Why Linux?

[t2kburl]

I am working on a website geared towards helping people make the switch from Windows to Linux. I would like some ideas/input as to why people should make the switch.
I have the stability and security stuff coverred, I think.
What would you use as a sales pitch to help convince people?


a very rough draft of the site is at http://dtag.cjb.net

[phen]

earlier today i had to fix my father's pc. It was not possible to retrieve the full name of the graphics adapter in the system. It hides everything "technical" or potentially confusing from the user. Therefore: FULL CONTROL of the system

After trial and error, i had found the right drivers online. they installed itself with a bunch of icons, tools wierd control panels and so on.

therefore again: full control of what software one want to use. a clean, tidy desktop. a system which boots maybe not as fast as a fresh xp install, but which keeps the performance, no matter how many programs you install.

there i love the penguin :-)

cheers,
kai

[sonny]

Perhaps you should have a read to this: http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktop.php
It was posted a couple of days ago.

[jasmuz]

Real Multitasking
Multiple GUI's (dont just settle with what they give you)
Very expandable
Easily turn your machine into a server

Humm what else? :)

[Brunellus]

1) No viruses, adware, malware.
2) Excellent GNU/Linux native applications: GIMP, OO.o and a few others.
3) Excellent documentation (organization of same is not-so-excellent sometimes, though!)
4) Stable
5) Freedom from vendor independence--no "upgrade treadmill" unless you really want it, no lock-ins, no commitments.
6) And you can't beat the price.

[NoTiG]

Hardware accelerated desktop: This will probably be the biggest feature that most users will care about. It allows you to use your graphics card to help the windowing system, which will result in a snappier/speedier system. I think this will be the biggest feature that will entice the most users, since they would either have to upgrade to longhorn(2 years away or more depending on when they want to buy a new computer). This isn't complete yet however. XGL (http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software_2fXgl) is not completed yet, but when it is it will allow users to use their graphics card for more eyecandy, and speedier desktops. A big plus.

Freedom: This constitutes many things... most imporantly infinite customization. You can literally make your desktop look how you want or act in any way. Remember windows when it wouldn't let you delete internet explorer? With linux freedom is essential.. for instance you can compile your own kernel with a different file system like ReiserFS. No need to call microsoft if you want to change some hardware in your computer... no activation hassles.

Multi tasking: Typically a user will notice that they can do more things at once without the system being bogged down

Virtual desktops: Allows you to have many different virtual desktops rather than just 1 like microsoft. Can be very useful when you have alot of windows open, or like to keep your workspaces organized

Free: The price is 0. If this was a perfect world that would mean that OEM's would offer computers either OSless or with linux at cheaper than windows computers with the same exact hardware. you don't really see this though because of Microsofts monopolistic strongarming which is probably illegal....

Repository method of installing software: This is an advantage of linux because it makes installing things actually easier than windows... not that its hard in windows. But because this multitude of free software comes from a central reliable source it is protecting the user from malicious programs with spyware/adware. This also means that the user can keep their entire system up-to-date much easier than windows. THey can literally update their entire system with the click of a button. The only problem is the repositories cannot contain everything. They also can't offer the software in a timely fashion, or as fast as the developers themselves can.

Security: Because linux is less popular there is less/no malicious software written for it. I do not know of any inherent principles of linux that make it less susceptible... most spyware is user error and it is easily possible to live spyware free on windows if you know what your doing. Still a selling point though....

Restarting: No need to restart the entire computer after you make a change. ALthough stopping/starting services is sometimes necessary but is easy and fast.

[az]

Free Libre Open Source Software. It is a right to know or be able to know what your computer is doing.

I will not use a black box which may perform acts which I do not sanction.

Also, it is a better development model. The software that comes out is more sophisticated and better refined.

[t2kburl]

Perhaps you should have a read to this: http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktop.php
It was posted a couple of days ago.

Excellent article! It describes almost exactly what our services will be :)

Thank you

[Brunellus]

...
Freedom: This constitutes many things... most imporantly infinite customization. You can literally make your desktop look how you want or act in any way. Remember windows when it wouldn't let you delete internet explorer? With linux freedom is essential.. for instance you can compile your own kernel with a different file system like ReiserFS. No need to call microsoft if you want to change some hardware in your computer... no activation hassles.


