A Question of Choice

Ubuntu is, as of yet, the easiest distribution of Linux to install/configure/use. However, it is still not on par with the likes of Windows and Mac OS X.

Why?

Well as far as i'm concerned, it's because there is too much choice. When it comes to computers, there are a lot of people who know what they want, but haven't the technical expertise, time or patience to acquire it without being given one, simple, intuitive method of doing so. I'm not a big user of Linux, but i've toyed around with it enough to know my way around, and the software repository systems surpass anything available in Windows or OS X in terms of content and potential. But as fantastic as it is, it's just not that usable. You are presented with an overwhelming amount of software, bewilderinlgy named with acronyms, abbreviations and numbers. The descriptions are terse, and, while installing is simply point and click, finding what you've just installed can be anything but (though i understand this has been addresed somewhat in the newest version). I saw an article not so long ago which discussed the prisoner mentality that is apparent in Windows users that scares people from moving over to Linux. Every bit of this article was true; that in Windows we dont have much choice over how we can do things, but are told what to do, so we all conform to doing everything the same way. However i disagree with the notion that this is such a bad thing. For 99% of people, this is what they want. They aren't paying Microsoft because they want to be restricted. They are paying Microsoft because they want to be guided. I see the problem stemming from the fact that the people producing the Linux distributions don't comprehend the fact that people might not want all this choice and confusion.

I think it's about time people started taking a few leaves out of each other's books. Windows software manufacturers, Microsoft and its associates, could learn a lot about software distribution from the Ubuntu camp, while they in turn should spend a little time using Windows to see what people want from their operating system. While both of them need lessons in interface design from Apple. As much as we love to bash Microsoft and Windows XP for all the various flaws and vulnerabilities, some things deserve credit.

Anyhow, just my 2 pennies, discuss!! But please, remind yourself that we're talking about the average Windows user here, of which none of you are

#412452

i'm going to go ahead and be l337 about this.

linux doesn't need windows like simplicity. linux is not a commercially oriented community and therefore there will never be one program for one job, nor will it be simplified not to have different version concurrently. you have to realise that the portion of linux users that make the different programs do so because they might have found something lacking in the program or differed from the school of thought that went into coding it.

the linux userbase is very different from the windows userbase. they're not all the type that uses the computer for multimedia. a lot of them use it as a development environment. others use it on their servers. a lot of old school hackers still run CDE. you can't force KDE on them can you?

IMO the best thing about linux is the plethora of distributions. these days a lot of new users are switching over from windows to linux but for them there is xandros and linspire. linspire's CNR pretty much offers one program per job. for the type that run linux as a statement, there is fedora core, suse, mandriva, etc. wide varieties of programs, but still in the form of rpms so there is no hassle of concurrent installations.

basically the people producing a distribution have a good idea who they are aiming the distribution towards. it can be as simple as you want, or as flexible. if you're switching to linux just so you can have a windows clone that you didn't have to pay for then you need to get less stingy. the distro's that try and stay close to windows cost money for almost the same reason windows does. people who don't want the choice and confusion should really run xandros or linspire because thats who theose distros are aimed for.

there are also some other good distributions like arch linux that have good package management. for the l337 h4x0rs or just people looking to get to know linux better there are source based distros, like gentoo, and source-mage.

basically the linux community has progressed leaps and bounds and it's mainly because of the OSS/FSF ideology. and thats something that's not going to change soon.

#412538

Or in cynical:

After you made your escape from proprietary prison, you carry the image

of your previous iron bars superimposed on your now unencumbered view.

But it'll wear off, if you keep going.

Linux is getting better every year.

This year, I persuaded my gf to make the switch with me:

Once I got her using Firefox/Thunderbird/Gaim for security/privacy reasons,

the switch was painless for her - the autohide-taskbar that took ages to react on her AthlonXP 2000+ was replaced with the default ubuntu one.

Maybe next year I can also cure my mum, aged 56, habitual gatherer of

IE-toolbars and other crap, from this pestilence that targets windows.

There are things that I don't understand/dislike/loathe myself with Linux but it is what it is:

Whatever I want it to be. (Like, coding aqua-apps for Linux isn't really funny: it'll take me ages to understand gtk+/cairo/dbus/glitz... but I'm already involved in porting some of my stuff)

My guess is that what went wrong with XP will get even worse with Vista and flock more of the headless sheep onto another shepherd. They mostly don't know why it is wrong but they sense that it is wrong and has been going downhill ever since. Linux can be a fresh breath of air to them and a rejuvenation for their older hardware that went slow under the burden of XP patches and updates...

