I guess what it boils down to is this: are you advocating the kernel itself or a specific OS? Ubuntu? Kubuntu? CentOS? Fedora?
You sound as if you are arguing the kernel. Yes, I am 100% in agreement with you - the linux kernel rocks. It's great. It's a triumph of the human spirit, yadda yadda.
My point is: The end user could give a **** about the kernel. They wouldn't know the NT kernel from the DOS kernel from the Vista kernel from the BSD kernel from the latest price of pork bellies.
If you could put the windows XP gui and API layers on top of the linux kernel, you'd have - to the end user - THE EXACT SAME OS. Apple pulled it off once - they COMPLETELY CHANGED THEIR KERNEL from something in house to BSD. They just so happened to also change the gui while they were at it, but they theoretically could have introduced the darwin kernel in a "classic" environment, and the general end users would have not noticed one whit.
What Shwaip and myself, and the hundreds of millions of sheep who buy windows PCs, are saying is that the kernel is ultimately nothing. It's the USER EXPERIENCE that matters. Chicken and egg, sure... You won't get the user experience unless people use it and demand this-and-that and then vendors will write software and drivers for their stuff and blah blah blah.
The market dictates what works. Windows works. I'm willing to spent $99 to give my mom, dad, or sister a seamless, easy experience. If there were a $99 linux distro that I could do this with (and don't argue with me on this - I've tried them.), I would - IF THE EXPERIENCE WERE BETTER THAN WINDOWS. That's the end result - your definition of "better" is not the same as "Aunt Josephine's"
And what I'm saying is that the user experience is there, at least on the basic end.
Linux systems work out of the box for everything that my mum does with her PC.
I too have a 16 year old younger sister. She is happily using Debian along with her twin brother. She knows nothing about how it works, just that it does. She downloads music, chats online, plays flash and java games, customises her desktop (more than she could do on windows I might add), and uses her webcam.
Though, with the arrival of Vista, trusted computing, the tightening of the DRM screws, and the drop of support for old windows versions, I predict a mass exodus to Linux, which may be exactly what the market penetration needs.
Maybe then you will agree that it is better than windows.
I want the m4p collection. I know all the limitations of not owning the music...but I can do what I need to with it. Play it on my ipod, play it on my computers, burn a cd (5 times, but I have an ipod, so I don't ever do that).
I've used itunes for about 4 years now, and have never had a problem with machineID stuff. I ran out of computers to install on (hit the limit) once, but I deauthorized all computers and haven't had a problem yet.
You said that fnando shouldn't pirate xp, but I should break the law to run linux (dedrm my stuff)? And where should I buy just a single of a song I like that will run fine on linux? Once again, this comes down to what should I sacrifice to run something that will not really get me much benefit?
Well, really you should have known better than to buy a m4p collection, as you don't even own it. You can't expect it to play in a few months anyway, when you lose your machineID key or someone decides to revoke it.
Whenever I find something that is broken in Linux that really shouldn't be (e.g. a web page that uses ActiveX) I send a fiery email off to whoever maintains it.
It may not help in the short term, but it lets the purveyors of broken software know that they are losing out on business.
Hopefully it will make more people support Linux when they release new hardware/software/websites.
As for games.. I have reluctantly subscribed to Cedega. It plays most things, maybe not the latest games like FEAR and so, but then I don't have time for those anyway. ^_^
And yeah, if I were you I'd crack those m4p's and transcode them to vorbis or mp3 while you still can, and ditch iTunes.
Though, with the arrival of Vista, trusted computing, the tightening of the DRM screws, and the drop of support for old windows versions, I predict a mass exodus to Linux, which may be exactly what the market penetration needs.
Maybe then you will agree that it is better than windows.
I do not expect this mass migration, regardless of what vista adds (unless some sort of physical penetration is included).
I want the m4p collection. I know all the limitations of not owning the music...but I can do what I need to with it. Play it on my ipod, play it on my computers, burn a cd (5 times, but I have an ipod, so I don't ever do that).
I've used itunes for about 4 years now, and have never had a problem with machineID stuff. I ran out of computers to install on (hit the limit) once, but I deauthorized all computers and haven't had a problem yet.
You said that fnando shouldn't pirate xp, but I should break the law to run linux (dedrm my stuff)? And where should I buy just a single of a song I like that will run fine on linux? Once again, this comes down to what should I sacrifice to run something that will not really get me much benefit?
I do not expect this mass migration, regardless of what vista adds (unless some sort of physical penetration is included).
as long as people know what they're getting (some may not know, but it's in whatever license they agree to), I can't imagine it's illegal.
