OSNews

That won't work. Imagine a discussion between gradma and the salesman:

"Well mam now you need to choose your operating system"
"What was that son?"
"Oh never mind, Windows will be fine for you."

My bet would be on education. Get them while they're young. Push Linux teaching in school and then when they grow up they'll probably want to use it on their own.

Maybe by then Adobe will release Photoshop for Linux so people can pirate it on Linux too.

what really should be educated, is understanding how to do something is a ui neutral way.

most complaints these days are not about how a replacement app miss some feature or other, but that the ui is different from what apps the user have been using to perform some task until now.

it seems a lot of people would love to use gimp as a photoshop replacement, if the gimp gui was more like photoshop for windows.

That's been my stance for a long time now. Teach how to do a skill not a brand of tool that performs that task. I can't remember what brand of hammer I first put a nail to wood with and I've never required that same brand of hammer to attach two pieces of wood since. If I by Brofasco nails, I don't required a Brofasco branded hammer to use them.

Schools are a very traditional and backward thinking institution though. Teachers may start with all the passion and enthusiasm imaginable but eventually, they are just trying to get through the school year and make it to retirnment. Just regurgitate the lesson plans from last year and mark the papers.

Bah.. teach a kid to use a computer rather than teaching them how to use a brand of software application.

Doesn't Photoshop run under wine? I would think that running photoshop would be a requirement before making any release of Wine.

Its a real shame that Wine works so well...maybe that is the reason they don't release a native version of it.

Only the current version-2 runs well under wine. It's basically unusable if you have to rely on running a current version. It's easier to run Windows in VMWare and use the apps there.

I work with 200MB+, 5-10 adjustment layers in ProPhoto/16-bit photos quite often and those require an incredible amount of grunt to do anything with.

I also work closely with InDesign, Illustrator, AfterEffects and Premiere.

WINE doesn't cut it.

Yeah, but if you really use all those features, you aren't a typical user...

I'd put you on an osX rig since it seems you actually use the 90% of Photoshop and other Adobe tools that most people will never touch and need a slick parformance focussed paltform.

The real downfall of Adobe outside of Apple/Microsoft markets was demanding license fees that where not justifiable in comparison to competing products for most users. Hm.. Photoshop does 10% more than GIMP yet they are still asking 700$ per install.. back to GIMP we go.

Now, they seem stuck on the myth that unless you run Microsoft or Apple systems, your unwilling to pay any license cost for software; nope, we just value quality, functionality and costs that are justifiable against those traits.

I'd guess your already on an Apple platform from the sounds of what your doing but that's not based on anything further than your comment here so what do I know..

sadly, a os alone does next to nothing. what people really care about is "can this machine do X?" where X some task or other...

and preferably that it can do task X by using app Y, that they got on a CD/DVD-R from a friend, neighbor, relative or similar...

hell, one could say that its the rampant copying of windows that have kept it in use more then any bundling on new machines.

That little strategy was not overlooked by MS when they where still growing. They happily turned a blind eye to home users since they wanted the enterprise and home users ask for the tools the know and use at home (and vis-versa).

Now that they have dominant share, it's all about the anti-piracy BS. No, you can't seel computers without an OS because they'll pirate our products.

My gripe isn't with a company trying to protect its property but MS goes about it the wrong way and changes it's stance depending on what is more applicable for that discussion.

There should be a law that prevents such bundling.

Taking away choice could be considered fascism. Granted bundling limits choice in a way. It makes it simpler for non-technical people.

You go to the store, buy the computer and then choose the operating system. It's extremely simple.

I would argue that it is not that simple at all. Take a look at systems theory in wikipedia. OS use follows complex ecosystemic interactions between business use, what you learned on, govt. support, what is supported in stores, what your use in your family, etc. Not that simple at all. Rather complex. Also changing behavior, human that is, is even more complex. We tend to stick with what we know even if there are better options out there. Not everyone has the motivation to change. One could argue that the majority of Windows users don't care about the OS but really want to run certain games, programs like Office, that they are used to.

Edited 2008-07-07 18:51 UTC

I couldn't disagree more. It doesn't have anything to do with bundling, or availability. Linux is free, that pricing is far more competitive that Microsoft's pricing. There's no public demand for Linux because it is an inferior product for the majority of the home user market. Linux is great in a server room, and on an enterprise level, but for someone who essentially wants something to "just work" Linux fails. There have been many improvements in this area over the years but they have not surpassed Microsoft in general usability for the average consumer.