While I'll grant freedom in terms of kernels and filesystems, I'm less sanguine on the hardware front.

Hardware support is getting better all the time--Ubuntu's is simply *phenomenal*--but the fact is that I have had an easier time adding hardware under Windows than under Linux.

This isn't Linux's fault--mostly. The most troublesome bits for me have been wlan cards, whose device drivers are Windows binaries. Ndiswrapper works in many (but not all) cases--which led to some major frustrations the first time I tried to go wireless under linux.

That said, the neatest thing about Linux for me has been the flexibility it gives me and the ability to try new things. The cost of trying something out is negiligible (not entirely free, if you factor your own time) and the prospects for self-education and self-improvement are wonderful.

[Brunellus]

Free Libre Open Source Software. It is a right to know or be able to know what your computer is doing.

I will not use a black box which may perform acts which I do not sanction.

Also, it is a better development model. The software that comes out is more sophisticated and better refined.
most users don't care about how opaque the functions of their devices are--they just care that they do function. Insofar as a well-configured Linux computer functions very well--stably, reliably, and capably--then Linux is great.

[poofyhairguy]

Free Libre Open Source Software.


thats the dead ringer. viruses and malware might come...but Linux will ALWAYS have an advantage here.

Simply put, in Linux you don't have to pay extra to get software to do basic things- aka burn dvds.

(for the Windows users that say "I don't pay anyway, I pirate" then they are not ready for Linux and the Ubuntu community does not want them in their current state.)

[Kvark]

Remember that we don't want all windows users to try gnu/linux. Seeing it from a windows user's perspective... If gnu/linux is the wrong OS for you and not at all what you want, and you try it, then you'll go back to windows and the only difference is that now you have a bad memory of gnu/linux. On the other hand if gnu/linux is just what you need then you will stay with it and be very happy to have found something that suits you better then windows.

So what you want to do when promoting linux is help people answer the question "Is gnu/linux right for me?" I think the possible answers are 'yes', 'yes, in combination with windows', 'no' and 'no, not yet'. If yes, then also the questions "Which distro will suit me best?" and "Which programs are good for the things I want to do?".


PS. Take a look at this thread (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=51873).

[az]

most users don't care about how opaque the functions of their devices are--they just care that they do function. Insofar as a well-configured Linux computer functions very well--stably, reliably, and capably--then Linux is great.


That can be true for a lot of people. Especially non-programmers. However, You do not need to know how to build a voting-machine, but I am sure that you insist that the ones used by your government are built by reputable companies according to know standards to avoid fraud.

Likewise, you would not buy a car wich has the hood welded shut, would you?

Anyway, I know dozens of people for whom this argument is fundamental in their software choices.

[t2kburl]

Perhaps I should have mentioned in the first place that there are 2 "target audiences" for the marketing I have in mind.
1st are small businesses which don't have the time or funds to either learn all they need to to make the switch for themselves or can't afford to hire a full time IT geek to do it for them. The reasons why they would want a change are fairly obvious. stabilty, security and costs. We believe they will learn as they go. The idea is that when/if they need help with something they can call us and we'll help them fix it. (there are 4 of us in this group with too much free time on our hands, right now)
2nd are people who want to try something different, but may not even know Linux exists as a viable alternative. It is about educating more people to their options. For example, we plan on arranging and advertising at least 1 installfest at the nearest local college, and most of the flyers will be placed in the areas where the programming students are.

Also, it is my opinion that, so long as someone knowledgeable installs it for them, Linux is a better option for the PC ignorant who just want to surf the web and write letters, etc. I wouldn't want my mother using a machine that tried to steal money from her in all the ways that are possible in windows (including windows itself). So why not appeal to them as well?

[sonny]

That can be true for a lot of people. Especially non-programmers. However, You do not need to know how to build a voting-machine, but I am sure that you insist that the ones used by your government are built by reputable companies according to know standards to avoid fraud.

