Linux and OS in general

[lmintnewb]

Sounds like simple choices for simple minds to me. Ohhhh there's too much to choose from ... Oh my buttocks hurts. Ohhhh I might have to think !!! Gawd save me, why would I ever want tons of choices and an ocean of great free software. There should only be 1 darn it !!! That way I don't get a headache, my poor widdle brain !

Sounds like the run of the mill junk windows fanboys and girls come up with. The there's just too many choices with linux. I don't like choices ! lol ... sheesh, how hard is it ? Pick one ... try it, don't like it ... pick summin else. Don't want to do that, they can pick one of the better known distro's leave it default and not have to worry about choosing or learning anything. Just 2 cents on the contents of that quote. Ye gawds fence sitters ... pick one already or don't. Pay M$ and Apple big dollars for often lacking software for the rest of your lives, lol. When you/they can get opensource that can do all that and often more for nuttin, shrugs.

Though in India and China esp ... Sheesh, winblows is pretty much cost free too. Oh well ... diff strokes I guess. Would still like to see linux making more headway in those places. Well would like to see it making headway all over the world. Long overdue for gnu/nix to get some well deserved recognition for the 5 billion hours of work talented folks put into it.

[xenopeek]

You must be tough to have linux installed. I often get criticized for using it, even if i can give an pro argument for everything. It is still not accepted at all. You better get a XP from the Internet or have a cracked copy from MS than use a so called hacker OS. In fact it is still easier to get a cracked OS than finding someone using Linux, so you are very likely on your own. You really cannot judge someone for DL illegal copy, if he gets no other choice. All general computer magazines are made for other OS and sometimes you will find it hard to even find a magazine with little articles about Linux at all. Also some magazines are just too much overloaded for beginners, they have no use for advanced commands. Of course you get help on the Forums, thanks here to the community, and there are quiet a lot of sites to help getting started, but you most likely won't visit/find them if you are unsure which OS to take.

Edit: There are of course some Linux magazines out, but they are less than 10% and not available everywhere.

It is Ubuntu focused, but it has great general articles on various subjects: http://fullcirclemagazine.org/. Very accessible and it is completely free!

[xenopeek]

Which is the best Linux? After you choose between the various flavors--Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, etc.--then you have to choose which version, and which desktop interface to use.

The fact that there is diversity, and options is a strength of the Linux platform, and one of the factors that draws people to the operating system in the first place, but when it comes to mainstream adoption, the lack of agreement and solidarity over which Linux is the right Linux is a handicap.

Agree with lmintnewb on this one. Stop sitting on the fence people! The "right" Linux? The right Linux is the one that works for you.

[trollboy]

Personally, I feel sorry for those people who's brains are so limited, they can't deal with making a choice. It must make their day to day lives very difficult indeed. I mean, what soup do you have for lunch?

[lmintnewb]

And everyone wonders why IQ's in the developed countries are in free fall. Society over here is setup to produce stupid people. Stupid people are easy to control and manipulate and the folks running the show like it that way. They don't want people who can think and understand what's going on. lol ... anybody with an IQ above 78 is a potential "terrorist" to hear them tell it.

Personally think Linux should be mandatory in all educational institutions. Not only would the taxpayers save BILLIONS every year. The youth would probably gain a 12 pt boost in avg IQ. Stuff like that does make me mad. I don't have any claim on having created gnu/nix. But some super smart and generous people have been working their butts off forever and a day so all us people would have alternatives. Weren't for linux ... imo. Wouldn't even be an internet. Apache runs around 78% of web servers. Of the ones that are left a good percentage of em are running summin linuxish.

Bill Gates is on record as having said "the internet is a passing trend". If he had his way and everyone had to fork over a kings ransom to M$ or other closed source people. Nobody would've been able to afford to host the friggin internet. Just personal opinion, if it weren't for all the illegal backroom deals M$ ( and others ) have made to keep linux out of the PC market. Linux would've and should've done to windows in the PC arena, what it did to them a longgggg time ago with server technology.

Am grateful for the generosity and talent of all the opensource devs and supporters of the world. They've done much more to make things better than vast majority of people even realize. They gave a selfless gift to everyone in my view. Don't even want to think where technology would be without those people and the founding fathers of gnu/nix. It would not have been pretty for most of us every day people or at least I don't think it would've been.

lol ... errrr, well there's my pro nix zealot rant ... sighs. Got carried away for a sec folks ... sowwie.