The big shift in computers in the past year has been from Windows to the Mac due in large part to usability and quality being superior to Windows. Also, positive experiences consumers have had with Apple's consumer devices and the availability of some of their software on the Windows platform has advanced their mindshare with the public. Complaints of Microsoft bundling their OS to a HP machine at Best Buy is a cop-out.

in other words, the ipod halo effect

oh, and lets not forget the amount of help microsoft gets in the "just works" department from the third party suppliers. as microsoft os's are the big dog of the industry, not making sure that ones product work on it can be a economic suicide...

Edited 2008-07-07 19:08 UTC

I couldn't disagree more. It doesn't have anything to do with bundling, or availability. Linux is free, that pricing is far more competitive that Microsoft's pricing. There's no public demand for Linux because it is an inferior product for the majority of the home user market. Linux is great in a server room, and on an enterprise level, but for someone who essentially wants something to "just work" Linux fails. There have been many improvements in this area over the years but they have not surpassed Microsoft in general usability for the average consumer.

The big shift in computers in the past year has been from Windows to the Mac due in large part to usability and quality being superior to Windows. Also, positive experiences consumers have had with Apple's consumer devices and the availability of some of their software on the Windows platform has advanced their mindshare with the public. Complaints of Microsoft bundling their OS to a HP machine at Best Buy is a cop-out. "

Although Linux is free, Windows bundled PC is cheaper than Linux bundled PC. So you can see that actually Windows is more competitive than Linux.

looking at recent netbook prices, im not so sure about windows being cheaper (but for some reason, most multiversion netbooks seems to only put linux on the version with the inferior hardware). still, microsoft seems willing to take a loss on os, as long as they can get people "indoctrinated" on their products for the long term.

They put it on inferior hardware because thats the only market they have been able to penetrate. Most people who buy "good" hardware and want linux are not noobs, and would rather do it themselfs. The only time ive seen a computer illiterate person buy some good hardware is when I led them to it. Most ask does it do this? and go home with whatever hurts thier checkbook the least.

Windows bundled PCs are cheaper than Linux bundled ones because for Windows PCs, the OEM more than makes up the cost of the Windows OEM license with the revenue gained from deals to bundle trialware (aka "crapware"). (Corresponding Linux "crapware" is free to begin with, and is already available via the distro repository, so OEMs can't make money via crapware bundling deals.)

So, cost to an OEM for bundling Linux is zero.
Cost to an OEM for bundling Windows is cost of Windows OEM license offset by crapware revenue, which actually makes it cheaper to bundle Windows than Linux.

The bulk of the home market in Australia is from small whitebox shops. They will all sell a machine without Windows for AUD120 less (the cost of oem Vista).

I couldn't disagree more. After the third time I spent a few days rescuing my sister-in-law's Windows computer from its latest breakdown (due mostly to accumulated malware) I suggested to her to let me put the Windows back on the machine as a "Virtual" machine where it could be protected a bit from the internet, and where I could re-instate it simply by replacing one file. She agreed.

So I installed Kubuntu for her, then Virtualbox, and then her copy of Windows under Virtualbox. It ran pretty well and I showed her how it all worked.

A few weeks later I asked her how it was going ... she told me she didn't use the Windows bit any more because the Kubuntu part was far easier to use and it didn't get malware ...

You still had to install that and set that up for her. Also she had windows in a virtual machine to use while she adjusted to Kubuntu. She wouldn't have done any of that on her own. It's a heartfelt anecdote, but it's hardly the typical consumer scenario.

The point of the tale (admittedly an atypical one) that you seem to miss is that she didn't know how to set up a Windows installation for herself either, but she was able to buy a Windows installation from the computer shop.

Her purchased Windows installation kept breaking on her through her normal use of it ... to the point where it no longer worked at all and would have required as much expense (each time it broke) to get fixed (if she didn't have my help) as the original cost.

She didn't know how to set up a Linux installation for herself (if she didn't have my help) but she couldn't buy it from a computer shop ... because it wasn't offered to her as an option.

When she did get a Linux installation on her machine ... it didn't break on her through her normal use of the machine, and she found out quite quickly that in her normal use she didn't need Windows at all ... (once she was able to get a working Linux installation supplied to her).