Likewise, you would not buy a car wich has the hood welded shut, would you?

Anyway, I know dozens of people for whom this argument is fundamental in their software choices.
All those arguments SHOULD be fundamental for 90% of the people in this forum, because that's most of the reason why we hav changed, the fact that it's not our will the computer is doing, but the will of someone a thousand miles away, that "believes" he knows what's best for you.We want to be able to open the hood as much as we want.

[darkmatter]

I was tempted to post the usual 'because Windows sucks' response, but then I read the initial post of this thread. Here are my point's.

2) More stable. Though I've had the odd application crash on me (I like to experiment a lot), I've never had the desktop crash, nor a full blown system crash.

3) More secure. Windows was built as a single user system, and has been slow to implement the change to a true multi-user platform. The UNIX'es (As in all UNIX derived and UNIX-like OS's) were designed from the start as multi-user platforms, thus have a better integrated security framework.

4) Virtually virus-free. Only one currently known virus in the wild. Need I say more?

5) Smaller physical size. A 'clean' install yields an OS smaller than it's current Windows counterpart. (and Linux has more applications by default)

6) Faster installation and setup. Though Linux often requires more configuration than Windows, the overall installation/configuration time is less than that of a Windows system (partially due to the included applications mentioned in point 5), giving you a functional desktop in less time than Windows.

7) Software management. Though some may disagree, I find managing software in a GNU/Linux installation far better than in Windows. You can install/configure a s***load of applications in as much time as it takes to download/install/configure a few applications in windows. Removing apps/cleaning up residual configurations is just as easy. (in Windows, something always gets left behind)

8) Malware? We realy don't need to have this conversation now, do we? ;-)

Ant the #1 reason. We can all do what we like with GNU/Linux, as it is *freedom* above all else. If I want to dig around in the guts of the system/reverse engineer, whatever. Well, whatever turns my crank. Nobody is going to sue me for it...

I'd continue, but my fingertips are getting numb from all this typing...

[aysiu]

Lastly, why is it that people would not buy a car that prohibits them from doing anything but drive it, but will accept these limitations being imposed upon their software? If you want you can chop the roof off your Mazda and turn it into a convertable, change it's colour, put a new engine in or customise the sound system. Try cutting the roof off Windows. ;-) To be perfectly honest in answering your question, most automobile drivers are like most computer users--they don't want to be able to get under the hood. I've changed my own oil and replaced my battery, checked fluids, etc., but I know a lot of people who, as long as they know the car can be serviced by a mechanic, couldn't care less if their hood was welded shut.

Likewise, for their computer, as long as a computer technician can charge them $150/hour and get the thing fixed, they don't care that Windows won't let them see or modify certain things.

[sonny]

To be perfectly honest in answering your question, most automobile drivers are like most computer users--they don't want to be able to get under the hood. I've changed my own oil and replaced my battery, checked fluids, etc., but I know a lot of people who, as long as they know the car can be serviced by a mechanic, couldn't care less if their hood was welded shut.
That is true in all the ways and senses... that's a perfect analogy. The only time a "normal" user will care about MS and Bill Gates' acctions will be when those actions will affect them in a direct way, a way the are going to be hurt, but when that happens there's gonna be so many patents that all the sinergy would be unstopable, and they would only cry about that, cuz in the end, it's their fault.

[sonny]

Just for the record, I can't personally cut the roof off Linux, but if I wanted to I could learn and do it... and that is what counts. :)
As not everyone can make a convertible with his/her car, but they can take it with someone who can, and they won't be put in jail for that. Anyone can take their Linux Distro to someone and get it "tunned".

PS: You can't make a convertible with a ferrari, cuz you'll be put in jail; nor you can repaint it, or put your name on it, if ferrari doesn't approve it and do it in their own garage, isn't that a bit like MS??

[az]

Can we lay off the "sheeple", please? It is not that clever and is condescending. Find a better way to convey your point, please.

[Brunellus]

Can we lay off the "sheeple", please? It is not that clever and is condescending. Find a better way to convey your point, please.

I concur.

