Now, you can't repackage software with closed source applications. Is this a problem, yes. But once again, you have to remember why the GPL (which most linux software is released under) was created. It was created to help promote a completely free(dom) system. Closed Source software goes against this belief, so it naturally isn't very compatible. This is an ideological stance, and no one has a right to say that the "open source idealogy" is wrong. People with different beliefs will just have to get along. There are different religions, and while they don't agree with each other fundamentally, many manage to "mesh". And just like the real world, sometimes two groups simply won't be able to get along. When choosing linux, you must keep this in mind, and if you truly disagree, you shouldn't be using GPL software.
Then comes people saying that Linux/Open Source would ruin business. Let's assume for a minute that the entire world used nothing but open source applications. How would a business make money? Simple, through services. Another popular one will be customizing already available open source applications for a specific companies needs. Both of these are not "temporary" and would provide a source of income. This is once again, different. We have to remember that Linux is and will always be ideological, at least in part. The idea is to change society, not just fit in with it. I'm sure many of you are afraid of change, and that's ok, we all are. But Open Source is helping to usher in a new economic scheme. This will obsolete the current system of "shareware" and proprietary software. Please remember that it is not societies job to support an economic model. Do not feel bad if it puts a few people out of work. People will have to adapt, but few can say society would be a worse place if software was free(dom). The Open Source movement parallels many things in society, including its increasing globalization. We are one world, and I for one want to support that. You may call me a zealot, but I try to think things out rationally, and my opinion may change in the future.
There are too many zealots
As I've been repeating, Linux is in part, ideological, and this can not be avoided. People care greatly about this operating system because we've all invested our time, money, and code into making Linux great. There is nothing wrong with having pride in something you do. This is an advantage though. People are proud of their work, and don't want to see it fail, so they will try their hardest to make it the best possible. Companies like Microsoft could care less if they make the best product, as long as they make money. Eric Raymond has discussed this greatly, and you can read "The Cathedral and The Bazaar" for a more in depth look.
Are there people who believe linux is without flaws? Yes, but there are people like that for every operating system. The majority of people simply want to make linux better. As an end user, you have thousands of people DOING WORK FOR YOU, all out of the goodness of their hearts. Could you ask for more?
But alas, I'll throw in some zealotry, and try to appeal to your moral nature. Ignore this paragraph if you don't like getting preached to. There are people who will say something like "I only use what product works best, I don't care about politics" for a reason to choose Microsoft over Linux on the desktop. This is what causes monopolies and other problems in the first place. In a society driven by money, EVERY purchase you make is inherently political. When you buy something from a company, you are saying "I Support what you are doing". Microsoft is very well known for its unfair tactics and extreme amounts of FUD. Even if Windows is the superior platform, you can't just ignore the problem and say that you don't want to get political. Now is a wonderful time to stand up and really think about whether you want Microsoft controlling your computer. You may decide that you are comfortable with that, but there is no reason not to think about it.
Linux is slow
There is really no "argument" to this, it's opinion. But I'd like to clear up one thing that is often thrown around. "X is slow". X11 is a protocol, and can't be slow. Only a specific implementation can be slow. If you feel XFree86 is slow, please provide some evidence, because I haven't seen any proof of this. The problem is that many distributions like to turn everything on by default. I was playing with someone's Mandrake installation earlier, and they had 3 different servers running on a desktop system. This was obviously making things drag.
In my experience, the default install of Windows is rather bloated as well, but you often hear people saying, "If you just turn off unneeded services, windows flies!". Please take this attitude with linux as well, to be fair.
There Are No Drivers
Yes, there are. Linux supports more hardware than Windows, it's that simple. The problem lies in supporting common "desktop" hardware. For a very long time, this was difficult because companies would create cheap hardware to save money. This cheap hardware wasn't as compatible, and didn't conform to standards. I'm reminded of the HP LaserJet1000 (not the 1012), WinModems, and WinCams. Luckily though, the tide is turning. Many companies have pledged to improve linux support, and I believe them. But if you expect a driver CD for linux, you aren't seeing the big picture. Ideally, the drivers would be allowed in the standard kernel (and be open source), allowing you to get full hardware support "out of the box". Linux already has out-of-box support for much more desktop hardware than Windows. If you want proof, it comes with your new hardware. Windows probably won't support your brand new video card at a decent resolution, or it might not even recognize your sound card. Windows simply doesn't ship with enough drivers, so you are forced to use a CD. I have a modern system, and all my hardware is supported with the standard linux kernel, no extra driver needed. And yes, this is a commercial system, so its not a "half baked" home built box. That said, I understand "it works for me" isn't enough.
No Applications
Have the big name applications been ported? No, they haven't. But, the idea is to create something better, something open source. Ideally, we want a replacement, not a port. With open source programs, you rarely have these porting issues, as some volunteer will port the app if it's good enough. You don't depend on a single company for new features/fixes. For normal desktop work, Linux is there. Web browsing, word processing, email, and PIM are already mature and stable. There are of course parts where linux drags behind, but it is improving every day. Saying that there are "no applications" is false. Located here is a great table of replacement apps. There are many other tables like this as well.
I know what you're thinking. "But {insert expensive proprietary app} isn't available!" Well then, Complain! Write to that company, and ask them to port the software. They won't port it unless they know people care. Applications are something that will come in time. Linux is still "emerging", and the process will be slow. First, the foundation has to be laid, and that is what the main focus should be on. As linux as a development platform matures, we will see the big names finally cower under the pressure. ;-)
Conclusion
I want people to take one thing from this. That is to remember that linux is coded by regular human beings. They can only do so much, so quickly. Linux will come to the desktop, eventually. Please do not try to force it. Like the IBM commercial says, "Linux is open....The Future is open." Linux can be whatever you want it to be. There is nothing stopping you from helping out with one of the Desktop Linux distributions or your favorite Desktop Environment/Utility. If you lack coding or technical skills, money is always appreciated(and for some, beer). ;-)
Lastly, you might be saying, "I already knew this!". These ideas are just a compilation of all the flame war's I've read. Feel free to respond, just PLEASE not with another "linux isn't ready for the desktop" article.
- "Linux on the Desktop, Page 1"
- "Linux on the Desktop, Page 2"
