Why windows ?

[emshains]

Every day when I go to the mall, I see the shop assistant typing in stuff in her computer. To an unexpierienced linux enthusiast it would seem stupid to buy the license that allows you to type in price tags and such. But to me, it is obvious that linux wouldnt support the cool laser gun, neither there are applications that are needed there. Of course you could hire a linux specialist that would make a kernel just for this purpous but that would be more expensive than buying a license of windows.

But why, when the country is facing an economical crisis, do they buy windows for putting it on public internet access points ? I am talking about those computers you can use for free to accsess the internet. Its 100$ for the windows, and about 100-300$ for the PC itself. You dont need to run shockwave or play games with ATI, the local authorities advertised (like advertising a public services that bring no profit would'nt be foolish enough) them as an easy way of accessing the internet bank and email on-the-go. I cant seem why could you make an gentoo and install everything it needs (which is a bit modified xfce and a firefox that has no cache). That could save a lot money for the city and then they could raise the wages of people who work for the city but get "symbolic" wages, like people who clean the streets, educate me and cure/heal me.

But, hey, thats whats governments are like, arent they ?

[nick09]

Windows is the most popular and widely known OS in the market with percentages high as 90%, simiple as that. Add in the fact that your normal PC user only knows of windows and the Mac OS. Because whats the odds of a normal person finding a Ubuntu commercial on TV?

[jgrabham]

IIRC all the checkouts in Tesco (one of the biggest supermarkets in Britain) run Linux. :guitar:

Although to answer your question - 'cos they got in there first and formed a monopoly'.

[Steveway]

Oh yes, at least the checkouts of the Sky supermarket here are running linux. They have a cute half-screen filling Tux in a shopping-cart on the screens. Isn't that awesome? Everyone that shops there unconsiously saves it into their brains. That's what I call marketing.

[emshains]

I mean, it would cost a hell of a lot less to use linux on these access points, because you don't need windows on them. If you can, then give me one or more reasons they should need windows on them ? I can give only one- in my country, every 10% of the money that is put in to the development of the city goes to our fat dudes who sit all day in the parliament. And 10 % of 100$ is more than 10% of 0.00 (the cost of linux). But, when we have a law, that every service the country buys/rents has to be chosen by their price. Like if you match the needs and you've got the lowest price, then by the law, the authorities should choose you instead of wallet-busting windows

[bigyoy]

I guess from a business point of view it can sometimes come down to user experience and familiarity. I thinks it's still fair to say a lot of people don't "get" computers, so Windows is a comfortable option as at least they know something about it.

I think Linux will grow over the years, but there won't be a huge revolution over it (in the Business world)!

[Dixon Bainbridge]

XP is a very good OS if you a) remove every single shred of MS on it, b) use as much 3rd party/opensource software as poss, and c) get decent anti virus software.

Its faster than OSX on pretty much everything, and pretty stable all said and done. Vista on the otherhand is Windows ME in a different skin.

I like XP. I use it at home now (I've replaced Ubuntu). When LightRoom 2 runs in Wine, I'll be back to ubuntu. Until then, I fine with XP. And with pidgin, vlc, opera, thunderbird, etc, its like being on back on linux anyway :)

I still run ubuntu on my works laptop.

[jespdj]

... But to me, it is obvious that linux wouldnt support the cool laser gun, neither there are applications that are needed there.
Why are you assuming that Linux wouldn't support the "cool laser gun"? I've worked with those kind of devices (long ago), and the ones I worked with, worked just like a keyboard; connect to the keyboard connector of your computer, and scanning something sends digits to the computer in exactly the same way as a keyboard. Such a device would work on Linux without needing any special drivers.

Also, Linux is used in far more places than you think. It's used a lot as an embedded operating system in all kinds of devices, including cash registers, for example. I was in an airplane recently, and at the beginning of the flight the crew was resetting the in-flight entertainment system. What did I see on the screen in the seat in front of me... Tux (the Linux penguin) and some text, indicating that the entertainment system was running on Linux!

[joshdudeha]

Tbh, personally.. I don't mind if they use windows.
That's their choice.