[xenopeek]

lol ... errrr, well there's my pro nix zealot rant ... sighs. Got carried away for a sec folks ... sowwie.

That's allright

[lmintnewb]

Crap !!! I think homeland security is scanning my comp folks ... yikes. Errrrrr ... I mean windows is awesome .. too many choices bad ( droolz )

Crap ... nope they're still on me.



Kay had my forum time. Better get something productive done or I'll be living in a cardboard box. Night fellow nixers, hope ya all have a good night/dy ( depending on where in the world ya are.)

[linuxviolin]

when it comes to mainstream adoption, the lack of agreement and solidarity over which Linux is the right Linux is a handicap.

And lack of direction and leadership... Oh and I'm not so sure the "diversity, and options is a strength of the Linux platform", they can be weaknesses rather, neither this is "one of the factors that draws people to the operating system in the first place"... I guess there other factors before this one, if it is one even.

[KBD47]

I felt like Linux was a well kept secret, or at best, known as a high-tech operating system far beyond the reach of your average computer user. But once I figured out how to download an iso and burn it--this first part needs to be made easier, perhaps a big website for newbies to allow them to download Linux like a Windows program like Joli OS does, but for 4-5 of the most popular Linux distros--and then discovered just how easy it was to use Linux. There is a small learning curve, but also with a new user of Windows. We tend to forget just how big a learning curve there is to a completely new computer user. Joli OS is far simpler, or Mint, for a brand new computer user than Windows IMO. But sady, Linux still seems like a well kept secret to too many people. Hopefully that will change.
KBD47

[aes2011]

Microsoft has updated the wording it uses to define competitors of the Windows operating system. Microsoft now only states that Apple and Google are the biggest threats and has removed the section that said Linux was also a viable competitor.

-http://www.neowin.net/news/micorosft-no-longers-considers-linux-a-threat-for-desktops-

[xenopeek]

Microsoft has updated the wording it uses to define competitors of the Windows operating system. Microsoft now only states that Apple and Google are the biggest threats and has removed the section that said Linux was also a viable competitor.

-http://www.neowin.net/news/micorosft-no-longers-considers-linux-a-threat-for-desktops-

Well, that is true. isn't it? Apple at a yearly revenue of 65 billion dollars has surpassed Microsoft's 62 billion. And Google is gaining at almost 30 billion in revenue (that's bigger than Oracle). Both Apple and Google had a lower profit margin than Microsoft last fiscal year, but both have improved from previous years.

Put that versus Red Hat, which is the biggest Linux company, doing almost 1 billion in revenue. Linux is no longer seen as a threat.

We should use this opportunity for a sneak attack?

[mordant23]

Maybe a successful Linux marketing campaign would be "Linux - look at the shiny shiny!"

Never discount the power of the shiny! For years I laughed at Hollywood's portrayal of computing systems hackers use (apparently all you need for a super powerful system is more monitors or do cool dance moves while flinging images around with your hands) until I saw that rotating cube. Then I realized that they must use Linux. I had already switched to Linux Mint but that was a nice "I'm cooler than everyone I know (except the IT people)" moment.

Linux is in a really great position right now. Millions already use it without realizing with Android. Big corporations whose business is NOT based on selling OSes seem to back linux (Google and IBM are the two big ones I can think of. There's definitely more). Interestingly enough ESR made a deliberate decision to target corporations when he started to evangelize open source.

A bank I worked for (I used to work in outbound sales for existing customers) did marketing research a few years back to figure out how to target Gen Y(1).

Characteristic shopping behaviors for Gen Y are:

1) Love technology
2) Will move to other service/product if they think they will get a better deal
3. Want things immediately

I had already switched to Linux Mint when I realized a really powerful motivation to use it that I wish someone had shoved in my face. By switching to linux, I broke free from the forced cycle of OS/program bloat -> hardware upgrade -> upgrade OS/program -> OS/program bloat -> ... When I got frustrated with some inconsistencies, it didn't seem so bad when I realized that I future proofed myself.

Free as in liberty is nice. Free as in free beer is even better.

