lets make a linux better than vista

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Jay Smith
  • Start date Start date
Colin said:
IMO the only serious competitor to Windows is OS/X. The general public
seems willing to pay for a system that does for them what they want to do
and does it without them having to learn things like configuring devices and
such.

I doubt that most users care about OS features and capabilities. Most users
just want to use email and do things provided by simple word processing, use
programs like Turbo Tax and Quicken, do photo and music management, and
generally be entertained by a few games and puzzles. The last thing they
care about is the OS. They want a printer that...well... just prints. They
to want shop online.
Click to expand...

I completely agree except for one thing. Most people own PCs and not Mac
hardware. Now if they were to do a port.... But I've said that all
before in other threads.
 
Colin said:
The Mac OS on a PC won't happen. Apple doesn't have to offer an edition of
OS/X that can run on PC's. They have played the Intel card and it is
working for them to draw Windows users to the Mac. 75% of the Macs sold in
the first half of this year are Windows compatible. 100% of the Macs that
will sell the rest of this year will be Windows compatible. The Intel Mac
hardware is as Vista Premium ready one could want. When Apple does the Mac
Drivers for Vista that's where I am going with my MBP.

Windows has become integral to Apple's business plan. They don't have to
sell Windows, but they had to allow the dream of Windows on a Mac to
materialize in order to keep their standing in the notebook market. When
notebook sales passed desktop sales Apple had to go Intel.

There was never going to be a G5 laptop chip. Tests with G5's showed
battery life of only 20 minutes and thermal issues that could not be dealt
with in the constrained air circulation in a notebook form factor. The
popularity of the laptop is what killed the PPC Mac.
Click to expand...

I understand the background and I can understand wanting to lure Windows
users to Mac hardware but I think that is still very much missing the
paddle steamer. I think you are probably right in your analysis but I
think it is the wrong strategy for Apple. I think this will be their
second monumental snatching of defeat from the jaws of victory if they
don't port the Mac O/S to the pc. I do not believe Windows users want
Mac hardware and I know it is very pretty. What they really want is the
Mac O/S.
 
deebs said:
I think for finished consumer products Windows always wins.

Linux tends to be a garage-band OS even at the best of times?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Remember the computer clubs of the late 70s/early 80s? They
don't regard computers as tools to do productive work but more like pets
that can be morphed into all kinds of interesting and exotic animals. :-)
 
Luke.

Yeah. I know about UR and quake, but, to be honest, I got bored with those
games during the first edition of them. If all that can be done is with
those two engines, there isn't much hope.

To be honest, one of the top things that Microsoft does, IMO is games. I've
been an "Age of..." fanatic since the original AoE, and Sid Meiers stuff is
pretty good also. I'm not an FPS type gamer. More into strategy and
thinking. Please don't tell me about freeciv, as it's got to be the worst
piece of crap... lol

Really though, it's hard to port a game over that works strictly with DX
system and no OpenGL. So the linux community needs to get the "Everything
microsoft is bad" crap out of the way before any REAL involvement with Linux
can be done in the gaming world.

I REALLY think that what the computer industry needs, if people REALLY want
to see Linux do anything, is a single STANDARD OS that allows "extensions"
to be added as one needs them. i.e.: You start with an office app client
that is a STANDARD. And you add internet usability to that with a quick
addon, then gaming addon, then the various server addons, etc. It's what
linux is supposed to be, but there are so many flavors in the kernel that a
software company would have to charge many hundreds of dollars to put out an
app that worked with all of them, so they don't bother.
 
Kerry Brown said:
How can you RTFM when there is no manual and the man pages were written by
someone who loves the command line and thinks GUIs are for wimps? If
someone was to hire a team of good technical writers and document almost
any of the current top 10 distros they would have a saleable product. They
all work at least as good as Windows and there are applications that are
suitable for most people's needs. The problems arise when something
doesn't work. Even a fairly sophisticated user runs head first into a
brick wall. I recently had an email conversation with another MVP. We were
both trying to get the wireless adapters on our laptops working in Linux.
Between us we have decades of experience with many OS's. It didn't help
that we had different laptops and different distros but you think that the
config files would be similar. I finally got mine working but I had to
write a special script to run whenever I want to activate the wireless
adapter. If I change networks or the encryption key I have to manually
edit the config file. I am sure that if I had proper documentation I
wouldn't need the script or to edit the config file. Here's the
documentation for the distro I am using FC5.
Click to expand...


