What is keeping Ubuntu from topping the list of operating systems?

[askyourpc.com]

Any ideas?

[SomeGuyDude]

- It doesn't come preloaded.

- Largely because Canonical can't offer kickbacks to PC manufacturers

- Not a lot of games

- Missing proprietary software that many people want.

- A sadly high number of people don't trust FOSS under the belief that it can't be as "high quality" as the stuff you buy at the store.

[linux5uper]

Any ideas?

The "domination" of Windows and Mac OS :) By this I mean that they are proprietary, each copy is sold for profit etc. Ubuntu is not aggressive enough in that way, it sort of floats around for people to grab instead of invading their space uninvited.

[exploder]

Ubuntu has everything in place to be on top. The problem is it's default look.Three moths after a release everything is fine tuned and in great shape. Ubuntu has no bling the other operating systems do.

[askyourpc.com]

Ubuntu has everything in place to be on top. The problem is it's default look.Three moths after a release everything is fine tuned and in great shape. Ubuntu has no bling the other operating systems do.

That is what I thought. I don't meant to be critical but when you start of with Ubuntu is is brown gray and dull. Windows vista and Macintosh are exciting in a sense. I understand that there are some systems that cannot and should not handle something like Compiz but it does make the OS way more attractive. I am always waiting for a "new look" for Ubuntu.

[daniel.hodge]

In all honesty, I wouldn't want Ubuntu to top the list. More attention is great, but some of it may be unwanted attention. I like the fact that I can tell people I run linux and they have no idea what I'm talking about. Keep it "floating around for people to grab". I like it that way.

[aysiu]

What list are you referring to? Can I see this operating systems list?

[3rdalbum]

It's not preloaded

Most PC games are not written for Linux

Nvidia's graphic drivers create suction around a set of donkey testicles

[askyourpc.com]

What list are you referring to? Can I see this operating systems list?

This list is just a generalization of what OS is at the top in terms of usage and sales.

[aysiu]

This list is just a generalization of what OS is at the top in terms of usage and sales.
Is it a list comparing preinstalled operating systems to operating systems you have to install yourself?

[jrusso2]

I feel like a broken record but Linux is not ready for most non technical users. It has to be preinstalled. Work wireless, microphones, webcams, etc as easily as Windows.

It must have commercial software.

Until these things happen it will be fine for us technical users but limited on the desktop.

[aysiu]

I feel like a broken record, too, but Linux actually is ready for most non-technical users if it is preinstalled. Windows also must be preinstalled for non-technical users, and it is, which is the main reason non-technical users use it.

Of course, the one qualification I'll make is that almost everyone I know has an iPod and has bought stuff off the iTunes music store, so AmaroK won't fly for those DRM-protected AAC files.

[SomeGuyDude]

I feel like a broken record, too, but Linux actually is ready for most non-technical users if it is preinstalled. Windows also must be preinstalled for non-technical users, and it is, which is the main reason non-technical users use it.

Of course, the one qualification I'll make is that almost everyone I know has an iPod and has bought stuff off the iTunes music store, so AmaroK won't fly for those DRM-protected AAC files.

Like I said above, it comes down to three basic problems: you can't get it preinstalled for cheaper, you're lacking proprietary software, and devices aren't built for it.

It's a sad irony of life that it's actually cheaper to buy a machine with Windows and then replace it with Linux, but that's where we're at.

[Kevbert]

Too many problems with display and wireless drivers. They aren't plug and play unlike Windows. Games support is rapidly improving.
Advertising would need to be more aggressive and more articles in mainstream computer magazines would help. For example, in Personal Computer World Magazine, it's rare to get more than a page or two on the linux platform (including Ubuntu, openSuse, Fedora etc). This magazine is available in many countries and not just the UK, so many people still aren't even aware of Ubuntu.
Also many of the more mainstream computer manufacturers treat linux as an operating system for low end PCs only. For example I received a leaflet with our newspaper for Acer. The only PC advertised with linux is the Aspire One and that uses Linpus Linux Lite. All other PCs come with some form of Windows Vista and on the front page there is a note at the top 'Acer recommends Windows Vista Home Premium' (it should really be Ubuntu).
I know that Intel are promoting Linux, but I believe IBM/Lenovo have withdrawn Linux as one of their OS (why?).
Just my two cents...