Understand this: Enlightenment (and by that I mean the attainment of insight, not the window-manager) is available to everyone, but that doesn't mean everyone embraces it, or, indeed, that everyone needs it.

A lot of Linux users--myself included, from time to time-- tend to have an automatic contempt for most other computer users simply because they can't be bothered to know much about their computers. Dismissing these people as merely 'sheeple' doesn't help our cause (or, if you don't believe there is a cause, it makes us look like assholes).

Isn't free software about the ability to control how much you are involved? If you want to use the software, fine. If you want to test it, good. If you want to improve it, great. But what's so wrong with wanting good software--software that works for the user, and not the other way 'round?

[sonny]

I would like to see Ferrari try to sue some rich Hollywood celeb for painting their Ferrari pink. ;-) It would be hilarious!

But then maybe that's why they charge so much, so that they can afford any potential court cases. :)

And yes, it sounds just like MS!
Just for the record, the famous brazil soccer player Ronaldo, got suited by Ferrari, cuz he put his name on his ferrari (they were big gold letters), now it's just plain red. :grin:

Another famous singer in mexico (Thalia) got banned from buying a Ferrari car ( or was it lamborgini?) cuz she wanted it painted in a corny pink color (or something like that), so she was kicked out of the car company and banned from buying any of their cars.

[sonny]

Isn't free software about the ability to control how much you are involved? If you want to use the software, fine. If you want to test it, good. If you want to improve it, great. But what's so wrong with wanting good software--software that works for the user, and not the other way 'round?
Yes.. you ARE right, but isn't our duty to inform the people what are the big companies doing with their software?
I think it is, we have to spread the word.

[NeoSNightmarE]

I chose Linux because many years ago (like back with Windows 90 something) I was getting fustrated with windows crashing on me all the time and security issues were annoying when backdoors started to hit the scene hard. Plus I was reading into what windows actually was and it didn't sound right to me. It was at that time that I went to Red Hat. Best move that I ever made. It was awesome although there wasn't as big as an open source community as there is now it was still killer. As time went on I tried different distros until I found Ubuntu through a friend. I'll tell you why I like this distro:

--Debian based
--Runs pretty stable
--Backports are good
--Is user friendly when I'm not in the mood to get into the system too much
--Is not windows

Off topic:


The Matrix has you Neo.

Really? I've been denying it for years. :grin:

[Brunellus]

Yes.. you ARE right, but isn't our duty to inform the people what are the big companies doing with their software?
I think it is, we have to spread the word.

Sure. As to whether or not most of them will care, that's an open question.

[sonny]

I agree!

I also think that real freedom includes the right to pay good money for whatever software you want... regardless of quality, even if you know the truth.
I think that OS and Comercial Software can coexist, but there's to be a "commision" to check the code of the comercial, so they won't put any bad thing, or braking the GPL license, cuz as far as we now MS is not braking any copyrighted license, but his he breaking our copyleft? we don't know that for sure, unless there's someone that makes a real check of their code.

[sonny]

Choose freedom! I forget which pill. :?
I'm 90% sure it's the red pill the one you have to take.

[Omnios]

Why Linux? People hate to say it including me but Ubuntu is very affordable and so is the sofware that runs on it. Think of all the possibilities of running Ubuntu.

[az]

Point is we all have a part to play in waking up the dozy masses to the fact that they can be free, if they so choose.

A superiority complex is a poor attitude to adopt when you want to influence people.

They just end up thinking you are an ****.

[gray-squirrel]

Why Linux? Well, it in a sense levels the playing field.

Think of all the unused computers we may have lying around. Install (K)ubuntu on them, configure them as servers for home networks, and not a dime was spent to upgrade to keep up with the Microsoft way.

But, if we were to give them to schools and universities in need of such equipment, installing (K)ubuntu or any other distro, it would be a great help for them as well as the students.