Edited 2008-07-08 07:30 UTC

No, it's NOT that "simple". Generally speaking, people want integrated solutions. They don't want to install an operating system -- hell, most people have no idea what an operating system IS or DOES -- and they certainly don't want to think about how it should be configured. They treat their computer as they would any other prepackaged component. They open the box, plug it in, and it's ready for use. Done. They don't want to hunt for drivers, read FAQs, or tweak config files. This issue of CHOICE, that seems so important to many of you, doesn't even register on their collective radar. As far as they're concerned, they made the CHOICE when they purchased the computer. If you want to change anything, you have to change the market relationship where the operating system is pre-installed; namely, at the PC OEM. Which means getting Dell and HP and Toshiba and others to choose Linux. But, seriously, how are you going to convince them to go Linux when they perceive the desktop Linux market to be less than 1% of users? It's a chicken-and-egg problem.

in other words, a netbook with a integrated package of os, office suite and browser would be perfect for most out there?

sounds like apple really is on a winning streak then if they made a imac with iwork and iphone with mobileme as a package deal.

now if the linux community could get together and bang out a similar package around the eeepc and neo freerunner...

but i guess that the recent uproar over switching from GTK to QT on the neo shows that people in that area are more about politics then products...

You are bang on about choice. If you are chasing the mainstream market (god only knows why you would want to do this, but a lot of people do seem quite intent on it), choice is the last thing you want.

Every time someone has to make a choice, you are forcing them to think about something that they don't want to think about. They don't want to have to choose between Distros, DMs, WMs, Text Editors, File Managers, Browsers, etc. This is considered work.

Well, Ubuntu is for that - one preselected item of most needed apps is preselected.

Long as we make the same provision for Macs... you can't buy a machine bundled with OSX. You gotta choose either OSX or Linux when you purchase it.

I wish it were that simple. I've moved back to Mac after putting up with *NIX on my Lenovo laptop. I can tell you, in all due respects, the Linux world (distributions) need a good hard look at their product line up before spitting and cursing at Windows/Microsoft and OEMs.

There is a demand for an alternative, and Mac's are filling that spot - and not all Mac OS X users are clueless drones. Many of us are *NIX people tired of waiting for the blessed silver bullet to arrive and bring the *NIX world kicking and screaming into 2008.

I suggest that every Linux advocate who knows how to programme - purchase a Mac, and study every single inch of the operating system; concentrate on the 'small things' that make using it a nice experience. Live, breath and eat the Mac experience, then go back to using a Linux machine - then tell me that Linux is ready for the masse.

Don't get my wrong, I'm all for bashing a greedy bully such as Microsoft, but to ignore Linux's short comings in a fit of Microsoft-hating rage accomplishes nothing.

And it's so easy to avoid... Just use '%25' instead of '%'...

http://osnews.com/story/19985/Linux_-_Still_Chasing_That_Elusive_1~...

remember, that % means nothing without some kind of added info like the total size of the group referred to, and how the data was collected.

distro forums will naturally show a high concentration of users for that distro. but if one collect browser data for all the major search engine sites and use that as a single large data set, what then?

think of it this way. you have 100 linux users in a room, then you march in 100 windows users. now you have a total of 200 people in that room, but the percentage of linux users dropped from 100% to 50%.

with larger groups, like what one get from looking at website logs, there may be 100000 linux users, but 1000000 windows users. this will send the linux % into a nosedive.

Why? If you use Linux at the desktop, chances are you've already changed your browser's UserAgent string to some version of IE or FireFox for Windows so you don't get tons of useless warnings from sites refusing to show you a page because you're using an "unsupported browser" to view it. Those people will show up as Windows users in the survey.

That and you get a certain amount of skew based on the demographics of the sites.

Anyway, Linux "market-share" is mostly concentrated in other "markets", such as servers, embedded devices, media distribution, etc.

yeah its not accurate at all.. linux has atleast the same share as osx has, anyone who just looks around themselves for a few minute will come to the same conclusion..

Consider how many computers exist in the world. 1% of that number is enough to fill a hell of alot of forums.

one can focus it down to specific pages or regions, but then one have to be a paying user.

is osnews willing to fork up some cash?

Yeah... but the statistic as it is now doesn't tell you anything. It's worthless. You can't make a conclusion from the data.

Where in the world is this marketshare representative?
IS it representative at all?
What is the age span of the people who provided the data?
How computer-literate are they?
etc.

If you don't have this information you can jump to nice conclusions like: "The people who provided the data are all over 40 years old and live in Utah".
Why would this conclusion be wrong? There's no source that tells me that it isn't.

Of course this example is a bit over the top. But without the source it is impossible to give any trustworthy statistics.

indeed, a % without context is useless. but sadly its being used that way all the time. i guess the news reading/viewing public have basically become accustomed to it...