[smoker]

i think ubuntu is better progressing as it does at the moment, slowly but surely increasing in use.

[pietjanjaap]

People have never heard of ubuntu.

Wenn you say it's free, they laugh, they(ubuntu) lie, in beginning it's free, later not.

Not able to play games, so young people will never use it, windows will stay on top because of this.

Ubuntu has to install better, with working videocard(so you do not have to change this to get it good, and do not get a white screen), things like wifi that a lot of people use that does not work.
For normal user that know nothing they will not keep on using it.
Like i pluged in a foto camera, nothing happend, it was not visible,in f-spot it was visible, i wil look for it but normal users not.

Everything should be able to be changed with a gui. And not textmode.

Make a ubuntu install cd, so you can choose 2 diffirent installs systems,
1 normal like now, 2 with more things that are usefull, like gksudo nautulis and gedit etc.


Programs like hjsplit(with gui) should be better available and not in textmode, people go back to windows, this program is an example. So find out what are the most used programs, make that these are available in a gui format.

The biggest is the games playing, this will stop ubuntu for home use.

I like ubuntu, i will also put time in it, ubuntu is very good i think.
Games i play in xp dualboot.

[oldos2er]

- It doesn't come preloaded.



Dell's sold Ubuntu preloaded laptops and desktops for over a year.

[aysiu]

Dell's sold Ubuntu preloaded laptops and desktops for over a year.
1. Only on certain models
2. Only in certain countries
3. Never advertised or with a promotional discount
4. With a disclaimer that basically scared Windows users away from it
5. Tucked away on a part of the website only Linux users would find

[SuperSonic4]

I'd say familiarity. Many users have used windows for years and they know it.They know it's strength and weaknesses and there is a huge database on error codes (even if I do think UF are better). In short people don't like change

[Riffer]

i think ubuntu is better progressing as it does at the moment, slowly but surely increasing in use.

+1 In the short time I've been using Ubuntu (June '07) Linux has gone from less the 1% to 3% of total usage of computers. Thats an amazing feat, especially when there is little to no advertising. Couple that very lukewarm reception for OEM (DELL et al) these numbers speak volumes on how well Linux and Ubuntu is doing.

It'll take years before Linux has a market share to rival Apple let alone MS, which is good. It will allow Canonical to grow in an orderly fashion.

[billgoldberg]

Any ideas?

Microsoft and osx.

--

Really, as long as people can't download any piece of software on the internet and install it like you would a .exe on Windows, they are going to complain.

I had a friend over in my house this weekend and he didn't understand why his poker software (everest poker) wouldn't run on my pc's.

I suspect a lot of users don't really care that they are using windows, they just want their software.

[jrusso2]

I feel like a broken record, too, but Linux actually is ready for most non-technical users if it is preinstalled. Windows also must be preinstalled for non-technical users, and it is, which is the main reason non-technical users use it.

Of course, the one qualification I'll make is that almost everyone I know has an iPod and has bought stuff off the iTunes music store, so AmaroK won't fly for those DRM-protected AAC files.

It really isn't even ready preinstalled thats why all the returns.

People have a lot of problems getting their printers working or webcams, even the webcam people got with the UMPC installed didn't work with the apps !

They were told to use command line to try to get them working so they just returned them.

[jrusso2]

+1 In the short time I've been using Ubuntu (June '07) Linux has gone from less the 1% to 3% of total usage of computers. Thats an amazing feat, especially when there is little to no advertising. Couple that very lukewarm reception for OEM (DELL et al) these numbers speak volumes on how well Linux and Ubuntu is doing.