See my post just prior to this for my response, but I really empathize, as
it's the main reason I won't switch to Linux. The ONE distro of linux I've
found that does a DECENT job of writing the man pages is Mandriva, and if
you tell a LF that you're using that, they scoff and tell you that THEIR
distro is the only GOOD one. Funny thing is that the only GOOD distro is
the one that none of the "true believers" don't like.
 
Raven said:
See my post just prior to this for my response, but I really empathize, as
it's the main reason I won't switch to Linux. The ONE distro of linux I've
found that does a DECENT job of writing the man pages is Mandriva, and if
you tell a LF that you're using that, they scoff and tell you that THEIR
distro is the only GOOD one. Funny thing is that the only GOOD distro is
the one that none of the "true believers" don't like.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. And I agree with you about standards in another post. I'd
bet my house that when a distro eventually comes along that average
Windows users will flock to it will become the new Antichrist among the
current faithful.

There are many moves in the right direction. I've seen at least two that
come with proprietary video drivers and codecs out of the box and there
is already snarling about that. I think open source and infinite
configurability are great things as options but they are the enemy of
mass take up.
 
I agree with you %100 about standards. I've been advocating about that
issue for years. I would have to say it has to be the absolute main
reason why people try Linux and do not stay with it. Why would anyone
want to learn 5 different programs that all do the same tasks? At the
same time the Linux platform can not have a strict quality control like
other platforms or that will suffocate any new developments. Personally
I use more BSD/HURD kernels than Linux do to the lack of standards and
for sheer power of the other kernels.

As far as the games go, like I said earlier about the engines, not just
the titles themselves. All the games titles on these two links can be
play under Linux/BSD/HURD.

http://www.idsoftware.com/business/technology/techlicense.php
http://www.unrealtechnology.com/html/powered/released.shtml

Granted that is a short list compared to the thousands of games
available for Windows platform.

With Sony playing the Linux card with Mylo and PS3, how long will it
take before other large game companies will start porting their games
from console Linux to PC Linux? Personally I would like to see companies
like EA just release unsupported game binaries and the let Linux
community support them on their own. Thats what Epic did to the Unreal
engine and it did very well in the Linux community. Now of course we
can't expect Microsoft to jump ship on their own platform to support
another.

Not all Linux users are Microsoft bashers; just like not all
environmentalist are tree hugging hippies. This is the first rule that
we have at our local Alt.OS meetings.

I also agree that freeciv is crap.

-Luke
 
I knew I forgot another link in there.

http://www.freestandards.org/en/About

The Linux Standard Base is slowly changing the instable hodge-podge
approach to a more structured standards of Linux. As you can see the
group consists not only of companies that have distros but also hardware
companies and system vendors.

-Luke
 
I looked Bernie, and couldn't see anything there about that either, but I'm
sure it covers pretty much everything...
 
I took a brief look at that link and it comes across like a bloated
government site, ie. very difficult to find the exact information you
are looking for. I just want to know if part of the standard is for all
software (including drivers) to be open source. Does anyone know the answer?
 
In my opinion - should our cousins continue to act in the way they are I
can see most software being created in the far, far east some 10 to 20
years hence.
 
In my opinion - should our cousins continue to act in the way they are I
can see most software being created in the far, far east some 10 to 20
years hence.
Click to expand...

Why that long?

I read an article in PC Pro (not online yet) saying that MSFTs figures
for the pre-installed market are very optimistic and amongst many
other things from a commercial POV without WinFS there is no reason at
all to upgrade. It was also said that MSFT thinks that home users with
Vista on pre installed machines will demand Vista at work thereby
driving commercial upgrades.

Personally I think it will be the other way round, home users will
demand Vista is wiped and re-installed with XP after using 2000 / XP
machines for years at work.

I like Vista myself but can see absolutely no reason why I would want
to spend real money on it, even if it was bug free and rock solid.

Linux definately is getting closer but the real competition is going
to be XP IMO. The time is ripe for a killer Linux OS to come along but
where is it?

Jonah
 
Back
Top