#413806

you're right, but it doesn't mean that linux has to work like windows. if you're switching, you need to be prepared to adjust to the differences that are inherent to the OS

#413945

I'm not looking forward to Vista either.

From what I've seen it appears to be bulky and bloated. I run my Windows laptop in as fast a configuration as i can. Every unecessary service is disabled and the UI is hashed up (in what has to be said is a very linux-esque manner) to be as quick and easy to use as possible. I don't want skins and themes bogging down my system, which is why i haven't actually installed a new theme in months, and yet this seems to be the only new offering in Vista that the average user is going to notice - UI enhancements. People argue that it has a whole new filesystem, but so many features have been dropped that i really think it is a poor show for years of development.

With regards to speed, that is one of the things i like about Linux. The speed and responsiveness. Yet as with many people, it is the lack of software support that prevents me from ever adopting it. There is also the small matter of being content with OS X but that is beside the point. Though in some cases i find the interface in Tiger to be a little on the unresponsive side to.

linux doesn't need windows like simplicity. linux is not a commercially oriented community

On the consumer desktop side this is largely true, on the server side, certainly not, though i think our discussion is focused on the PC side here, where the low cost is the USP of Linux. While these Linux distributions may not be commercially motivated to gain market share, you cannot deny that this is one of the primary objectives when it comes to distributions such as Ubuntu. Ubuntu is linux's best ambassador in the PC market, hence my focus on them, and their emphasis is on ease of use. This is why i have been comparing the 3 operating systems. I think in this case it really does need Windows like simplicity in order to capture the market.

In my opinion, the ideal system for Ubuntu would be to structure their OS in "tiers". The OS should be straight forward for people to configure without any use of the command line (which is inherently scary for most) on one level, and on another level there should be more advance options that people can explore, alter and adjust as they learn more about the system.

Forgive me for byassing my discussion towards one distribution, but you are very right when you said:

the linux userbase is very different from the windows userbase

However, Ubuntu IS going after the windows userbase, and that is why they need to look at the leaders in the industry if they are ever going to build a substantial user base, before they start making big changes, which will no doubt be for the good, yet may reduce the appeal of the operating system if things are too different, too soon.

Where do you see all these platforms in a few years time? Windows will almost certainly decline, though the userbase is far to massive for it to be in trouble any time soon. OS X is gaining market share, but they're never going to be competitive in terms of numbers as long as Apple are the only official hardware vendors. Which leaves a gap for Ubuntu & Co to infiltrate the huge maret looking for a cheaper alternative.

Anyhow, thanks for persevering with that! I think it's a good discussion to have though

#413982

if ubuntu is going after the windows user base then they will have to almost clone the windows UI.

90% of windows users are not willing to adapt to a change in the ui that they are so used to. thats pretty much the reason they keep going back to windows - the comfort of familiarity.

but i think the superficial and core differences are the key to getting windows users to switch to linux if they aren't happy with the way windows is working (cost aside)

#414266

I too hope that ubuntu does NOT go after the windows user base.

Cloning the UI would be a degress to some extent - hopefully there will always be choice in xubuntu/kubuntu if gnome based ubuntu gets too windowsy, which will never happen I guess...

Needless to say that 90% of the windows users are non-geeks that are also not willing to learn, either using their windows safely or using a safer OS in a safe manner. There'd be no problem if computers would be as limited as VCRs or toasters, but they aren't. Yet the amount of patronizing one can endure from MS differs from person to person: The more MS tightens the screws, the more people will be fed up with it...

#414353

Needless to say that 90% of the windows users are non-geeks that are also not willing to learn, either using their windows safely or using a safer OS in a safe manner. There'd be no problem if computers would be as limited as VCRs or toasters, but they aren't. Yet the amount of patronizing one can endure from MS differs from person to person: The more MS tightens the screws, the more people will be fed up with it...

*raises hand*

i am gettin tired of windows now, but i played around for a week on my friend's mac and it just showed me what its like on the other side. most of my apps that i like didnt work, and everything seemed too hard to fit together.

if linux is anything like that, and it sounds even more complicated, im not really willing to go switching to it.

but i agree with herds previous post too, my computer has become noticably slower after sp2, it came with only sp1 installed, and it is still massively fast after a reformat.

#415210