The challenges are:
1) Content trumps everything. Since switching to Linux I've learned how evil DRM is. Netflix coming to Linux soon will be great.
2) There is a learning curve to switch. As long as Windows 7 is "good enough" people won't clamor to change. But this is where the argument about saving money really comes in.

I remember linux advocates pressing me to switch ten years ago. I never could figure out how to get that knoppix cd to start on my machine and do the things that I want. I was really surprised at how easy it is to use Linux Mint. Now Linux is "good enough" and the point should be made to the consumer that Microsoft and Apple needs to justify paying $100+ for their OSes. It now seems almost like a stupid move to pay $130 for a single license of Windows 7 to use in virtualbox or as a second boot (just in case I need it) compared to the $3.95 I paid (which I only had to pay because I messed up big time) for a Linux Mint dvd I can use on a gazillion machines. And don't get me started on the power of virtualbox. That's another thing that I wish I had known about because it takes away the risk of needing another operating system plus with seamless windows it works better than using dual boot when I want to watch Netflix.

Why did I choose Linux Mint? Because I saw people advocate it in the comments of some articles I read. I had already heard of Ubuntu, but I wanted to be able to easily experience multimedia content and Linux Mint seemed to not be against that in its philosophy (Content trumps everything). I didn't spend a lot of time comparing distros.

So the way I would sell it is this:

First have conversation to build rapport with the person.
Listen to cues for needs, e.g. likes to save money, likes to tinker, wants personalization, wants things to be easy, security, etc.

Then I would cater the following to address the person's desire.

"Linux is a great OS because there's a distribution that fits your needs."

"Linux is easy to use and supports most hardware. In most cases you don't even need to download extra drivers. It just works."

"Linux saves you money in the long run because you control when you upgrade your hardware. With other Oses, you're forced to upgrade your computer when they roll out a new version that breaks your hardware, and then you're forced to pay them more money for the new operating system. With linux, you can just keep using your system that works until you decide to change."

""The great thing about Linux is that instead of staying on hold forever to get support, there's a large community of people who are willing to help you for free."

" There's a lot of power with Linux and you can personalize to be the way you want it instead of how a corporation decides it should be. Plus it's all free. It doesn't cost you a dime." (use free as in free beer as a joke when it's sutiable)

"Other OSes cost over $100 even when it comes on a machine. What do you think you'd do with over $100 right off the bat? Plus you'll save thousands of dollars in the future because the other OSes force you to upgrade your hardware. What would you do with an extra few thousand dollars you won't have to spend?"

"It's easy; it's the way you want it, and you maintain control plus your wife/husband/children will thank you for the extra money you save."

"You can start with a system that works right out of the box and is similar to the OS you're accustomed to. You can always change if your needs change and it's still free."

""There's a linux distribution that caters to anyone. And if you really need to, you can always have the other OS as a back up, so there's no risk."

"With Linux, there's built in security. You don't have to worry about a virus or malware that messes up your system. The operating system is built from the ground up with security in mind"

"With Linux there's thousands of people working on it every day to make it more secure. Any security holes are fixed quickly and easily.:

"Updates are easy. There's one program that controls the updates for entire computer instead of getting annoying pop ups for hundreds of programs. That's one less thing you have to worry about when it comes to your security"

"Even if you need to run another OS, there's a powerful tool that's absolutely free called Virtualbox that you can use to run another operating system. You can even set it up so that the programs run just like another window on your desk top. Users have even reported that running the other OS in Virtualbox is faster than launching it natively. So there's no risk even if you need to use another OS for an application."


(1)For those that don't know, the challenge banks have is that there's almost no differentiation in product. A checking/savings account work pretty much the same no matter where you go and there are hundreds of competitors. So trying to build brand loyalty is the holy grail for bank marketing.

[trollboy]

It's true, shiny does sell. That's why all the people in adverts on telly are good looking and attractive. Or to put it another way; shiny.

One argument that noone has made in favour of Linux yet is that it is far more environmentally friendly than any other operating system. I'll pause a moment to let that sink in and then explain myself.