It'll take years before Linux has a market share to rival Apple let alone MS, which is good. It will allow Canonical to grow in an orderly fashion.

Last I heard Linux increased from something like .69% to .83%

[howlingmadhowie]

It really isn't even ready preinstalled thats why all the returns.

People have a lot of problems getting their printers working or webcams, even the webcam people got with the UMPC installed didn't work with the apps !

They were told to use command line to try to get them working so they just returned them.

that's because the oems do a bad job of preinstalling it.

[Kevbert]

Dell's sold Ubuntu preloaded laptops and desktops for over a year.

In their latest UK advertising leaflet they make no mention of Ubuntu or Linux and on the top of every page they state 'Dell recommends Windows Vista Home Premium'.

[richg]

Linux culture is the reason. Techies do not want the unclean using Linux.

Ubuntu is at least trying. Mark Shuttleworth is doing a pretty good job. Linspire/Freespire I started with about five years ago was on that path but MR sold out so they are a non issue.

Look at ALL the issues on any Linux forum and you can see what the issues are.
I know many friends and family using computers. Maybe half know they are using XP. I know two people who pay to have their computers "cleaned" about once a year. Something like getting the oil changed in their cars. They do not care what is under the hood, they just want it to run. Most computer users want something that works.
I gave one brother a 98SE desktop and a Windows 2000 laptop. Both were working just fine. About six months later, the computers had slowed to a crawl. He would not bother with Linux and I gave him iso disks to try.

But this is a good subject for those who are bored and want to rant, about anything.

Rich:)

I doubt Linux will ever come to ten percent. Stuff is changing at an ever increasing rate.

[qazwsx]

They do not care what is under the hood, they just want it to run. Most computer users want something that works.

Yep. My sister called me another day. She insisted that I should install M$ Office 2007 into her Windows (which is really Kubuntu by the way and absolutely no MS crap is installed :lolflag:). Reason: it is free and everyone uses it. Then I explained her actual cost and send her video how to open docx mimetype files with OpenOffice and she is happy now. Kubuntu or Windows she can't tell the diffrence. For normal user OS itself is a big mystery.

[master5o1]

Ubuntu has everything in place to be on top. The problem is it's default look.Three moths after a release everything is fine tuned and in great shape. Ubuntu has no bling the other operating systems do.

I started using Ubuntu back in March 2006. I started with Breezy Badger, 5.10. I had troubles with my wireless, which I solved using help from various members of this forum, for which I am still in debt to.

At the time, I didn't really like Human too much. I may have tried a few other normal GTK/GTK+ themes. At around Edgy Eft, 6.10, I installed Beryl. I effectively went overkill on theming. Right up until Hardy Heron I used alternative themes - Compiz/Beryl + Emerald, (+ AWN), (+ Screenlets), etc.

For the entire time I have had my Laptop (see sig.), I have not deferred from the default: Human. I have realised by way of "trying them all," that Human is actually rather beautiful -- simplicity is beautiful.

Of course, if a future release contains a default theme that I do not like, I will likely revert to Human. If a future release does not contain Human (unlikely?), and I do not like the default, then I will find an alternative.


tl;dr: I like Human after trying `all` the others and disliking them.

[master5o1]

Linux culture is the reason. Techies do not want the unclean using Linux.

A lot of people are like this. It also stems from the [same/similar] idea that as Linux's market share increases, so will the number of viruses.

Maybe half know they are using XP. I know two people who pay to have their computers "cleaned" about once a year. Something like getting the oil changed in their cars. They do not care what is under the hood, they just want it to run. Most computer users want something that works.

I think that to be allowed to use/own a computer they should know what (by simplified definition) an operating system is, and what operating system their computer is running. I would accept a definition like "My computer runs Windows XP. It allows me to install programs like a web browser and office tools. Without it I would not be able to use my computer."
blah.

[bikeboy]

Inertia.

[jangari]

I think that to be allowed to use/own a computer they should know what (by simplified definition) an operating system is, and what operating system their computer is running.