I am not pro-drm. I am apathetic towards it. The only thing I haven't been able to do because of it is switch to linux...which I don't want to do for other reasons. There was a time when I was playing my m4ps fine in fedora, but I left it because I couldn't do everything else I wanted to do.
That's exactly the problem. Everyone is apathetic.
When they tighten the thumbscrews and remove more of your rights for their own greed, it will suddenly hit you that DRM is evil.
But by that time there will be absolutely nothing you can do about it.
Get out while you still can.
And there is such a thing as Fair Use, that makes DRM unconstitutional (AFAIK;IANAL), because you can't even use it for personal listening after buying it.
Read up on it.
That is not the only problem. The other problem is that some things don't work in linux. People will say oh, I'd like to not deal with {insert vista feature here} but I can't do {insert thing here} in linux. My, or even all computer geeks everywhere, boycotting of the things that don't work, will NOT phase a company that makes their money from focusing on windows development.
AND
Remember those people you were talking about that the switch to linux would be easy? The Internet/email/wp people? They are:
a) Not going to upgrade to vista. People still run 98/ME
b) If their new computer comes with vista, and all they want is the basics, DRM will not get in their way, and they won't care.
That is not the only problem. The other problem is that some things don't work in linux. People will say oh, I'd like to not deal with {insert vista feature here} but I can't do {insert thing here} in linux. My, or even all computer geeks everywhere, boycotting of the things that don't work, will NOT phase a company that makes their money from focusing on windows development.
AND
Remember those people you were talking about that the switch to linux would be easy? The Internet/email/wp people? They are:
a) Not going to upgrade to vista. People still run 98/ME
b) If their new computer comes with vista, and all they want is the basics, DRM will not get in their way, and they won't care.
And what if companies were allowed to sell PCs with no OS loaded but still include a warranty? (they currently aren't, micro$oft says that they aren't fit for purpose and encourage piracy )
Then Joe Shmoe could get his email box for £150 less.
Also: win98 is officially broken. M$ do not support it, and neither do many antiVirus companies. They will eventually have to ditch 98.
I get a chuckle every time someone types M$ or a variant.
Do you have proof that they aren't allowed to now?
How much do you think that dell/whoever would actually knock off their price. I'm thinking a no OS box would cost $50 less than an os box. Then, they have the choice of dowloading a (depending on the distro) large or huge iso...or buying cds.
They go to the store (and assuming vista and {insert distro here} are both stocked), they have to choose between an established (in their mind) name and a something they've not really heard of.
People are lazy. They will pay $50 to get the vista install.
Microsoft will lose some people with vista (or they just will stick with xp for a while), but I don't expect to see the mass exodus that you do.
edit.
Yes, 98 is unsupported. But people still use it. How long do you think people will use xp for?
And what if companies were allowed to sell PCs with no OS loaded but still include a warranty? (they currently aren't, micro$oft says that they aren't fit for purpose and encourage piracy )
Then Joe Shmoe could get his email box for £150 less.
This is just a total lie. I buy PCs from Dell ALL THE TIME with "No OS" option. What the hell are you talking about?
I get a chuckle every time someone types M$ or a variant.
Do you have proof that they aren't allowed to now?
How much do you think that dell/whoever would actually knock off their price. I'm thinking a no OS box would cost $50 less than an os box. Then, they have the choice of dowloading a (depending on the distro) large or huge iso...or buying cds.
They go to the store (and assuming vista and {insert distro here} are both stocked), they have to choose between an established (in their mind) name and a something they've not really heard of.
People are lazy. They will pay $50 to get the vista install.
Microsoft will lose some people with vista (or they just will stick with xp for a while), but I don't expect to see the mass exodus that you do.
edit.
Yes, 98 is unsupported. But people still use it. How long do you think people will use xp for?
Well Microsoft haven't released a price vor Vista yet, but I'm guessing it will be a lot more than XP is today, probably more like XP was when it first came out, which was £200+
Obviously OEMs get it cheaper but I think £150 is not an unrealistic estimate. That's nearly $300USD.
And as for the PCs with no OS, it is just what my bosses at the computer shop where I work told me, but I did find this: http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=32692
And the shop is a microsoft gold certified partner, so it is likely that they would lose that status if they went against microsoft's recommendations above.
Is that just for servers or for home desktop *joe shmoe* PCs as well?
I would also imagine that Microsoft really doesn't want to piss off Dell. But a small computer company might well lose their gold status.