I was watching telly last night and a Microsoft advert came on in which a woman's house is converted into a computer shop because her PC is seven years old. Microsofts latest ads, here in the UK anyway are basically; there's nothing wrong with your old computer, but it is old so buy a new one that can run our latest operating system. Whereas, a simple install of a modern Linux on that old computer would give it a new lease of life.

Now, it can be argued that a new computer uses less power and manages it better than an old one thus causing less carbon emmissions during use and that would be true. However, the vast majority of the carbon emmissions in a computers life are generated during manufacture, from the components to the case; during the shipping, all the components to the assembly point, the assembled unit to the wholesaler and from the wholesaler to the retailer and eventually to you.

Things are improving in that area but even now, if you buy a computer just because yours is old (over 10 years old and things have probably evened out a bit) then you are being environmentally unfriendly. And of course when you get rid of the old box, it has to be transported, broken down, recycled where possible and then much of it still ending up in landfill. That process will release many toxic components like lead, mercury, arsenic, beryllium and brominated flame retardants, some of which cause cancer and other adverse health effects. Although to be fair to the recycling companies, far far more will be released if the PC is just dumped in landfill. The same holds true for all your electronic equipment, your white goods and even your car.


DON'T THROW OUT THAT OLD PC. PUT LINUX ON IT AND SAVE THE LIFE OF A PENGUIN


I have mild OCD, which among other things (for example, I must leave the house with my keys in my left hand) forces me to buy a new computer when the one I have is between one and two years old. Since learning about the above, I'm going to try and fight that. Who knows, in a couple of years, I may be using a three year old PC for the first time ever.

[Robin]

Wow. And I thought I was a fanboi! Nothing compared to you guys. I thought maybe I was getting cocky because I use Linux - and this thread serves as a picture of what I don't want to be - a zealot who holds most computer users in contempt because they don't use Linux.

Aside from the argument that Linux is not yet a full-service OS (CAD and heavy gaming come to mind), you guys must have been born using Linux, since you seem to be so far removed from "newbiedom" that you can't even remember being befuddled at your first curious inquiries into Linux.

Until then most of us just used what we were given and it was fine. That cycle of upgrading software and hardware forever was "part of the job" of owning and using a PC or Mac. When most people hear about a "third option" called Linux (and by the way, there are more than just those three to choose from and Linux is not the only free alternative to Windows and OSX), they are confronted with:

Dozens of window managers and desktop environments and combinations to choose from.

Dozens of web browsers, music players, e-mail clients, office suites, pdf readers and editors and annotators, etc ad nauseum.

Hundreds of Linux distributions.

And you think people are unintelligent when confronted with all that new and unfamilar stuff because they hesitate to jump in with both feet? You guys use Linux Mint. I know several Linux users who would impugn your intelligence because you use "a kiddie distro where all the work is done for you." You didn't compile your own kernel and build your desktop OS from scratch? Then you must be just another unintelligent sheep, using what you were given like a good little soldier. There's a joke on UF about such techno-snobbery:

Question: How do you know when someone is using Arch Linux? Answer: They will tell you.

I detest arrogance like that.

But you zealots absolutely take the cake. Until I found this thread I worried that I had become too much of a Linux fanboi. Now I realize that I'm in no danger of becoming what I despise. So thanks for the comforting reassurance.

[mordant23]

Wow. And I thought I was a fanboi! Nothing compared to you guys. I thought maybe I was getting cocky because I use Linux - and this thread serves as a picture of what I don't want to be - a zealot who holds most computer users in contempt because they don't use Linux.

Aside from the argument that Linux is not yet a full-service OS (CAD and heavy gaming come to mind), you guys must have been born using Linux, since you seem to be so far removed from "newbiedom" that you can't even remember being befuddled at your first curious inquiries into Linux.

Until then most of us just used what we were given and it was fine. That cycle of upgrading software and hardware forever was "part of the job" of owning and using a PC or Mac.

I presume you refer to my post as well since you mentioned the cycle of upgrading software as "part of the job" so I'll respond. It sounds like you missed the point of my reply which I can understand. So many words there it's easy to get lost.

So to clarify:

1. I replied to a post about how to make a case for linux
2. I emphasized that linux and people's needs are better matched than people realize, economic times, generational shift in buying habits, etc.
3. People who use Android already use linux but don't realize it.
4. I was frustrated at points with my switch to Linux but realized that I hadn't paid a dime for the distro.
5. I had not touched linux in over 10 years because someone had handed me a knoppix cd which didn't fit my needs at the time. Things have changed since then.

