This question comes up again and again -- and it's really a waste of time. The nature of OSS and Linux is that there is going to be a wide variety of distributions, so the "should we have less distributions?" is a hypothetical question and will always be one. Linux (a specific distribution) might be more popular if there weren't other choices, but who cares?
Yes, that's true, that's the result of Linux being Open Source. But, there should be a few standard distributions for closed-source commercial vendors to package their software. They don't because there are a wide variety of distributions with their own Window Managers and libraries. It's just crazy.Why don't more people adapt Linux? Because Windows comes on their computer and their main goal is to use a few applications.
Completely agree. This should be true of any desktop, though I am always biased towards Open Source alternatives, if possible. They don't know you don't have to worry about malware or viruses. They don't know there is something better than the Windows Registry. They just make do.
I don't have to worry about viruses on my Windows Vista either. I don't give a damn about my registry, and like Linux, there are step by step instructions for most problems. And you know what, for someone who doesn't routinely edit config files, Windows provides intuitive GUIs for solving problems. For instance, I solved a problem with wireless detection on Windows myself navigating into deep GUIs, when I couldn't find any help online. Why was this possible? Because, there is only one window manager, and it's easy for driver manufacturers to make good UIs.They're not usually going to move to Linux anyhow, unless they lose all their data one more time and they ask their Linux using friend about installing Linux. And guess what he's going to install? -- yep, the distribution he uses.
Guess what I would recommend? Re-install windows, and get yourself a better antivirus program, there are lots of good, free ones out there. No way I am recommending a non-technical linux noob to get into linux, he will just sit on my head if something goes wrong. If it's out of his own curiosity or what ever, I will be happy to assist him with what little I know.There's also the fact that the Desktop is becoming more and more irrelevant. People don't even know it, but they'll be moving to Linux via Android, or WebOS or (when it comes out) Chrome OS.
Lol... that's because it's being done by Google and HP. They will set a standard for commercial vendors, and they are going to market
their product (note the singular noun here) well. And Linux is everywhere in their house in embedded devices, it's on the servers they use on the Internet, it runs the data warehouses for their online search engines and markets. Linux is getting huge.
True, but the fact that licensing issues with Microsoft are so expensive for running a server may
have something to do with this. I couldn't say for sure though. And as far as embedded goes, I think Linux deserves a kudos for penetrating into the market, and surpassing commercial alternatives. But, this point is not relevant here in this discussion.
And, BTW, the usage numbers I think you chose may or not be accurate. I think desktop Linux usage is closer to 5% as some figures show.
) would beg to differ.
Windows has it's own share of problems, but it is more friendly for commercial developers, and not to mention 90% of desktops run it anyway.
To people who say that Linux is not about market share: sure, that's why good, beginner-friendly, desktop-oriented distros like Linux Mint and Ubuntu exist, right? so that only developers can use it, amirite?