing operating systems for a reason" (because the one you are using failed you and it does not reach expectations.)
AND tempered with "remember, nothing is perfect!"

emrys

August 12th, 2009, 12:05 PM

The single most important problem for a lot of people is Openoffice compatibility. At least in environments where sharing documents is common.

aysiu

August 12th, 2009, 12:10 PM

The single most important problem for a lot of people is Openoffice compatibility. At least in environments where sharing documents is common.
Just tell them to use OpenOffice in Windows, then. It's cross-platform. It works in Mac, too.

Regenweald

August 12th, 2009, 02:26 PM

If you had to choose the biggest barrier to Linux / Ubuntu adoption, what would you choose?

No support from hardware manufacturers. If the manufacturers actually designed drivers for linux, new users would no longer have to struggle getting random hardware to work and they could judge the distributions based solely on the experience and not the hell of getting stuff to work.

An added bonus to this would be that we would now have thousands of talented developers who could now invest time in many other projects and not have to waste time engineering and reverse engineering drivers. Linux would improve exponentially.

robbieo11

September 30th, 2009, 11:01 PM

the WORST THING for my wifes migration is photoshop and Majic Jack

0100TheGeek

October 1st, 2009, 07:15 PM

MS is what I used in school and at work. I use Ubuntu at home, now, but I keep windows installed just in case I have to be 100% compatible with work.

shaunsmith_99

October 2nd, 2009, 02:54 AM

If you had to choose the biggest barrier to Linux / Ubuntu adoption, what would you choose?

Microsoft....Dumps Millions per year into making sure everyone out there knows they are the best. Mac....Dumps millions per year into making sure everyone knows they are best. If it were all about drivers only, then Microsoft would have been hit a lot harder when it tried to spoon feed the market Vista.

There was a computer shop here in town that started running RedHat on it's demo machines and a few months ago they told me they were moving more Linux machines than Vista's. It's all about getting it in front of the public. Nobody wants to try it when they have to download a huge file, learn to rip an ISO, burn the ISO (without an error, mind you) and then play.

Remember AOL flooding the streets with their CD's? I think that would be the logical step...

steviecandtheplacetobe

October 2nd, 2009, 05:34 PM

I can't get Cubase to run on Linux *cries*

As a sound engineering student, we need software to mix music on and i love Cubase. I also use Ardour quite a bit - but i just prefer Cubase.

I'm getting a new pooter soon, as Windows/dell is being a complete c**t so I'm getting a mac.
So until Steinberg (et al) make Cubase available for linux - as long as we're not using sh*tty MSWindows, who cares?

[BTW i'm using Audacity, Mozilla Firefox & Thunderbird, Pidgin, Frostwire, GIMP, OpenOffice.org, Hydrogen, Rosegarden, Ardour on Ubuntu & XP]
But i still like stuff like iMovie, Logic, Garageband, Cubase etc
I can tell i won't fit in here.

magog45

October 2nd, 2009, 07:34 PM

A number of issues were touched on and all were quite valid as to why Linux isn't taking over the desktop. If you discount gaming I think there are two key issues, one being commercial software, Photoshop etc, the other is the actual install of software. In a Windoze environment you simply run a file and it installs, the architecture is known and if an upgrade of activex or some other such software is needed generally it is done automatically. For those of us that have been using Linux for many years that isn't a big deal, but most end users want their computer to be like their car just turn the key. I have migrated a few people to Linux including my 84 year old mother and they are very happy until they have to install something and the whole dependency thing rears its ugly head or worse yet a new hardware device that requires drivers be installed. I would suggest a standardization of the file structure and also that the community settle on one or two package styles, rpm,deb, and when a dependency is not met then the item needs to be downloaded and installed automatically or at the very least easily downloaded and placed in a directory where the package can find it. Oh yes and a word to Dell, a Linux powered computer needs to reflect the free software in the price.

jrusso2

October 2nd, 2009, 07:36 PM

No commercial applications. Unable to run MS Office or Photoshop,Quicken or other software people might already own or use in their business.

