Perfect time for a traditional Linux desktop OS!!!

[global citizen]

With Windows Vista's failure and Microsoft concentrating heavily on Windows Seven to release it as soon as possible to replace Vista and to fill the gap I think this is the best time for all major Linux distros to consider creating and releasing a counter Windows traditional Linux desktop Operating system to fill the gaps and consolidate on this opportunity. The traditional Linux OS need not to be free but should be competitively priced, easy to use, i.e. user friendly and by that I mean along with the terminal easier ways to install and remove softwares from the OS like those in Windows and Mac OS x and equally polished and developed in everyway to be considered a worthy competitior to both Windows and Mac OS x. That should be a commercial venture in every way. Thats not to say that the present open source distros should be discarded; they should remain as they are. I think the best Linux companies positioned for this venture are Canonical, Red Hat, Novell and Xandros. What do you think? What are your view points about that?

[billgoldberg]

With Windows Vista's failure and Microsoft concentrating heavily on Windows Seven to release it as soon as possible to replace Vista and to fill the gap I think this is the best time for all major Linux distros to consider creating and releasing a counter Windows traditional Linux desktop Operating system to fill the gaps and consolidate on this opportunity. The traditional Linux OS need not to be free but should be competitively priced, easy to use, i.e. user friendly and by that I mean along with the terminal easier ways to install and remove softwares from the OS like those in Windows and Mac OS x and equally polished and developed in everyway to be considered a worthy competitior to both Windows and Mac OS x. That should be a commercial venture in every way. Thats not to say that the present open source distros should be discarded; they should remain as they are. I think the best Linux companies positioned for this venture are Canonical, Red Hat, Novell and Xandros. What do you think? What are your view points about that?

I could start listing things you said and go into detail on why I don't agree, but I'll keep it simple.

No.

[Sealbhach]

1. Under the GPL, I thought it has to be free, not allowed to charge for it ???

2. I thought Ubuntu was aiming to be just this. (REF: Ubuntu Bug # 1).



.

[SpenceMakesSense]

NOOOO DONT RELEASE LINUX..its my os mine!

[billgoldberg]

1. Under the GPL, I thought it has to be free, not allowed to charge for it ???

.

Not true.

[ubuntu-freak]

Windows has been crappy for a long time, so I'm not sure what your point is. It's just a different and newer kinda crap at the moment.

Ubuntu is doing fine, people will discover it if they really want an alternative to Windows.

[davidryder]

Do you think charging for the OS would make Linux more popular?

[icett]

I agree. Normal people neither have the time nor like to play around with the present commands setup for installing-uninstalling softwares and many other things very confusing for the normal beings. And they are the majority. Also there is a real need for another OS in compeition to Windows and it could either be Linux or Mac OS (if they consider to license it). Better Linux! And yes a commercial OS could be created in Linux. Nothing is forbidding it. Also the hardware, software/games makers would only take a commercial OS seriously and this would only benifit the Linux community.

[Calmatory]

What IS the problem of Windwos for average user? It isn't free? For them it "is" as they pay the price when they buy the computer. It isn't free as in ideology and source code? Do they really care? They don't. Thus Windows is free enough for them.

Windows has their viruses and malware. Do they consider this a downside for Windows? No, since they have their AV software.

Windows can be used by about anyone, almost EVERYONE knows Windows. Put those in front of Ubuntu and tell them to launch web browser. They will ask you "What is it?" and after you explain, they tell that there is no "Internet Explorer" here. You get the idea.

A lot of software is written for Windows. Porting that software to Linux is very hard, if not impossible without heavy financial investments. Anyone having a spare billion in hand?

And those who struggle to use even graphical user interface are supposed to use CLI by their own? Who is going to teach them? Why should they learn it? Why should they NOT use Windows because it works for them? They don't care about the price after they have bought it. They don't care about how good or bad company MS is, they don't care about the ethics of Linux etc. They care about what they can do and what is the easiest way. Windows is.

Microsoft will keep it's marketing going on, in practice, Linux doesn't even have one. People ask you "Linux? something to do with computer nerds??".

Thats how it goes, no can do.

[davidryder]

Calmatory, I mostly agree with your post.