PDA

View Full Version : Linux: Alternative no Longer



RelativelyQuantum
June 12th, 2007, 01:35 AM
People have a tendency to refer to Linux as an "Alternative" operating system. I ask the question: an alternative to what? Windows and Mac aren't "Alternative", so why must Linux be? I believe this distinction just takes away from the abilities of Linux; to appreciate it, people need to start seeing it as a stand-alone OS.

Lord Illidan
June 12th, 2007, 01:43 AM
Good call..

Linux Killer!
June 12th, 2007, 01:43 AM
We live in a Windows world, more or less. The status quo is Windows. Anything other than this becomes an "alternative", because it's not the status quo.

Perfectly understandable why alternatives are called as such.

starcraft.man
June 12th, 2007, 01:47 AM
People have a tendency to refer to Linux as an "Alternative" operating system. I ask the question: an alternative to what? Windows and Mac aren't "Alternative", so why must Linux be? I believe this distinction just takes away from the abilities of Linux; to appreciate it, people need to start seeing it as a stand-alone OS.

People refer to Linux as an alternative OS because its just that. Most users only know Windows, some even have a belief (Adamant if your reading I'm not just generalizing, I've met these very people many times) since they've never known any better that Windows is the only OS out there with a few exceptional Mac's here and there. So, to those users who don't know that there are any other choices, it is "An Alternative" to using Windows/Mac.

When I hear people refer to Mac they often say its an alternative. In my mind, the word just means its an option which is what Linux is, it doesn't mean it doesn't have it's own merits. In fact the truth is without a "comparison" you can't see it as a stand alone product with a lot of its own pros.

So I don't really see what your saying...

Lord Illidan
June 12th, 2007, 01:48 AM
Aye, but people don't refer to Mac OS as an alternative to Windows. It is just Mac OS. Similarly, Linux should be referred to as just..Linux (or GNU/Linux) not, Linux - the alternative to Windows.

starcraft.man
June 12th, 2007, 01:50 AM
Aye, but people don't refer to Mac OS as an alternative to Windows. It is just Mac OS. Similarly, Linux should be referred to as just..Linux (or GNU/Linux) not, Linux - the alternative to Windows.

Well I guess we speak to two very different sets of people... I just think its splitting hairs.

Lord Illidan
June 12th, 2007, 01:55 AM
Well I guess we speak to two very different sets of people... I just think its splitting hairs.

Aye...probably it's just that..

tcpip4lyfe
June 12th, 2007, 01:57 AM
Aye...probably it's just that..


This thread has resolution. I like that.

Lord Illidan
June 12th, 2007, 02:01 AM
This thread has resolution. I like that.
Maybe.:-({|=

smoker
June 12th, 2007, 02:02 AM
i think as linux becomes more widespread, especially in schools (my eight year old niece uses linux at school now!), it will become 'linux' in it's own right, rather than an 'alternative os'. still, an alternative is just another choice, so i don't find it a big deal.

forrestcupp
June 12th, 2007, 02:26 AM
Actually Mac is an alternative. Windows takes over 90% of market share, and Mac is an alternative.

Also, you can't compare it with Mac anyway because Mac has its own hardware. They have intel procs now, but they're not x86 based. Linux is an alternative OS to run on an x86 proc that was probably created with Windows in mind.

SunnyRabbiera
June 12th, 2007, 02:37 AM
People have a tendency to refer to Linux as an "Alternative" operating system. I ask the question: an alternative to what? Windows and Mac aren't "Alternative", so why must Linux be? I believe this distinction just takes away from the abilities of Linux; to appreciate it, people need to start seeing it as a stand-alone OS.

well it cuts down confusion when newbies come to linux thinking it would replace windows or OSX

kamaboko
June 12th, 2007, 02:44 AM
I prefer to say that Linux is a "fringe" OS.

JT673
June 12th, 2007, 03:17 AM
Hmms...I like what some of you said earlier about schools...Maybe we can launch a campaign to try to convince school districts to switch to Edubuntu. Our key arguments are that it has multiuser built-in (though I don't know about synchronization), you can't play many games, and it's easier to control student activity with the access control built into the OS.

RelativelyQuantum
June 12th, 2007, 03:31 AM
I like what's been said here. There were certainly varied reactions, though the point of the thread was to give Linux its dues, particularly Ubuntu. It doesn't really matter what the operating system is called, just as long as it's appreciated :)

kamaboko
June 12th, 2007, 03:36 AM
Hmms...I like what some of you said earlier about schools...Maybe we can launch a campaign to try to convince school districts to switch to Edubuntu. Our key arguments are that it has multiuser built-in (though I don't know about synchronization), you can't play many games, and it's easier to control student activity with the access control built into the OS.

I've said it time and again it comes down to enterprise software packages. The first thing a school district would ask is: so what kind of software packages do you offer? A very good friend of mine the is lead software project director (and programming for over 25 years professionally) for something like five or six school districts in my state. It all comes down to enterprise level software packages. Linux doesn't have it. Sure it has OpenOffice, etc, but whoop-di-doo. Or are you just talking about computer labs?