Tibuda

October 2nd, 2009, 07:42 PM

No commercial applications. Unable to run MS Office or Photoshop,Quicken or other software people might already own or use in their business.

This. It doesn't matter which OS is more friendly, or prettier, if people won't be able to run software that they really need, especially if they are going to collaborate with Windows users.

aysiu

October 2nd, 2009, 07:47 PM

This. It doesn't matter which OS is more friendly, or prettier, if people won't be able to run software that they really need, especially if they are going to collaborate with Windows users.
Right. Which is why Mac OS X suffers from some of the same adoption problems Linux does (gaming, certain Windows-only commercial applications, CUPS printing).

The good news is that a lot of Windows users do not use Windows-only applications, so there's no legitimate technical limitation to their using Linux (it has to do more with fear of change, fear of the unknown, ignorance, etc.).

krimzonstarr

October 25th, 2009, 03:19 PM

I still believe that the single greatest "barrier" to linux/ubuntu/open source adoption is OEM install. Most users that I have been friends with, talked to, known, seen, etc... Use Windows XP/Vista/7 or Mac OS's for one reason: It's what was there when they bought the computer. As more manufacturers include FOSS on their retail product, adoption will quicken. Only then will there be a viable open source competition with M$ windows.

aysiu

October 25th, 2009, 03:26 PM

It's not enough to be preinstalled, though.

Preinstallations have to be optimized. They have to come with appropriate documentation (no Windows documentation or Windows drivers, etc.). They have to be priced competitively. There has to be proper education and marketing around what the preinstalled option is good for over Windows--safe web browsing, basic productivity, web-based applications, easy application management (and what it is not good for--iPhones, commercial Windows games, AutoCAD, Adobe CS3, Microsoft OneNote).

johnzollo

October 25th, 2009, 04:04 PM

aysiu

October 25th, 2009, 06:22 PM

You all have great ideas about Linux and its adoption -- that's awesome. The question is: what are we going to do about it? Ubuntu is already available on certain dell models (I was looking at a mini10 notebook with it) -- that's awesome. Maybe Canonical (or other Linux vendors) needs to partner with hardware vendors to offer PCs with Ubuntu (or another distro) pre-installed. Maybe we need to make Linux better. Maybe we need to do both. Sitting here talking about it isn't changing anything though. Maybe we should come up with a plan & execute?

-John
Why do you assume those who are talking here are only talking and doing nothing else? My last two computers I bought with Linux preinstalled. I'm voting with my wallet. I'm writing documentation. I'm helping new users.

Others here are contributing code, filing bug reports, donating to projects.

Talking about change and making the change happen aren't mutually exclusive. Not everything has to be like the People's Front of Judea.

joeoshawa

November 7th, 2010, 11:09 AM

I see quite a few people mentioning "having to use command line" or "installing apps" and I must say this is to me entirely an ignorance problem. THIS IS NOT MEANT TO BE OFFENSIVE. I realise it sounds that way but i mean this in the true meaning of the word. I am not a geek i just have to learn the ends to the means. I love the Compiz stuff and say what you want you just cannot at least nearly as easily do what you can with a windows desktop that you can with Linux. Many windows problems cannot be solved because you don't have a command line option of fixing you have no control or way of fixing when an install or program goes bad and with Ubuntu in 98% of the time when something does go wrong i start the command in a terminal copy and paste the error in Google and there is the solution. Installing apps all you have to do is look through the software center or synaptic and ta da there it is click install it downloads installs and puts a menu option to start it and with 10.10 if you do a search and download for something not in those when it downloads the software center opens and you just click install. In windows you have to search either online or go out and buy your software then it has its own installer which makes the menus a pain because if you want to remove it it has to have the uninstall in the menus making the menus humongous and a pain and you could just end up giving yourself a virus. People need information with that many would already be using it
just my two cents. and btw thank you for making my desktop spin in space turn to smoke explode burn wave and wobble and the ability to change my login theme and background easily