Linux for the masses? But which Distro?

[the lemming]

When Joe Public buys a Microsoft OS they usually go for a Vista product and when an Apple Mac fan gets an OS once again its pretty straight forward what they are going to get. However when somebody new wants to experiment with Linux or move away from propriety OS's in general then they, or specifically me, are blown away by all the varieties of Linux on offer to them.

Can anybody see a time when there will be one standard Distro that Jo Public can choose to compete or even replace the mainstream OS's of microsoft and mac?

[zmjjmz]

The distros aren't all that much different.


mv . ../Recurring\ Discussions ?

[ibutho]

Can anybody see a time when there will be one standard Distro that Jo Public can choose to compete or even replace the mainstream OS's of microsoft and mac?
I don't think there will ever be one standard distro. As long as the needs of individuals interested in Linux are different, there is always going to be room for different types of distros. As for going mainstream, it depends on where you are and what you are using the OS for. For server use, Linux is already mainstream. For desktop use, in some places its already mainstream and in others, many people have never even heard about it

[koenn]

when somebody new wants to experiment with Linux or move away from propriety OS's in general then they, or specifically me, are blown away by all the varieties of Linux on offer to them.

Can anybody see a time when there will be one standard Distro that Jo Public can choose to compete or even replace the mainstream OS's of microsoft and mac?

If you don't know the difference between all the available varieties, it doesn't really matter which one you choose, does it ? You can pick one at random, and if you don't like it or run into trouble with it, just pick an other one.

Or you can go where so many have gone before and pick a distro that's reputed for being user friendly or newbie-friendly (Mint ? Ubuntu ?). while in fact you might as well try Debian, which has a reputation for being a "technical" distro, but it's so easy to set up and looks so much like Ubuntu that if you ran them side by side, you 'd have trouble telling the difference (hint: ubuntu is the brown one)

The "grand unified linux distro" is a typical reaction of a newbie facing the many distro's available. It's never going to happen, there's no "one size fits all". Even in your comparison with Windows : Microsoft typically offers 4 to 6 versions of every OS release (Basic, Home, Web Edition, Enterprise, Advanced, Ultimate, ...) and that's only the OS ; Linux distro's also offer a selection of applications + a default configuration for them. It's next to impossible to come up with a selection that suits everyone, everywhere, all the time. So different distr's offer different presets, and in the end, you can still have anything, anywhere, any time, by simple adding stuff from the immense pool of linux-compatible software.


mv . ../Recurring\ Discussions ?
soon.

[Linuxratty]

I agree with koenn on this one..Linux is Linux is Linux...I just don't think one version of Linux will ever emerge and mop the floor with the rest..I just don't see it happening..
Time will tell, however.

[DrMega]

I agree with koenn on this one..Linux is Linux is Linux...I just don't think one version of Linux will ever emerge and mop the floor with the rest..I just don't see it happening..
Time will tell, however.

I can't agree. I tried several distros before Ubuntu, and while some looked and worked OK, none of them disproved the stereotype that Linux is for geeks. I was about to give up and just stick with Windows when a colleague recommended Ubuntu. That was nearly two years ago and I've been using Ubuntu ever since.

Quite recently, Dell decided to offer Linux preinstalled on some machines. Get which distro they chose?

[koenn]

I can't agree.
Yet you prove my point :
If you don't know what to choose, go where so many have gone before and pick a distro that's reputed for being user friendly or newbie-friendly - such as Ubuntu.

And while Ubuntu is a good entry-level distro, people who prefer more control about how things are set up, might not be overly enthousiastic. They might prefer on of the more technical distro's. While Ubuntu appeals to home users, RedHat still rules the corporate environment, and Debian is often the system of choice for dedicated servers or as a foundation to build a specilized, custom environment on.

So, how is all of that ever going to be satisfied in a single, unified distribution ?

[Vadi]

Any human-friendly distro - Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, or Fedora.

[cardinals_fan]

Any human-friendly distro - Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, or Fedora.
So I'm not human for finding Arch and Slackware easier?

[maniacmusician]

So I'm not human for finding Arch and Slackware easier?
Sure you are...you're just a bit of a higher-level being :)

[Vadi]

So I'm not human for finding Arch and Slackware easier?

Not the average human, no. You're a more technology-oriented one?

