Another Windows 7 vs Linux Story [And Apple]

[6Foot2]

To quote the post I have just read:

 

"Former Microsoft Employee: Linux is the future, even after Windows 7 release"

 

Extracts form the post:

 

Microsoft is greatly hampered by backward compatibility and old code.

 

I think we already knew that.

 

If Apple is threatened by Windows 7, Linux is much less so. Linux runs on the same inexpensive PC hardware, has a robust worldwide community of programmers, less baggage, a better development model, and can be acquired for free.

 

I think that that is also accepted/known.

 

Many of the benefits of Linux are subtle. It doesn't come with any nagware. The default media player supports both many formats including QuickTime and Windows media. Likewise, the instant messaging program supports 16 different protocols. The GUI is more customizable. But the best feature of Linux is something that neither Windows nor the Macintosh have: a rich set of free applications, installable with one click

 

I think Rory Cellan-Jones might have missed this point?

 

Full article: Linux is the future, even after Windows 7 release

 

Source: TechFlash.Com

[tmcd35]

To quote the post I have just read:

 

"Former Microsoft Employee: Linux is the future, even after Windows 7 release"

 

 

On the face of it I'd agree with the M$ employee. I think it's a case of when and not if Linux will become the defacto standard OS. I think Ubuntu are leading the way and improving release upin release. I just don't think their time has come just yet.

 

I think there'll be a more interesting Linux v. Windows debate come the release of Windows 8.

 

Long term I think OS X is destined to go the way of the Amiga and RISCOS. Although a vastly superior OS (IMHO) unless Apple open up and allow clones it'd never gain the market share required to rival either Linux or Windows.

[localzuk]

I think the issue is this - as linux moves more and more into the other devices you use in your life - your tv/set-top-box, your phone, smart-fridges etc..., the more reason you'll have to *not* use Windows. The world of computing is moving to a 'service' industry - ie. your pc is there simply to provide an interface to the many services available - be they streaming media, the web, and even games (look at games consoles and the way they're moving to 'pay as you go', or games such as eve-online and WoW), and more functions such as smarthomes and the like.

 

It won't matter what OS to use - so why pay for one, when Linux will do it, for free?

[cookie_monster]

I agree with localzuk. I don't think Linux will ever replace Windows on the desktop but the idea of a desktop PC will be replaced and the class of devices that replace it will be more open and will definitly include Linux, i'd expect to see MS there as well but their period of total dominance will be over by then.

 

Linux just need a bit more spit and polish and 'less' choice consumers don't like it and of course Office, Photoshop and a few other apps that people 'know' then it's there.

[DrPerceptron]

Realistically Linux should be a lot more popular than it is.

 

I still do not understand why there are millions of distro's and still more popping up all over the place - which ultimately holds it back in my eyes... a single open source OS which is managed properly would be far more successful at breaking into the main stream.

 

It's nice to see Ubuntu emerging as the most publicised distro though - even if the bulk of that is probably down to manufacturers such as Dell offering it up as a pre-installed option from the factory.

[tmcd35]

It's nice to see Ubuntu emerging as the most publicised distro though - even if the bulk of that is probably down to manufacturers such as Dell offering it up as a pre-installed option from the factory.

 

I think this in itself is progress. Sure the likes of Dell and HP are only offering a Ubuntu option from their website rather than on the high street but this is a step forward compared to the situation only a couple of years ago.

 

I don't think the desktop, however much we move more into 'service computing', will ever be killed off. And I think Windows cannot last forever. It's only a matter of time till something supercedes it and Linux is the most promosing alternative at the moment.

[cookie_monster]

I still do not understand why there are millions of distro's and still more popping up all over the place - which ultimately holds it back in my eyes... a single open source OS which is managed properly would be far more successful at breaking into the main stream.

 

 

"I'm not happy with Slackware doing this 'code fork'"

 

I don't like the way Debian do this 'code fork'

 

and the latest "Oracle messing with MySQL 'code fork'. This one might not happen though.

 

and so on.... I personally like the way that Ubuntu is taking off in the consumer area, I've played with so many distros over the years but i've never dared racommend one to a (none tech) friend. So many 'big' distros have come and gone, some I nearly recommended to friends only for them to start to fade into the mist.