Dude... Your info is just plain wrong. You don't lose your gold status for not selling windows on every PC.
To answer your first question - that's for dell poweredge servers. Home desktop joe shmoe users are not going to be interested in the no OS option. It would be like buying a car without an engine if you weren't mechanically inclined.
I beg to differ. I think joe shmoe *would* be interested in a linux PC if he could save money on it for the same functionality. That's what most of this thread was about. :P
And like I said, that's just what my boss told me.
I present as a final argument before I go to bed: (and I am thoroughly enjoying this discussion! )
It will NOT be the same user experience. The average user expects a computer to do certain things. All of the things they see on TV, from their friends, on the shelves at the local big box mart, the devices, the gadgets, the culture of PCs is essentially that which Windows and Mac OS have given us. I can 100% guarantee you that the average Joe Shmoe, at some point, will encounter SOMETHING he can't do on his shiny new linux PC. Whether it be to buy a $5 kids game that he saw in the checkout line (like Jumpstart Kindergarten for his young daughter), or plug in his new Kodak EasyShare and have it be recognized out of the box, to buying a scanner, to photo printers, to video capture boxes.
I am not arguing that these things CANNOT BE DONE in linux - but I am saying that they are not effortless. Some of those things require great effort and frustrating hours of searching. The end user would simply take the $5 jumpstart game back to the store for a refund, and then bitch to his coworkers or friends that his computer sucks.
Have a good night! I'm sure I'll see you in the morning
I too need some sleep. but I might point out that all of those things you mentioned are very easily done with debian, kde, and your friendly IRC support channel. ^_^
There are just as many things that don't work if you have a mac. Users tolerate that though, so why not Linux?
1) Regardless of the current amount of support, there are some things that do not work on linux. You admitted that earlier.
2) Bobby could go out and buy a game/whatever and make it work with support from whatever distro with some or a lot of work and help from whatever distro you pick. The point is that Bobby and/or his dad (Robby) want to go to a store, buy the game, put the cd in the drive, let autorun do its thing (or click setup), have it install and work. Not have it kinda work and then need to head online/IRC to make it work right.
The ability to make almost everything work eventually cannot compete (for the mainstream) with the ability to make everything work right away, with less effort.
Note that there are some games/programs that don't really work all that well out of the box (for whatever OS), and I admit that I am ignoring those.
re macs:
People aren't buying macs ({insert large cat os}) to replace all the functions of a pc (windows). They're buying them because they do everything that they want, and they do it well. They know what they will or won't be able to do when they buy it.
If you're pushing linux as a windows replacement, with the same ease, that is not the case. I'm willing to bet that if I told you that I had a better car to give you, and all you had to do was...change the oil, check the dingle arm, make sure that there was minimal sinusoidal deplanarization, calibrate the duractance, and make sure the flux capacitor was ok, EVERY TIME you wanted to drive somewhere, would you really want that car? Oh, and just because it worked the last time you drove to one place, that doesn't mean it'll work the next place you drive. Don't worry, you could just drive to the local IRepair Cars garage to help if you had any problems.
not to mention now that you can run windows on any of the intel macs now.
why do you think the sales of mac notebooks have sky rocketed lately. i have a feeling it isn't because everyone suddenly wants to convert to OSX, it is because now they can run windows on macs premium hardware...
Give ubuntu another couple of years and I do think the gap will be even smaller. Just look how far linux has come over the past couple of years... yeah thats right.. a LONG ways
Okay, there is no way on earth that dear Auntie Josephine is going to know how to get onto an IRC channel, much less even knows of its existence. That is not a valid support option for "Joe Shmoe"
Okay, there is no way on earth that dear Auntie Josephine is going to know how to get onto an IRC channel, much less even knows of its existence. That is not a valid support option for "Joe Shmoe"
Oh but Mac is FreeBSD, which is almost the same as linux, isn't it perfect and infallible?
What, are you going to tell me that Mac isn't ready for the end user now?
How can a few nonexistent features make Linux not ready for the end user, yet not do the same to Mac?
The superiority of linux has absolutely nothing to do with how the software is designed, or what software is available or even the fact that it may or may not be more secure than the others.
I feel that its superior because I have the sourcecode freely available. If somethings broken or acting funny, I can open up my favority development environment and have a look through the code to see why...and if it tickles me I might fix it as well. Thats where Linux has the advantage to me....
Do you have proof that they aren't allowed to now?