[cardinals_fan]

Not the average human, no. You're a more technology-oriented one?
I suppose... :)

[aysiu]

If Jo Public or Joe Public is using Linux and hasn't had her or his arm twisted by a Linux geek, that means Linux comes preinstalled, which means there isn't an initial overwhelming choice. Just use whatever is preinstalled. You can always switch up later if you're so inclined.

That's what's going on with the Eee PCs. People who buy the Linux version automatically get Xandros. They don't have to be overwhelmed by choices. They get Xandros. Now if they use Xandros for a few months and want to explorer eeeXubuntu or Puppeee or Eeedora, that's up to them.

In other words, this question makes no sense. There will never be a time when Jo Publics and Joe Publics en masse will be downloading, installing, and configuring their own distros. Preinstalled all the way for those people. Only power users and geeks install their own operating systems.

[koenn]

If Jo Public or Joe Public is using Linux and hasn't had her or his arm twisted by a Linux geek, that means Linux comes preinstalled, which means there isn't an initial overwhelming choice. ...
Then how come this question about too much choice and we need a single standard distro keeps popping up ?

[aysiu]

Then how come this question about too much choice and we need a single standard distro keeps popping up ?
Well, it's not Jo or Joe Public asking these questions or pushing for a unified distro. It's power users and geeks who are asking these questions and making these suggestions.

Right now, there aren't that many Linux-preinstalled solutions on the mass market for Jo or Joe Public. They still have the choices between Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, XP, XP, XP, XP, Mac, Mac, and Mac.

Is the choice confusing for power users who want to install Linux over Windows or set up a dual boot themselves? Yes. If Linux were popular enough for average users to have as an option, then it wouldn't be confusing, because the distro choice would be made by the OEM instead of the user.

[madjr]

Well, it's not Jo or Joe Public asking these questions or pushing for a unified distro. It's power users and geeks who are asking these questions and making these suggestions.

Right now, there aren't that many Linux-preinstalled solutions on the mass market for Jo or Joe Public. They still have the choices between Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, XP, XP, XP, XP, Mac, Mac, and Mac.

Is the choice confusing for power users who want to install Linux over Windows or set up a dual boot themselves? Yes. If Linux were popular enough for average users to have as an option, then it wouldn't be confusing, because the distro choice would be made by the OEM instead of the user.

very enlightening post :guitar:

oh and to answer which distro will people use.

they will use the popular ones with an "easy-to-use" reputation.

Right now the most popular is ubuntu (for obvious reasons)

Other distros may also be as easy or easier (linuxmint), but the big community is another "big" advantage.


popular distros also start to get pre-installed.

the popular will only become more popular as long as they keep getting better supported and easier to use.

in the netbook front, we still have to see how ubuntu remix compares next to xandros. Only the reviews will tell.

I seen no bad reviews about the eeePC "linux version" yet from the customers. Positive reviews at amazon.

[2cute4u]

If Jo Public or Joe Public is using Linux and hasn't had her or his arm twisted by a Linux geek, that means Linux comes preinstalled, which means there isn't an initial overwhelming choice. Just use whatever is preinstalled. You can always switch up later if you're so inclined.

That's what's going on with the Eee PCs. People who buy the Linux version automatically get Xandros. They don't have to be overwhelmed by choices. They get Xandros. Now if they use Xandros for a few months and want to explorer eeeXubuntu or Puppeee or Eeedora, that's up to them.

In other words, this question makes no sense. There will never be a time when Jo Publics and Joe Publics en masse will be downloading, installing, and configuring their own distros. Preinstalled all the way for those people. Only power users and geeks install their own operating systems.


Even if it's to be installed by OEM's, there still needs to be a distribution designed to be "Linux for the masses" , otherwise there will be no broad base appeal, and no incentive for OEMs to offer it.

There doesn't need to be the only unified Linux distro available. There can still be the thousands of specialized "geek versions" that give geeks the features that they want. But if Linux is ever going to become mainstream on the desktop, there needs to be a single distribution that has the status of the de-facto standard, and is designed for the "average Joe".

I think Unbuntu could be the linux for the masses, but I see 2 big obsticle that are totally unnessecery.

1. The Name: For those who know what it means ubuntu embodies a positive philosophy, but most people wouldn't know what it means. To most people it's a weird sounding name with Third-world overtones. So most people will think of it as being a third world (and third rate) product. the "linux for the masses" needs a name that says it's sleek, powerful and sexy.