On the server and pro side it doesn't matter so much but the desktop needs to be 'much' more consistent.

 

I could break my jaw yawning over the whole Windows 7 vs Linux thing though (where's the yawn icon?)

[CyberNerd]

whats the point of desktop computing if you can carry a computer in your pocket?

It can't just be me that lives on a browser, can it? The web gets better and better, and makes the desktop more and more irrelevant. The only thing that seems to hold back webservices are people with vested interests in keeping their old school tech relevant.

With a cloud of computing power available, I can't see the desktop computer being around forever and without the desktop market to lock people in MS are on a more even footing with ubuntu/android for the home user.

[tmcd35]

whats the point of desktop computing if you can carry a computer in your pocket?

It can't just be me that lives on a browser, can it? The web gets better and better, and makes the desktop more and more irrelevant.

 

I have a pocket computer - an iPhone. I live on the internet and for my internet needs the iPhone is fantastic. Does everything the desktop can. However there are a lot of things that even if they moved more into web based services I'd still want a desktop for.

 

Word processing, spreadsheets, image manipulation, video editing, presentations, programming.

 

There are probably a whole host of other things but these are the ones I do on a regular basis. Could you immagine writting 1000 words on an iPhone - ouch! One day GoogleApps may compete with microsoft office. But even if it does get as feature rich I'd be wanting to use it from a desktop for serious work.

[webman]

whats the point of desktop computing if you can carry a computer in your pocket?

It can't just be me that lives on a browser, can it?

 

I agree with your points about web services and the cloud in general. But there are still some apps that will only work realistically on the desktop at the moment. One example for me personally is photo editing. I'm aware of online versions of cut-down Photoshop and Flickr's Picnic; but they don't compare to a local install of Adobe Lightroom (or similar software) working on local files.

[mac_shinobi]

I agree with your points about web services and the cloud in general. But there are still some apps that will only work realistically on the desktop at the moment. One example for me personally is photo editing. I'm aware of online versions of cut-down Photoshop and Flickr's Picnic; but they don't compare to a local install of Adobe Lightroom (or similar software) working on local files.

 

A touch screen tablet whether its windows, linux or heaven forbid OS X

 

Axiotron : Modbook

 

That way you can have a virtual keyboard , no need for a mouse and you can either use web services or local apps

[cookie_monster]

whats the point of desktop computing if you can carry a computer in your pocket?

It can't just be me that lives on a browser, can it? The web gets better and better, and makes the desktop more and more irrelevant. The only thing that seems to hold back webservices are people with vested interests in keeping their old school tech relevant.

With a cloud of computing power available, I can't see the desktop computer being around forever and without the desktop market to lock people in MS are on a more even footing with ubuntu/android for the home user.

 

I can agree to a point we're currently directing everything that has the option onto our VLE and using more online services in general. I can only agree with the computer in your pocket part if you have a 'real' screen that you can use when you want to 'work' rather than 'play'. The 10" screen on my NC10 is as small as I could possibly work from and I have a 19" TFT that I plug it into for real work.

 

I just don't get along with the iPhone at present but the concept is certainly something that I like.

[localzuk]

I have a pocket computer - an iPhone. I live on the internet and for my internet needs the iPhone is fantastic. Does everything the desktop can. However there are a lot of things that even if they moved more into web based services I'd still want a desktop for.

 

Word processing, spreadsheets, image manipulation, video editing, presentations, programming.

 

There are probably a whole host of other things but these are the ones I do on a regular basis. Could you immagine writting 1000 words on an iPhone - ouch! One day GoogleApps may compete with microsoft office. But even if it does get as feature rich I'd be wanting to use it from a desktop for serious work.

 

Many of the things you list could easily be handled with a touchscreen television based system. Video editing for the average home user, for example, is a very simple thing. As is making presentations and image manipulation.

 

Word processing, ok that is one that is currently a little odd - voice tech is poor to say the least, so a keyboard interface is still needed. However, by no means does that need to be on a desktop. I can see it being, for a home user, another function of your 'house computer' which will integrate with your TV.

 

Programming is never going to leave desktops - that is a different issue.