I choose to use Linux because it is my choice.
You don't want to start forcing people to use Linux.. that is the wrong way to go about things. Let people find it for themselves.

The minute they do... They'll love it :D

[kirsis]

Tbh, personally.. I don't mind if they use windows.
That's their choice.

I choose to use Linux because it is my choice.
You don't want to start forcing people to use Linux.. that is the wrong way to go about things. Let people find it for themselves.


You can't really adopt this sort of attitude with the government.

[joshdudeha]

Yeah .. I know.

But, if people / the government whoever want to use windows then by all means.. use it.
With the government.. or big business.. they use whatever they think the "end user" will be able to cope with.
If people demanded linux.. I mean in their thousands.. I'm sure it'd be done sometime.

Though, I am surprised with this government.. they like to save money with everything :D Why not use linux :P

[emshains]

Yeah .. I know.

But, if people / the government whoever want to use windows then by all means.. use it.
With the government.. or big business.. they use whatever they think the "end user" will be able to cope with.
If people demanded linux.. I mean in their thousands.. I'm sure it'd be done sometime.

Though, I am surprised with this government.. they like to save money with everything :D Why not use linux :P

If you have to pay you're bills and you don't have a computer, I think you wouldn't care if you do the bills in Firefox on windows or Linux. But then again, if you dont have a computer, you probably woudn't use the e-bank either.

For a big business, they would choose the cheapest way to satisfy the end user's needs, which are, in this case, to access the internet.

[sydbat]

The problem is, there is no logic involved...whether business or government. Thinking that there is any thought put into it (like it will benefit the end user somehow) is totally misguided. Governments especially have no clue...they are quite easily sucked into a "deal" by Microsoft or Apple to use those products. If it had anything to do with 'cost', Linux/Unix would have been completely dominant for years.

It is the vendors who sell XP or OSX ( and related "production" software) to the clients, and have deals with MS and/or Apple to keep selling to clients who, IMHO, are the worst offenders...mostly because they tend to spread more FUD than anyone in order to keep the money rolling in. If they were ethical in any way, they would be honest with their clientèle and present the best option, regardless. I mean, they would still make a killing off the service contracts. But greed is a nasty thing - it makes people do things...

[tubezninja]

[rant]It is the vendors who sell XP or OSX ( and related "production" software) to the clients, and have deals with MS and/or Apple to keep selling to clients who, IMHO, are the worst offenders...mostly because they tend to spread more FUD than anyone in order to keep the money rolling in. If they were ethical in any way, they would be honest with their clientèle and present the best option, regardless.

Maybe for a lot of people, linux isn't the best option?

I can tell you right now, that Linux is a good option for me on certain applications, but not all of them. I'm pretty much OS agnostic. I use ubuntu for some things, SuSE for others, Mac OS X for still other projects, and Windows for still other things (mainly things involving software packages that will only run on Windows). Though, my use of Windows is rapidly dwindling as of late.

However, that's me, and I'm fine switching from one OS to another. We represent a small minority of people, and most people out there are simply not willing to learn something new. They learned Windows first, for better or worse, and for them it works well enough that they feel no need to switch to something else. Why force them?

I will say this much: had Windows continued to work well for me, I probably would still be using it as my primary OS, though I'd still brush up on OS X and linux because my job requires it. But it started frustrating me to the point that I felt I had to move on, and I did.

If and when other people get to that point, they'll jump ship.

[Chame_Wizard]

Because Winblah,is less secure ):P

[amadeus266]

I use that "cool laser gun" and other hardware doing sales where I work and I have proven that all ofthis equipment can and does run on linux. The problem however is the software being written using FoxPro which only runs on Windows.

[kg4cna]

But to me, it is obvious that linux wouldnt support the cool laser gun

That's absurd. My wife used to manage a regional clothing store and ALL their stores use Linux (RedHat) and a POS system called APROPOS. They used those "cool laser guns" without any problem AND it had a credit card reader built into the keyboard. It was so easy, "I" could use it ;) Woohoo!