If you accuraly read there partner licencing information you would see that you breach the terms of there contract if you fail to install windows on every pc you sell. (At least in canada)
skryking:
Yup, that is a huge benefit to those of us who are code-savvy. I've fudged around in the source a lot when I was trying to get whatever program to compile or run properly for embedded linux at my internship, and some of that on my own machine. (I know you're not necessarily trying to say it is, but...) This is one part of linux that Joe Shmo isn't going to care about, and probably won't ever want to mess with compiling something from source.
jared:
The gap has closed greatly, and Ubuntu is pretty close, I agree. Hopefully they (or another project) can get there, and maybe more support will come from that.
the ubuntu developers pissed me off when they decided to patch the kernel to prevent any access to /dev/kmem, /dev/mem, and /proc/kcore. use to be able to grab dumps out of those devices to retrieve files after an application had crashed...but not any more... they hacked the code so even root is denied access...
the ubuntu developers pissed me off when they decided to patch the kernel to prevent any access to /dev/kmem, /dev/mem, and /proc/kcore. use to be able to grab dumps out of those devices to retrieve files after an application had crashed...but not any more... they hacked the code so even root is denied access...
Skryking
Wtf? That's stupid. Wouldn't it also break software suspend/hibernate?
But then, you can always just compile your own kernel. you don't have to use the haxxed ubuntu stock kernels.
Comments
Linux systems work out of the box for everything that my mum does with her PC.
I too have a 16 year old younger sister. She is happily using Debian along with her twin brother. She knows nothing about how it works, just that it does. She downloads music, chats online, plays flash and java games, customises her desktop (more than she could do on windows I might add), and uses her webcam.
Though, with the arrival of Vista, trusted computing, the tightening of the DRM screws, and the drop of support for old windows versions, I predict a mass exodus to Linux, which may be exactly what the market penetration needs.
Maybe then you will agree that it is better than windows.
I've used itunes for about 4 years now, and have never had a problem with machineID stuff. I ran out of computers to install on (hit the limit) once, but I deauthorized all computers and haven't had a problem yet.
You said that fnando shouldn't pirate xp, but I should break the law to run linux (dedrm my stuff)? And where should I buy just a single of a song I like that will run fine on linux? Once again, this comes down to what should I sacrifice to run something that will not really get me much benefit?
I do not expect this mass migration, regardless of what vista adds (unless some sort of physical penetration is included).
DeDRMing your music I call Fair Use.
I am not pro-drm. I am apathetic towards it. The only thing I haven't been able to do because of it is switch to linux...which I don't want to do for other reasons. There was a time when I was playing my m4ps fine in fedora, but I left it because I couldn't do everything else I wanted to do.
When they tighten the thumbscrews and remove more of your rights for their own greed, it will suddenly hit you that DRM is evil.
But by that time there will be absolutely nothing you can do about it.
Get out while you still can.
And there is such a thing as Fair Use, that makes DRM unconstitutional (AFAIK;IANAL), because you can't even use it for personal listening after buying it.
Read up on it.
AND
Remember those people you were talking about that the switch to linux would be easy? The Internet/email/wp people? They are:
a) Not going to upgrade to vista. People still run 98/ME
b) If their new computer comes with vista, and all they want is the basics, DRM will not get in their way, and they won't care.
And what if companies were allowed to sell PCs with no OS loaded but still include a warranty? (they currently aren't, micro$oft says that they aren't fit for purpose and encourage piracy
Then Joe Shmoe could get his email box for £150 less.
Also: win98 is officially broken. M$ do not support it, and neither do many antiVirus companies. They will eventually have to ditch 98.
Do you have proof that they aren't allowed to now?
How much do you think that dell/whoever would actually knock off their price. I'm thinking a no OS box would cost $50 less than an os box. Then, they have the choice of dowloading a (depending on the distro) large or huge iso...or buying cds.
They go to the store (and assuming vista and {insert distro here} are both stocked), they have to choose between an established (in their mind) name and a something they've not really heard of.
People are lazy. They will pay $50 to get the vista install.
Microsoft will lose some people with vista (or they just will stick with xp for a while), but I don't expect to see the mass exodus that you do.
edit.
Yes, 98 is unsupported. But people still use it. How long do you think people will use xp for?
This is just a total lie. I buy PCs from Dell ALL THE TIME with "No OS" option. What the hell are you talking about?
Well Microsoft haven't released a price vor Vista yet, but I'm guessing it will be a lot more than XP is today, probably more like XP was when it first came out, which was £200+
Obviously OEMs get it cheaper but I think £150 is not an unrealistic estimate. That's nearly $300USD.