 

I think you're mixing average (read home) users with business users though really. I'd agree a desktop will still live on for many business functions - but these will all be done via cloud computing instead.

[sparkeh]

I still do not understand why there are millions of distro's and still more popping up all over the place -

Perhaps because your view goes against one of the guiding principles of Linux and OSS? Linux is all about choice.

Say you install Ubuntu and are unhappy at how it handles media codecs, then just install Mint. Don't like Gnome and want a faster window manager, install Xubuntu.

If you really want to configure things then make your own respin!

 

Can you do any of that with Windows?

 

Distros pop up becuase someone sees a need for it. If they are right then it becomes popular.

 

a single open source OS which is managed properly would be far more successful at breaking into the main stream.

 

I would hate to see one single Open Source distro and thankfully it will never happen as there will always be people out there wanting to create their own distro.

[tmcd35]

That way you can have a virtual keyboard , no need for a mouse and you can either use web services or local apps

 

Seriously? Have you tried typing on a tablet PC. All right for 100 words or so, but anything more serious and RSI would be the least of your worries. Probably why Tablet PC's have never really taken off.

 

Word processing, ok that is one that is currently a little odd - voice tech is poor to say the least, so a keyboard interface is still needed. However, by no means does that need to be on a desktop. I can see it being, for a home user, another function of your 'house computer' which will integrate with your TV.

 

Convergance technology is a dead end and always has been. It seems like a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow until you get up close. The problem with using voice recognition to dictate an essay on to a cloud wordprocessor on your TV is not the power of voice recogonition. It's the arguements.

 

WIFE - I want to watch eastenders

SON - I want to play Finaly Fantasy XXXII

DAD - You can't I need to to complete a report for the morning

 

Programming is never going to leave desktops - that is a different issue.

Raise your hands all you amature bedroom programmers, You iphone app creators, you web page designers.

 

I think you're mixing average (read home) users with business users though really. I'd agree a desktop will still live on for many business functions - but these will all be done via cloud computing instead.

 

No offence, but I think you under estermate what the 'average' home user uses a computer for. Theres a lot of people with a lot of serious hobbies out there. Especially in the world of music, video and photo. Without significant money spent on high speed internet connections and serious server farms even a budding amature photographer would get discontented with 'the cloud'.

 

I'm not saying that the cloud isn't going to be big and important. It's just not the replacement to the desktop. Joe Average does actually use some of that power on his desk.

 

 

Besides back OT. The argument isn't wether touchscreens can work or if the cloud will ever be useful. The arguement is Windows vs Linux vs Mac (again). If we agree that the desktop will not die (regardless of if we use speech recognition or a keyboard or a touchscreen). Even if it's primary purpose is to access the cloud. Then we need a desktop OS.

 

I think Linux is now showing signs of getting into a position where it can challange that market. I think by the time Windows 8 is released there'll be an interesting Windows v. Linux debate and I think Linux will start gaining a sizable market share.

 

As I said above, unless Apple open up to clones they will eventually fade away. I mean lets face it, the iPod saved them big time!

[localzuk]

Convergance technology is a dead end and always has been. It seems like a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow until you get up close. The problem with using voice recognition to dictate an essay on to a cloud wordprocessor on your TV is not the power of voice recogonition. It's the arguements.

 

WIFE - I want to watch eastenders

SON - I want to play Finaly Fantasy XXXII

DAD - You can't I need to to complete a report for the morning

 

Completely, 100% disagree. The average house now has multiple TV's in it. They are now HD TV's, so display of text is much more acceptable.

 

 

Raise your hands all you amature bedroom programmers, You iphone app creators, you web page designers.

 

There is no way you could claim the average user does any of those things, lol.

 

No offence, but I think you under estermate what the 'average' home user uses a computer for. Theres a lot of people with a lot of serious hobbies out there. Especially in the world of music, video and photo.

 

No, you are over-estimating what they do. Having repaired, advised on, or plain out purchased the computers of about 30% of the staff in our school, I would have to say that every one of them fits well within the 'average' grouping. The average user is not someone who spends their time creating apps, editing photos (past red eye removal etc...), or making hollywood movies...

