|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
RE: [PLUG] Linux on the desktop (was: rationalizing .Mac web pages)
|
Sorry to butt in on the conversation but I don't think Linux is going to
hit the desktop anytime soon. According to google.com
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html
90% of there users are using Windows. The average person will not be
changing there current OS or desktop. Mostly because they just don't
care. The biggest thing I see is that the average computer user is just
that a user they have specific goals and if there current system
completes them why change. Ever update a person computer?? If the reply
button in there email client moves they get freaked out. "Hey
something's wrong", "what did you do" , ect. Then there is Linux which
100 choices of software that all do the same thing. It's like putting 10
gas pedals in a car. Sourceforge is a big source of problem. They need
to stop giving space to 100% waste full programs.
The FSF needs to work on getting open source onto the Windows Desktop.
Get people hooked then sneak the OS under there feet.
Ok that was my rant :-)
Matt
-----Original Message-----
From: plug-admin@lists.phillylinux.org
[mailto:plug-admin@lists.phillylinux.org] On Behalf Of Ron Kaye Jr
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 11:51 AM
To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org
Subject: Re: [PLUG] Linux on the desktop (was: rationalizing .Mac web
pages)
its interoperability with the 95% windows world.
95% dont want the extra hassle.
i am learning linux to bridge the 2, and of course improve employment
prospects.
i'll keep trying
ron
-----Original Message-----
From: "W. Chris Shank" <chris.shank@acetechgroup.com>
Sent: Feb 27, 2004 10:09 AM
To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org
Subject: Re: [PLUG] Linux on the desktop (was: rationalizing .Mac web
pages)
Our formula for Linux desktop success is the inverse computer
sophistication equation. The more sophisticated the user means they are
more comfortable with Windows, even it's flaws. They get good at
predicting when the system will crash or hang, the nuances and tricks of
the applications they use that cause the system to freak out. They have
gained a level of comfort knowing that Windows isn't perfect but they
feel that it's not any better for anyone else, since everyone complains
about it. They are extremely frightened of anything else.
However, the unsophisticated user doesn't know or hasn't learned any of
the "tricks" of the Windows environment. They expect it to work in a
certain way and when it doesn't they figure they did something wrong
(this is opposite of the sophisticated user - who knows it's the
computer's fault but feels powerless to do anything about it). So the
unsophisticated user has a much easier time switching to linux,
openoffice, mozilla, etc - because after a little training - the system
pretty much works as they were shown. I almost never hear a peep out of
these people after they have switched.
Sophisticated users never seem to be able to get over the mental block
of not using a Micosoft product and look for every excuse to complain.
The trick that I've learned is sizing the user up before hand - so that
you don't push Linux to an unsophisticated user.
And as far as OpenOffice not handling MS Office formats well. From our
experience that is baloney. There are a few things openoffice doesn't
handle well - but that number is relatively small and those features are
only used by the most advanced users. which is one reason that we don't
see desktop linux as an option in big companies for a while - there are
too many users on all ends of the spectrum. Whereas in small companies -
they tend not to have that many users across the spectrum, and when they
do - it's easier for Window and Linux to coexist in these small
environments. After a few hours of formal training on OpenOffice, most
people learn the few things that don't translate between office packages
well and can pretty easily work around them.
On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 07:46, Magnus Hedemark wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Paul wrote:
>
> > I was told that Linux just passed Mac in percentage of desktop
users.
>
> I'd like to know how anyone could get numbers on Linux desktop use.
If
> Apple were cooperative, it wouldn't be hard to pull Mac numbers.
>
> I don't know of any Macs at $WORK, where I support about 500 users. I
> know of several dozen Linux machines, most of them desktops. I can
hardly
> walk to the men's room without someone else approaching me asking if I
can
> upgrade their Windows desktop to Linux.
>
> In the corporate environment, I think the things that are holding back
> Linux adoption (IMHO anyway) include:
> * Office suite. OOo doesn't score too well on interoperability with
MS
> Office, which is pretty much a requirement. Lots of complaints from
users
> about ease of use, performance, and UI consistancy.
> * Groupware. I know the KDE camp has some neat stuff going on here so
> this may change.
> * Applications. I work for a company that does E911 location
services.
> As you might imagine, we use a lot of software for mapping. The
options
> on Linux are pretty slim here. This seems to be true for a lot of
> application types. There are a lot of half finished projects, and
about a
> zillion finished IRC clients. Clue: We don't need any more IRC
clients.
> * Network filesystem. NFS (<v4) should go the way of telnet.
> Unfortunately it is the defacto standard. AFS sounds good in theory
but
> is a nightmare in practice. There are some other options, mostly
academic
> experiments, but nothing stands out as a good way to mount remote
> filesystems in a secure fashion.
>
> In a lot of other areas, Linux beats the snot out of Windows and even
> Macs (on the corporate front, anyway). I've put a system in place to
> automate the deployment and patching of all of my Linux systems, and
it
> should scale well. Deploying a Linux desktop takes about an hour of
real
> time, but about five to ten minutes of real work (most of that is
staging
> the hardware) while the rest is passive time waiting for the automatic
> kickstart process to complete, and the post-install script that
automates
> the customization of the box.
>
> Deploying a Windows desktop, however, can
> take an hour or more of real work plus another hour of downloading the
> base image. Deploying software packages on Windows is really a messy
> process and many apps cannot be pushed as they need to be installed in
the
> context of the end user or have some other odd requirements that
require
> manual intervention.
>
> Thanks also to gr for shaming me into brushing up on my shell
> scripting-fu. ;-) It could be argued that Windows has VBScript but I
have
> yet to see any sysadmins effectively employing its use.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
___
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group --
http://www.phillylinux.org
> Announcements -
http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
> General Discussion --
http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
--
W. Chris Shank
ACE Technology Group, LLC
http://www.acetechgroup.com
(484) 713-0075
________________________________________________________________________
___
Philadelphia Linux Users Group --
http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements -
http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion --
http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
________________________________________________________________________
___
Philadelphia Linux Users Group --
http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements -
http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion --
http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|