I disagree. Of course it'd be good if people knew more, but it's not entirely necessary. It's no more necessary than knowing what an internal combustion engine is to knowing how to drive, or knowing what optics entails to enjoying hubble telescope images.

On the broader issue, I think everyone here is right when they say MS or Apple OSs coming preloaded is the primary reason. It stems from this that linux would just require more work, and its functionality is a bonus, not a given.

My brother and I argue about this all the time. He's a recent Mac convert and always goes on about how good things like AppleTV are, and his most common reason for saying such things is that 'it integrates neatly with iTunes, and other macs in the house, Youtube is just a click on the remote away, etc.' Never mind the built-in restrictions on it: it integrates only with iTunes, forcing you to use iTunes if you want to use AppleTV, and the absolute inability to access the internet with it.

[cardinals_fan]

I think that to be allowed to use/own a computer they should know what (by simplified definition) an operating system is, and what operating system their computer is running. I would accept a definition like "My computer runs Windows XP. It allows me to install programs like a web browser and office tools. Without it I would not be able to use my computer."
blah.
People shouldn't have to pass a computer literacy test to use a computer. If they want to be ignorant and click on the links for free screensavers, so be it. That's their problem and not mine.

[ESE150]

I disagree. Of course it'd be good if people knew more, but it's not entirely necessary. It's no more necessary than knowing what an internal combustion engine is to knowing how to drive, or knowing what optics entails to enjoying hubble telescope images.
Agreed.

[stinger30au]

Any ideas?


i have thought about this long and hard

i reckon the mian reason is cos its free

lets look at microsofts way of doing this
since day one thay have charged pople like a wounded bull for anyhting

all the money they made they put back in to the company and bought companies out like theres no tomorrow and bullied their way to the top

lets face it, its a cruel tough world. im sorry, but it is.

if ubuntu charged *EVERYONE* for a copy even it was only $40 imagine the revenue it would produce.... imagine the extra programers you could hire...


it had nothing to do with the fact they had games or utiltys for the platform, the third party developers did that work for them

its the fact they had contstant money comin in the door and a constant crew of people working on it, not just done as a hobby or sideline project

dont get me worng here, i love ubuntu and i know ubuntu have got money coming in thats to canonical, but money is what the whole prcores move faster, no matter what your into be it big or small business, linux or windows or hell even your local suburb football team would not be there with out doing the fund rasing it does with car washes, jumble sales, poker mahcines in thir club house, chook raffles and the rest


open your eyes folks, its not the games or apps or some killer app someone keeps looking for....


its *MONEY* plain and simple

plus being a jiant school yard bully also helps a lot too.

[howlingmadhowie]

if ubuntu charged *EVERYONE* for a copy even it was only $40 imagine the revenue it would produce.... imagine the extra programers you could hire...


if canonical did this, their userbase would be reduced to a fraction of its current size overnight.

gnu/linux has only become so good and so popular because it is free as in freedom and free as in cost. free as in freedom allowed people to work on the code and contribute. free as in cost got the marketing people talking about it. changing this would kill off ubuntu in short order.

[stinger30au]

just cos its linux it does not have to be free of charge nor does it have to be open source

again another freedom so many people fail to see and everyone wants to take for granted their software will always be free and this is not the case at all

heres one example of some closed source software that you need to pay for that runs in linux

http://www.zedonet.com/en_p_turboprint_info.phtml

[howlingmadhowie]

just cos its linux it does not have to be free of charge nor does it have to be open source

again another freedom so many people fail to see and everyone wants to take for granted their software will always be free and this is not the case at all

heres one example of some closed source software that you need to pay for that runs in linux

http://www.zedonet.com/en_p_turboprint_info.phtml

linux is open-source and will always be so. it's licensed under gpl2.

if people want to write closed-source software that runs on gnu/linux that's their problem. it doesn't interest me and it doesn't interest the vast majority of programmers who have made gnu/linux what it is.