I also suggested that if you want to make a case for linux you need to first pay attention to people's needs and frame the suggestion to emphasize how linux meets those needs. This all based on my experience in successfully selling loans and bank accounts to people. Would I suggest linux to someone when it's not appropriate? No, just like I didn't waste time selling a home equity loan to someone who didn't need it.

By the way, thanks for the color and large text. Without it, I would never have known you don't like arrogance or that somehow I'm in competition with hackers who have spent millions (if not billions) of man hours to bring great software to the masses.

Cheers!

[trollboy]

Well, I was never confused by the choices presented by Linux purely because I spent quite a bit of time reading up on what I was getting myself in to. I knew there were different distributions and desktop environments and I knew what desktop environments were. I knew there were different package managers before I started out, even if I wasn't quite sure what they did. As it turned out, it was a damned good job I did the preparation. The first distro I tried was Fedora Core 3 and I hated it. It was so bad that if I hadn't spent that time, I would probably still be using Windows now!

I've used many different distros and when I look to my left, there is my oldest machine chugging away with a very out-dated FreeBSD 6.3 fully compiled including the kernel. Believe me, I have done the geek thing and no longer have the need to go there. I've never had time to to build LFS; maybe if Linux is still about when I'm retired I'll give it a go. Maybe not.

Do I think that people should jump in with both feet? Well, these days with live CDs, yes I do; absolutely. Download a few (or buy them for a couple of dollars), try them out and make a choice. It's not exactly rocket science is it? Or am I over-estimating peoples intelligence in your opinion?

Do I think that in this information age, people should be more informed about the choices available before they take the plunge? Yes I do, or am I over-estimating peoples intelligence in your opinion?

Just so you know, I grew up in arguably the most deprived area of Portsmouth, an estate that was so bad they pulled it down (no really). At best we were working class and I got a basic state education with no hope of going to university. I tell you this to make the point that I am no super-educated elite, I am no more or less than Joe Public.

Quite frankly, if I can prepare myself before I leap in, if I can take the time to gain at least a basic theoretical understanding of a subject before going further, I can see no reason not to hold other people to the same standard. Or is that too consistent of me?

So, if by holding others to the same standards I hold myself and if by judging them by the same standards I judge myself, if by having some pride in the operating system I use rather than shame, if by telling people about and showing them the operating system I use, I make myself a zealot in your eyes, then so be it, I'll proudly declare myself a zealot.

It's no skin off my nose what operating system people run and as I have said before, the vast majority of people don't know what an operating system is let alone care about which one they run. Now, if by trying to tell these people about the freedoms that come with Linux and trying to talk to them about the philosophy behind open source and yes, if by showing them the shiny shiny and telling them that things are better over here, I make myself a zealot in your eyes, then so be it, I'll proudly declare myself a zealot.

I've edited this for tone three times now and it still reads angrier than I want it to. But I'm running out of time, so I'll just finish by saying; please re-read this post and this time not in an angry tone of voice ^_^

[aes2011]

... Or am I over-estimating peoples intelligence in your opinion?
...

Take it easy! It's only a forum.

[trollboy]

... Or am I over-estimating peoples intelligence in your opinion?
...

Take it easy! It's only a forum.

Chill dude! It's just a question

[linuxviolin]

Well, I was never confused by the choices presented by Linux

Hmm, let's admit but a great majority of people yes.

trying to tell these people about the freedoms that come with Linux and trying to talk to them about the philosophy behind open source

You have no real need for Linux about "freedom" and "open source"... Even in Windows you have these, except for the OS itself of course.

[lmintnewb]

What should you tell someone, when they tell you they've got Arch Linux ?!?!?! ... Tell them you've got a girlfriend and have actually seen a real live woman naked while they were spending 40,000hrs setting up their PC.



(pointless edit ) O course that was tongue in cheek. Arch actually sounds darn good. Though willing to admit atm, it also sounds a bit outta my league. Imagine with enough googling and time could manage it. Just am not willing for the present to devote that kind of time. When so much other great nix ( LM etc.) comes out of the box working like a charm.