2. The default theme: Yes, I know that the them can be changed. But most people use what they get "right out of the box" , and even on this forum alot of people think Ubuntu is ugly ( and flat and Brown reinforces the Third -world image). Vista and Leopard both have a certain wow factor with there default theme. Ubutnu needs a theme that Rocks!

[jeremy1138]

Doesn't the idea of one standard Linux distribution go against the whole idea behind open source software? I thought that the thing that made open source software grow and get better was that one could learn how the software works, make it better and pass it on. If people everywhere are doing this, how could we possibly have one single Linux distribution?

[hvac3901]

Well, it's not Jo or Joe Public asking these questions or pushing for a unified distro. It's power users and geeks who are asking these questions and making these suggestions.

Right now, there aren't that many Linux-preinstalled solutions on the mass market for Jo or Joe Public. They still have the choices between Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, Vista, XP, XP, XP, XP, Mac, Mac, and Mac.

Is the choice confusing for power users who want to install Linux over Windows or set up a dual boot themselves? Yes. If Linux were popular enough for average users to have as an option, then it wouldn't be confusing, because the distro choice would be made by the OEM instead of the user.

I slightly disagree, respectfully. being still so very new to Linux, ubuntu only experience, with the few issues i had with Gutsy, and then just by reading the forum, and seeing people using Ice, Fedora, Ubuntu Kbuntu, you can name them better than me, it is VERY overwhelming and makes one second guess which is best or what they should be using.

so maybe a universal acknowledgement that SUSE, UBUNTU, FEDORA are pretty much the most common distributions and the best place to start for the NEW'b. I think just about all the real geeks and super computer users already found there way to linux in some form or another, so the new'b will be the plug and play, no driver need be found or loaded, or much more complicated than a select and click to make something work. thats going to likely be the level of interaction needed by the majority of new Linux users. JMHO

And of course an OEM selected operating system would mean that is the OS the person will likely get introduced to linux with.

[aysiu]

I don't see how you're disagreeing with me, even slightly.

Whether you like to admit it or not, if you're on the Ubuntu Forums and are thinking about what Linux distro to install, you are a power user if not a self-identified computer geek. So, yes, for power users, the choices are a bit overwhelming.

For people who don't know where to begin, I highly recommend the Linux Distro Chooser quiz:
http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/

When non-power users start using Linux in large numbers, the question of which distro to use will be moot. Market forces will decide which is the consumer-targeted distro (sort of like the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD thing). If Ubuntu is it, all other new-user-friendly distros will base themselves on Ubuntu, and every other distro will be a geek-only, server, or embedded distro.

[cardinals_fan]

For people who don't know where to begin, I highly recommend the Linux Distro Chooser quiz:
http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/

No! Use this quiz (http://polishlinux.org/choose/quiz/) instead. It has more distros and is usually more accurate.
I slightly disagree, respectfully. being still so very new to Linux, ubuntu only experience, with the few issues i had with Gutsy, and then just by reading the forum, and seeing people using Ice, Fedora, Ubuntu Kbuntu, you can name them better than me, it is VERY overwhelming and makes one second guess which is best or what they should be using.

so maybe a universal acknowledgement that SUSE, UBUNTU, FEDORA are pretty much the most common distributions and the best place to start for the NEW'b. I think just about all the real geeks and super computer users already found there way to linux in some form or another, so the new'b will be the plug and play, no driver need be found or loaded, or much more complicated than a select and click to make something work. thats going to likely be the level of interaction needed by the majority of new Linux users. JMHO

And of course an OEM selected operating system would mean that is the OS the person will likely get introduced to linux with.
The "average joe" has not and never will install an OS. Period.

[DrMega]

Yet you prove my point :
If you don't know what to choose, go where so many have gone before and pick a distro that's reputed for being user friendly or newbie-friendly - such as Ubuntu.

I agree. Ubuntu doesn't suit everyone. No one OS can suit everyone. Your question was "Linux for the masses but which Distro?". If we break that question down, you are asking which Distro (singular) is best for the masses (collective majority - not every individual). In my opinion, and in the opinion of a large computer supplier, that one distro for the masses is Ubuntu.

If the original question had been reworded to "Linux for everybody, but which distros, you'd have got a completely different answer;)