Ok, here's a random traffic ranking for a very popular site in Romania:
Windows XP 699.278 87,55%
Windows Vista 70.800 8,86%
Windows 2000 9.150 1,15%
Macintosh 6.111 0,77%
Unix 3.983 0,50%
Windows 98 3.497 0,44%
Windows 2003 3.153 0,39%
Altele 2.150 0,27%
Windows Me 358 0,04%
Windows NT 151 0,02%
Windows 95 80 0,01%
Source: http://stat.trafic.ro/stat/gazetasporturilorro/sistem/#sistemdeoper...
It's a sport sites, so it's not chock full of tech geeks (like a distribution forum), just regular people.
Linux (which is categorized under Unix) is in the gutter.
Romania isn't a rich country, but even Mac has a higher market share (remember, we import Macs from the US, with huge taxes, and because of low demand they're sold as high priced luxury items, so they're a lot more expensive than your average PC).

Checking for the top 10 or 20 sites shows the same thing. Under 1 percent. Linux is fighting Windows 98, not Vista

Edited 2008-07-07 21:33 UTC

Sorry, I visited the site with my Linux machine, so your post is now rendered inaccurate and out of date, please remove it.

yeah, so did I, lets really screw up them stats

If for Mac OSX they are reluctantly write release for Intel architecture, I wonder why should they write release for Linux?

Well, I think you're being far to generous for Adobes Windows gear. They seem to be reluctant to write decent software for those 'pesky end users'. I would love to see these people work in customer service and have them realise that it is the customer who pays their wage - not some magical entity called a 'corporation'.

Believe me, I've worked in companies with apparently very smart people who can't seem to work out who actually pays their wage. I think maybe if the people at Adobe realised it, then they would treat their customers a whole lot better.

or one can use the live cd desktop while the install gones on in the background.

Easy installation is good, but that alone doesn't make the system as a whole valuable to everyone. Installing should really only rarely be done.

Most people buy their computers with an OS preinstalled, so they don't have to configure the machine themselves. Turn it on, and off you go!
It doesn't matter what OS is installed in the beginning it just has to be useful.

Linux deficiencies are still general software availability. For a lot of uses it's ok, but only very few linux desktop apps surpass Windows or Mac OS apps. This is worse for professional software in a lot of fields.
And that's what it's all about: Apps you want to use.

The only Linux app I want to use on another OS is Synaptic.

I actually agree with most of your text but this piece:

Begs me to ask: why is it that most of the windows users I know need to reinstall their system often, to keep it running right ?

This question is not exactly directed to you, but since I had to quote you, I felt like "replying".

Begs me to ask: why is it that most of the windows users I know need to reinstall their system often, to keep it running right ?

This question is not exactly directed to you, but since I had to quote you, I felt like "replying". "

They need to reinstall so often because they install crap - so-called performance boosters, registry tweakers, installation slimmers ad nausiem. I can tell you that after working at an ISP, you will see all manner of crap people install.

Oh, and these aren't Joe Average, clueless village idiot - in a lot of cases these are so-called 'power users' installing all manner of garbage that slow the system down.

Does it occur in the Mac world? I can assure you it does. People thinking they're hot shit because they install some piece of hackware to 'uncover' and 'undocumented feature'. If I had a dollar for everytime I saw a scenario's like that in a Mac forum, I'd be able to purchase Microsoft with enough change to purchase OS news contributors a pizza and a 6 pack of beer each.

Edited 2008-07-08 05:59 UTC

and thats why i go for a open os. no need for such "tools"...

i recall that a web appliance was tried by telenor in norway around the 90's. didnt work out so well.

but that was then and this is now. it may actually work.

i recall reading that someone had set up a person with a N800 and a bluetooth keyboard so that he could access his banks web service. he was much happier with that then with the windows pc he had been using earlier.

You mean the Telenor SmartPhone?
http://press.telenor.com/PR/200003/798859_5_1.html

Reading about this now is just hilarious!



A friend of mine had this thing. He got it for free somehow, but I don't think he ever used it much. If I remeber correctly both the keyboard and screen was a pain to use.

yep, that would be the one.

a relative of mine owned one at some point, but i didnt mess around with it much (i think the browser was outdated even at that point).

nice try on their part tho, kinda like a web version of the minitel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minitel

but at that point isdn was already doing the dodo dance...

wal-mart sold linux based computers of the shelf for a while, but i dont recall ever reading why they stopped (iirc, they are still available online).

and if the number of people doing after-market installs of winXP on their eeepc's is anything to go by...

Why when someone points out that you really need to know how to use your computer, another one will reply "Joe Average isn't interested in computers". Then why acquire one? How come such a complex electronic device should be useable with no formation whatsoever? What's so "perfectly understandable" about trying to use something knowing nothing about it?

This isn't a personal attack moleskine, I'm being completely honest, I never understood why a person should be able to use a computer without really knowing how to do it, the same way you don't driver a car without knowing how, or don't shoot a gun without knowing which end is the deadly one.