And speaking of education. . . with all the development tools out there available at no charge, and opportunities to volunteer to help on libre/open-source projects, it becomes easier to put classroom skills to practical use for once. I can at least do that now. But, I wonder how many currently at my alma mater actually know about this option. When I was taking classes there, it was pretty much a Microsoft environment so I never knew a thing about Linux and the GNU project and philosophy. And now I see this four years after graduation. . . four years where I could have gained considerable experience, knowledge, and be in a better position to help people at work and teach others what I know. I would have to spend more money to take more classes which would make me slightly marketable in the job market I'm in. But why do that if I can get that practical experience now, continue learning and sharing for all to see?

So, this aspect, which I should call equal opportunity, is one thing that should be promoted when promoting Linux. That is what we ourselves encourage, after all. The Microsoft way tends to make some people play "keep up with Joneses", a game where the object where Microsoft and similar companies promote standards which a majority of people and even some businesses end up falling short of.

[bored2k]

Why Linux ? Because I can. I have different choices and this is what I chose. I like to learn new stuff, and I noticed I hadn't learn any useful stuff in a while, so I switched. It also happens to help me stay away from software piracy, wich is kind of good.

[sonny]

Why Linux ? Because I can. I have different choices and this is what I chose. I like to learn new stuff, and I noticed I hadn't learn any useful stuff in a while, so I switched. It also happens to help me stay away from software piracy, wich is kind of good.
Choise... I think it's all about that, the power to choose. Amen

[NeoSNightmarE]

How would you even know if someone didn't tell you? ;-)

Choose freedom! I forget which pill. :?

lol. Ok. I'll have to remember that when I'm getting some huge thing shoved into a brain that gave me a headache last time.

/off topic in here

[poofyhairguy]

It also happens to help me stay away from software piracy, wich is kind of good.

Agreed.

[Omnios]

Why Linux? Because some OS's are like having a job where you push a button that in turn screws a screw into a steel frame. Linux is more like having a fabrication job where you hammer metal into two weel pieces of art

[Xian]

It really wouldn't blow much wind up my skirt to switch to a different OS. The main reason I run Linux is because I like the user community, and the accessibility which is afforded to anyone who desires to involve themselves in the development process. I take advantage of both these, and have enjoyed the friends I've met and had the good fortune of knowing through related discussions.

But in comparison to the real issues and struggles that people face in this world, whether or not I run this or that OS is an issue that is practically meaningless, and on the whole a very trivial matter.

[Stormy Eyes]

I run Linux so I can afford to pamper my wife.

[Spoofhound]

Perhaps I should have mentioned in the first place that there are 2 "target audiences" for the marketing I have in mind.
1st are small businesses which don't have the time or funds to either learn all they need to to make the switch for themselves or can't afford to hire a full time IT geek to do it for them. The reasons why they would want a change are fairly obvious. stabilty, security and costs. We believe they will learn as they go. The idea is that when/if they need help with something they can call us and we'll help them fix it. (there are 4 of us in this group with too much free time on our hands, right now)
2nd are people who want to try something different, but may not even know Linux exists as a viable alternative. It is about educating more people to their options. For example, we plan on arranging and advertising at least 1 installfest at the nearest local college, and most of the flyers will be placed in the areas where the programming students are.


For small businesses cost and stability are, as you mention key. However, this should not just be seen in the short term - focus on long term. No more fork-lift migrations to the newest version, just a clean upgrade. Same for applications etc. Initially it'll probably have some hidden costs in persuading employees thatits real and that they don't have to be scared. If they ignore this the migration will be a pain, possibly putting them off linux for a long time.

For eveyone else, add the ability to influence the development of the products and contribute to its evolution is something I think can be added to all of the other points that have been made

[cleekjc]

1) No viruses, adware, malware.
2) Excellent GNU/Linux native applications: GIMP, OO.o and a few others.
3) Excellent documentation (organization of same is not-so-excellent sometimes, though!)
4) Stable
5) Freedom from vendor independence--no "upgrade treadmill" unless you really want it, no lock-ins, no commitments.
6) And you can't beat the price.