 

Without significant money spent on high speed internet connections and serious server farms even a budding amature photographer would get discontented with 'the cloud'.

 

No-one said this would happen tomorrow.

 

I'm not saying that the cloud isn't going to be big and important. It's just not the replacement to the desktop. Joe Average does actually use some of that power on his desk.

 

I'm saying that your view is shortsighted and based on current tech, not based on the way tech changes. 20 years ago, having the amount of computers we do now was seen as absurd...

 

Besides back OT. The argument isn't wether touchscreens can work or if the cloud will ever be useful. The arguement is Windows vs Linux vs Mac (again). If we agree that the desktop will not die (regardless of if we use speech recognition or a keyboard or a touchscreen). Even if it's primary purpose is to access the cloud. Then we need a desktop OS.

 

No, we do not need a desktop OS - that is the point. Stop tying yourself to the present! Think about what IT was like a decade ago. 20 years ago, 30 years ago. Things change very rapidly. In 10 years time, do you really think we'll still be doing things in exactly the same way we do now? No.

 

The issue is that the 'OS' will become irrelevant. Much like the DOS did (remember, Windows used to run on top of a DOS - MS tried to sustain the life of that product for as long as possible before it eventually died). The same is true of the OS.

[teejay]

Personally, I think the big problem with cloud computing is data ownership. For me, there is no way I'll stick my personal data in the cloud, I want it at home on my own storage thank you very much.

 

As for Linux vs W7, I'm a big Linux fan and have used it since the 90's. As a server OS it's the best, as a desktop OS it's good but not great. Still use it a lot on the desktop but find myself working in W7 more and more because I'm finding it just works better and just doesn't have so many annoying little niggles.

[tmcd35]

People will experiment ... the tech savy with try linux and some will even prefer it, but windows will be the OS of choice for the next 20 years at least.

The reason for M$'s dominance is Windows is installed as standard for free with all new computers. Windows will remain the dominant OS until that changes. I think that change has alread started - Dell/HP/et al offing Ubuntu via thier website. I don't think Windows has 10 years of dominance left in it.

 

Uptill now thier hasn't really been a suitable alternative. Linux is now getting to the point were it is a suitable alternative. As soon as HP/Dell can offer the same as they do now without having to pay M$ to install Windows they will.

 

This is why companies such as HP and IBM have invested so much in Linux development over the past decade.

 

The problem is it is, at the moment, too complicated for the "normal" user to sort problems out with Linux to make it viable for these users.

Agreed, but with each new release of Fedora and Ubuntu I see this argument slipping away more and more. It's only a matter of time.

 

I have tried Linux, and while I admire the idea, MS has allways been my prefered choice ... more so now im using 7 on 3 of my regualar boxes and only use Linux as a play toy.

 

Linux is just not ready or polished enough to make the switch anytime soon.

Agreed. I think Linux is still a toy for most techie users. A second OS in a VM to play with when the mood takes. But again I say come the release of Windows 8 - what 3 years away? - Linux will make some huge leaps forward over a three year period.

 

For arguments sake look at OpenOffice 2 compare to OpenOffice 3. OpenOffice 2 was frustatingly difficult to use. OpenOffice 3 is a real contender against M$ Office. What do we think OpenOffice 4 will be like? The latest Ubuntu is a real contender, what will Ubuntu 10 be like?

[tmcd35]

Completely, 100% disagree. The average house now has multiple TV's in it. They are now HD TV's, so display of text is much more acceptable.

And the TV is not the interface that people want to use for this purpose. If they did it would have taken off years ago. There be some integration with media services and basic webservices but wholesale computing no. The TV will compliment other solutions and not be the solution in itself - IMHO.

 

No, you are over-estimating what they do. Having repaired, advised on, or plain out purchased the computers of about 30% of the staff in our school, I would have to say that every one of them fits well within the 'average' grouping. The average user is not someone who spends their time creating apps, editing photos (past red eye removal etc...), or making hollywood movies...

YES, I probably am over=estimating. But only in as much as you are underestimating. People do not spend £1000 on a piece of tin just to surf facebook. People have other hobbies and interest that are wide and verid and the computer in some way compliments. This is even more true for the sub-20yrs generation who have grown up with modern computing.