And as for the PCs with no OS, it is just what my bosses at the computer shop where I work told me, but I did find this:
http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=32692
And the shop is a microsoft gold certified partner, so it is likely that they would lose that status if they went against microsoft's recommendations above.
I would also imagine that Microsoft really doesn't want to piss off Dell. But a small computer company might well lose their gold status.
To answer your first question - that's for dell poweredge servers. Home desktop joe shmoe users are not going to be interested in the no OS option. It would be like buying a car without an engine if you weren't mechanically inclined.
And like I said, that's just what my boss told me.
And for the next chapter in the choose your own linux vs windows argument, see this link
It will NOT be the same user experience. The average user expects a computer to do certain things. All of the things they see on TV, from their friends, on the shelves at the local big box mart, the devices, the gadgets, the culture of PCs is essentially that which Windows and Mac OS have given us. I can 100% guarantee you that the average Joe Shmoe, at some point, will encounter SOMETHING he can't do on his shiny new linux PC. Whether it be to buy a $5 kids game that he saw in the checkout line (like Jumpstart Kindergarten for his young daughter), or plug in his new Kodak EasyShare and have it be recognized out of the box, to buying a scanner, to photo printers, to video capture boxes.
I am not arguing that these things CANNOT BE DONE in linux - but I am saying that they are not effortless. Some of those things require great effort and frustrating hours of searching. The end user would simply take the $5 jumpstart game back to the store for a refund, and then bitch to his coworkers or friends that his computer sucks.
Have a good night! I'm sure I'll see you in the morning
Unless the server needs restarting before then
There are just as many things that don't work if you have a mac. Users tolerate that though, so why not Linux?
Shwaip: I take it it's a windows server?
2) Bobby could go out and buy a game/whatever and make it work with support from whatever distro with some or a lot of work and help from whatever distro you pick. The point is that Bobby and/or his dad (Robby) want to go to a store, buy the game, put the cd in the drive, let autorun do its thing (or click setup), have it install and work. Not have it kinda work and then need to head online/IRC to make it work right.
The ability to make almost everything work eventually cannot compete (for the mainstream) with the ability to make everything work right away, with less effort.
Note that there are some games/programs that don't really work all that well out of the box (for whatever OS), and I admit that I am ignoring those.
re macs:
People aren't buying macs ({insert large cat os}) to replace all the functions of a pc (windows). They're buying them because they do everything that they want, and they do it well. They know what they will or won't be able to do when they buy it.
If you're pushing linux as a windows replacement, with the same ease, that is not the case. I'm willing to bet that if I told you that I had a better car to give you, and all you had to do was...change the oil, check the dingle arm, make sure that there was minimal sinusoidal deplanarization, calibrate the duractance, and make sure the flux capacitor was ok, EVERY TIME you wanted to drive somewhere, would you really want that car? Oh, and just because it worked the last time you drove to one place, that doesn't mean it'll work the next place you drive. Don't worry, you could just drive to the local I Repair Cars garage to help if you had any problems.
why do you think the sales of mac notebooks have sky rocketed lately. i have a feeling it isn't because everyone suddenly wants to convert to OSX, it is because now they can run windows on macs premium hardware...
Give ubuntu another couple of years and I do think the gap will be even smaller. Just look how far linux has come over the past couple of years... yeah thats right.. a LONG ways
Oh but Mac is FreeBSD, which is almost the same as linux, isn't it perfect and infallible?
What, are you going to tell me that Mac isn't ready for the end user now?
How can a few nonexistent features make Linux not ready for the end user, yet not do the same to Mac?
I feel that its superior because I have the sourcecode freely available. If somethings broken or acting funny, I can open up my favority development environment and have a look through the code to see why...and if it tickles me I might fix it as well. Thats where Linux has the advantage to me....
Skryking
I'd like to see a quote from that.
skryking:
Yup, that is a huge benefit to those of us who are code-savvy. I've fudged around in the source a lot when I was trying to get whatever program to compile or run properly for embedded linux at my internship, and some of that on my own machine. (I know you're not necessarily trying to say it is, but...) This is one part of linux that Joe Shmo isn't going to care about, and probably won't ever want to mess with compiling something from source.
jared:
The gap has closed greatly, and Ubuntu is pretty close, I agree. Hopefully they (or another project) can get there, and maybe more support will come from that.
Skryking
Wtf? That's stupid. Wouldn't it also break software suspend/hibernate?
But then, you can always just compile your own kernel. you don't have to use the haxxed ubuntu stock kernels.