[sydbat]

@ scaredpoet - I agree. That is part of the point I was hoping to make, although I guess I didn't do a good enough job. The other part was/is giving your client ALL the options, and explaining those options (pros/cons/comparisons even), not simply saying "use this" because they have some type of deal with the manufacturer.

I build and configure computers for people (home use). When I first meet with them, I ask what they need, what they want and how much they are willing to spend. I discuss which OS and programs would suit them best. For example, my father-in-law likes playing video games, so the box I built for him has XP. But my sister only surfs the net and does a little writing - Ubuntu there. As I cannot build Apple boxes, I recommend at least two Apple dealers in the city (Calgary Alberta, for those morbidly interested).

This is what I was trying to get at with my original rant - giving the client enough information so they can make an informed decision...without overwhelming them. But I have experienced the "this is the only thing you need...trust me" thing, and it makes me angry when people take advantage of others like this...all for greed.[/secondrant]

[rune0077]

In some cases it just doesn't make much sense, because most people are used to Windows. All public institutions in Denmark actually runs OpenOffice, which were implemented by the government to save money not having to buy Microsoft's office suite. Linux I understand, has also been discussed as a replacement for Windows, but was dismissed. It would have required re-schooling of just about everyone working in these institution, which would be both expensive and time consuming.

So I guess until Joe Average learns how to use Linux by himself before applying for a job, we may see Open Source solutions like OpenOffice and Firefox running on Windows, but hardly a full switch to Linux.

[geekygirl]

From a Linux user/advocate veiw point, and someone who doesn't like Windows, or is a bit more PC savvy than the average punter it would be very easy to ask the 'Why Windows?' question and also argue about it.

Perhaps if you looked at it from the point of veiw of someone who does not have the slightest bit of interest in computers or operating systems other than being able to visit the odd website or use email you might see it differently.

Microsoft have a very good marketing machine, they have to, its a crappy product, Apple have a very good marketing department as well - Linux? mmmnope don't see much in the way of mainstream marketing at the masses there from any of the Distro's.

And when people like my Mum and grandparents have never heard of Linux but they know what Windows is (especially because it comes preinstalled on nearly every PC you buy thats premade) it makes sense not to alienate your users - and you have to set the becnhmark at the LOWEST common denominator regardless of costs as from a business perspective that can all be written off as running costs anyways.

You need to think less like a Linux user/advocate and more like Joe Bloggs who struggles to use Windows!

[Icehuck]

You need to think less like a Linux user/advocate and more like Joe Bloggs who struggles to use Windows!

I wouldn't say they struggle with Windows per se, it's the fact that they struggle with technology in general. There is a huge portion of population that can not even set the clock on their VCR.

Windows 3.1x was one of the first systems to introduce double click installation programs to the masses. The average user is just now getting used to the double click install from almost 20 years ago.

Then people want those users to just change over night to a totally new way of doing things? People do not like change, they like having a bead on things in their life.


Which brings me to my next point, Why should they change? Security? Average user doesn't understand this concept. No Malware? What is that? Free? Doesn't make sense at all, since everything in this world costs money(toiletries, food, clothing, education, electricity). Why trust vital systems that are free?

[emshains]

I wouldn't say they struggle with Windows per se, it's the fact that they struggle with technology in general. There is a huge portion of population that can not even set the clock on their VCR.

Windows 3.1x was one of the first systems to introduce double click installation programs to the masses. The average user is just now getting used to the double click install from almost 20 years ago.

Then people want those users to just change over night to a totally new way of doing things? People do not like change, they like having a bead on things in their life.


Which brings me to my next point, Why should they change? Security? Average user doesn't understand this concept. No Malware? What is that? Free? Doesn't make sense at all, since everything in this world costs money(toiletries, food, clothing, education, electricity). Why trust vital systems that are free?

The thing is, you don't need to compile from source to access the internet on a fully set up and running Linux box.

The main concern here is that the government is throwing away money when they can use it for other developments and such, and its even worse if the country is encountering an economical crisis, the inflation has risen up to 16%. I cant seem any way, but to save money everywhere they can in any possible working way, without compromising the main idea of the certain "object".