 

 

I'm saying that your view is shortsighted and based on current tech, not based on the way tech changes. 20 years ago, having the amount of computers we do now was seen as absurd...

No I'm not. What I am saying is that I have seen nothing yet that warrants a change in paradigm. The desktop model works quiet well. I don't believe that the cloud model is the panacia the media would have us believe it is. It's a solution to a neche problem, it may gow in popularity. If it does it will be part of a wider solution that includes desktops, tv convergance, mobile phones, etc.

 

No, we do not need a desktop OS - that is the point. Stop tying yourself to the present! Think about what IT was like a decade ago. 20 years ago, 30 years ago. Things change very rapidly. In 10 years time, do you really think we'll still be doing things in exactly the same way we do now? No.

No we won't doing things the same as we d now. I for one am looking forward to seeing how things progress and change. I think the mobile market is the one to watch. Smaller laptops, more powerful smartphones. But even then some applications will always be more convinent using the power and storage of a local desktop.

 

Even if the cloud id the answer the devices we use will always need some form of local OS to manage our connection and interfaces between us and the cloud. This is one area were Linux is already making huge inroads - netbooks, android, setop boxes, etc. So again I stand by my argument, Linux will one way or another upsurp Windows. Probably within the next decade. Just not yet.

[llawwehttam]

Personally I prefer linux to MS. Im an A level student and have been using different linux distros for years and feel way more comfortable with linux than with MS. Apple has its uses especially in the design, art and music industry and is nice and shiny for home use but linux is more free in every way. Obviously the price is an issue but the way in which you can modify and play with your system is much better on linux. Its so easy to make new splash screens, new themes and login windows and personalize linux.

 

I see Linux (and UNIX) as the future, I mean look at how fast Apple have risen from what they used to be. RHEL (red hat enterprise linux) and solaris are becoming far more popular in businesses. My school/6th form uses a mix of linux (fedora), MS and apple, and out of the three i prefer the linux. Its faster, easier to use, nicer looking and far more customizable.

 

Now that Dell and several other companies are selling Personal computers with Ubuntu and servers with a choice of linux distro Linux is starting to seem like a much bigger contender. All linux needs to become more common at home is more advertising. The amount of MS adverts out there is huge but the only places I see adverts for linux distro's is on the Internet in geeky sites and forums.

 

LINUX NEEDS MORE ADVERTS!!!

[localzuk]

And the TV is not the interface that people want to use for this purpose. If they did it would have taken off years ago. There be some integration with media services and basic webservices but wholesale computing no. The TV will compliment other solutions and not be the solution in itself - IMHO.

 

Why would it have? We didn't have high speed internet, HD TV's and cloud computing then. The key thing is that these techs are coming to maturity, people are using them more and more, and convergence into a single home style device (your TV) is becoming more and more probable. The Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 show this quite well.

 

 

YES, I probably am over=estimating. But only in as much as you are underestimating. People do not spend £1000 on a piece of tin just to surf facebook. People have other hobbies and interest that are wide and verid and the computer in some way compliments. This is even more true for the sub-20yrs generation who have grown up with modern computing.

 

Most people don't spend £1000 on computers - plain and simple. Most sales of computers are on low-end hardware (Celeron based machines for example). You are looking at the overall use of computers from a very narrow point of view - think of people over 30, over 40, over 50 etc... that use computers. There are a lot more people over these ages than there are under 20.

 

Think of the population of China that is now dominating the internet. Or India. There are more people who just use computers for the internet and related fields than do for other things.

 

No I'm not. What I am saying is that I have seen nothing yet that warrants a change in paradigm. The desktop model works quiet well. I don't believe that the cloud model is the panacia the media would have us believe it is. It's a solution to a neche problem, it may gow in popularity. If it does it will be part of a wider solution that includes desktops, tv convergance, mobile phones, etc.

 

No we won't doing things the same as we d now. I for one am looking forward to seeing how things progress and change. I think the mobile market is the one to watch. Smaller laptops, more powerful smartphones. But even then some applications will always be more convinent using the power and storage of a local desktop.

 

We'll see...