1) Don’t have these in XP pro either, well at least I don’t have a problem with them…….
2) I will give this to you
3) Got this in XP too I would argure its even better than.......
4) I guess I am just special, I do not have stability problems in XP either, could be related to no 1 though :-P and the fact the my taskbar area is not 6 inches wide.
To be honest stability issues are not all MS's fault part of the blame belongs square on the shoulders of the crappy devs who write sloppy code and decide to just up replace system dll's. What happens in Linux if you just up and replace system files with out checking dependencies? yeppers it crashes just like Windows....
5) ok ok ok You got me here
6) well crap you really got me here.............. :grin:


What I do have in XP is awesome third party hardware support, prime example wireless network interface cards…..I go to Dell.com find my laptop download and install the wireless driver and presto my wireless card works……………..I am on day 3 in Ubuntu trying to get that accursed unholyst of the unholy to work…………
](*,) ](*,)

Although everything else does work great in Ubuntu, right out of the box even………

[polo_step]

I run Linux so I can afford to pamper my wife.
OK, now I've spit coffee all over the monitor again.

[polo_step]

Remember that we don't want all windows users to try gnu/linux. Seeing it from a windows user's perspective... If gnu/linux is the wrong OS for you and not at all what you want, and you try it, then you'll go back to windows and the only difference is that now you have a bad memory of gnu/linux.
Bingo.

I can't see most normal people putting up with the exasperating (and sometimes insurmountable) problems inherent in converting an existing computer to an all-purpose Linux box.


PS. Take a look at this thread (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=51873).
Frankly, I didn't think much of that article. Though it tries not to be, it's a biased advocacy piece.

I view the whole Linux thing as representing an interesting phemonenon rather than a viable end-user OS for the general market. I don't think this will ever change. I've been watching and intermittantly trying distros for the past five years and the basic problems never go away because there's not enough money up front to make them go away and it's against many commercial interests for them to go away. It's just that simple.

I believe that far more money has been spent by outsiders studying the Linux phenomenon (see below) than has ever been spent on actual Linux development.

Here: I have numerous computers running, including a dedicated machine in a well-equipped recording studio, which because of the primary software and peripheral hardware used requires Windows. The dominant VST-based Windows software has innumerable new third-party plugins and accessory software packages. In my studio, however, I do not permit freeware or shareware on the machines. Why? Because none of it is as good as commercial software (if it is, it quickly gets bought by a software company and gets further development), most of it is junk and much of it is dangerous junk. In the beginning, I lost a lot of important tracks because of shareware plugin bugs and very nearly destroyed a couple of thousand dollars worth of playback hardware (and my ears) due to a doomsday bug in a highly-recommended freeware keyboard VSTi. That was the last straw. All the freeware and shareware stuff went off the box and never went back. It isn't missed.

In Linux, that's nearly all you have to work with. Aside from some funded major suites that are relatively beta-functional, you have a dog's dinner of experimental hobbyist programming that's typically in pre-beta state without adequate (or often any) documentation or support. A student or out-of-work programmer writes an app or a hardware driver that may work somewhat, plays around with it for a while until real life takes over and he jettisons it to put his attention into a real job or a family or whatever. Maybe some other people monkey around with it, usually not. It might work on your system, maybe not. The driver may be very marginal, but it gets put in the kernel anyway so that someone can say more hardware is "supported." The majority of Linux programs and drivers I've tried to use link to websites that haven't been updated for two years or more, or to promised updates and documentation that simply failed to ever materialize. What do you expect for nothing?

The problem with Linux is the problem with all unpaid volunteer labor everywhere: Availability is inversely proportional to competence, and there has to be at least sustained professional leadership for it to work it all for more than a brief period of enthusiasm.

A rich gadfly like Shuttleworth throws a few bucks at Ubuntu and people go crazy. Listen, I saw dozens of software start-ups in the '90s and those people spent more money than that on executive office furnishings.

This is the essential flaw in the Linux concept: "No money, no honey."

Yet...contrary to all rational expectation...Linux doesn't roll over and die.

This, not the OS itself, is what interests the world at large. The Linux phenomenon and Linux buffs have been the quiet focus of much very expensive, proprietary research in recent years. Who these researchers are, what they've determined and why they're concerned are all quite interesting, though not at all flattering to Linux users.

That is a different thread, however. ;-)