[tmcd35]

Why would it have? We didn't have high speed internet, HD TV's and cloud computing then.

Skys Red Button, CDTV, CDi, WebTV - just a few pretender to the throne I can name that didn't capture the puplics imagination. The reason the PS3 and XBox360 are working to a lesser extent is because they sit readily with the TV's native function - an entertainment device. The reason the TV will never be a wordprocessor is because it's primary function is entertainment. Sell a TV as a wordprocessor, telephone (videophone), even as a web connection for banking and e-mails and the public are not interested.

 

You are looking at the overall use of computers from a very narrow point of view - think of people over 30, over 40, over 50 etc... that use computers. There are a lot more people over these ages than there are under 20.

Sorry the point was this years sub-20's are next years 50's plus. These guys and girls have and are growing up with the technology and are demanding more from it. Just because my mother doesn't want to edit photo's today doesn't mean my niece want want to do that ans more when she is 50!

[ZeroHour]

I will be honest, linux has a LONG LONG way to go before it will get up to MS levels of usage at home and business (including apple). I have never really had an expience with linux where I have thought "yeh that made my life easier/less hassle" and thats the truth of it. I use linux for some servers but on the whole its too much pain to switch. I know I could do it but its a case of relearning tons and tbh I doubt it would ever be a *better* experience.

I am quite good with all things technical and I wouldnt even both with linux tbh so I dont expect anyone less technical too. Yeh its interesting, yeh its free but I want to be able to run all the software I have on windows and all the games etc and linux is not even close. Wine helps but its never going to be the goto solution for your average home user, they will get frustrated and give up. Look at netbooks, they ALL came with linux initially but as soon as XP was avalible they all switched as thats what the consumer wanted because its what they know and they know it will work (and they can get support!)

Even with Apple giving you what is effectively a supported linux install, its still not really growing against MS (and yeh there are fanboys saying it is but its so marginal a trend its pointless) and even then those with Apples all seem to use bootcamp/vmware etc to run windows as the truth of it is you still need windows for the majority of things because it is GOOD! and until an OS can tick all the boxes for games/software etc they wont compete.

Its like saying the Zune will blow the iPod away because it had strong sales and sales were up X percentage, its still only means going from 1% say to 2% of market share and lets face it, the zune probably wont nor really any other.

As for the cloud, it has its uses but I personally hate most of those crappy apps (google docs wtf!) as they are so poor by comparison to the REAL thing.

Openoffice fails as well tbh, it promises the world but when I use it or my GF we hate its limitations/interface over 2007 ribbon by a mile. Yeh its free but MS office is cheap for familys and I would always pay a little to save myself pain.

Home users generally want simple and safe, and with windows they get that. Even the mac users want windows because Mac cant make its O/S do it all even though it has shed loads of cash.

 

This is all before we look at businesses where the situation is more of a joke, you simply dont get the tools/software for linux/apple like you do for MS ware. There is no way we could replace windows here as so much of what windows is, is orientated for business and that makes it a damn sight easier to setup and manage.

 

I am not saying its impossible but I cant see it happening in the next 5 years and tbh if something radical came along MS have to much to lose to not jump on the wagon with the rest and still keep its install base.

[CyberNerd]

We gave our cover supervisors Ubuntu on their laptops. It's proved to be very popular.

Truth is that Linux is ready for the desktop, and has been for some time. It's fine for PC noobs, and it's even better for experts. The people who find it difficult and are unappreciative are those in between, or those in the situation where they are using lots of windows anyway and it's easier to keep the status quo.

[llawwehttam]

Truth is that Linux is ready for the desktop, and has been for some time. It's fine for PC noobs, and it's even better for experts. The people who find it difficult and are unappreciative are those in between, or those in the situation where they are using lots of windows anyway and it's easier to keep the status quo.

 

I definitely agree there. Experts and noobs are fine to give linux to but when you try to feed linux to someone in between they complain because its not in their comport zone so they freak out.

 

For instance this is the response of a friend during a MS vs Linux conversation.

 

linux is aload of bull, end off ^_^

 

And as the conversation went on it just proved he thought he knew everything about computers and linux just wasn't in his comfort zone.

 

I guess you just like what you've used most and know most about.