Quote:
Originally Posted by entwisi
Studio, I'm agog at your hard to maintain comment, can you expand?
|
This bloke puts it far more eloquently than I could. My personal experience is quite specific, so the reason Linux didn't work for me is not itself a valid explanation for my opinion on why Linux is not more generally accepted, but I'll offer both.
I think it's "institutionalisation" - both general users and semi-geeks can't always justify the extra time needed to dedicate to getting results on their new machine/software/operating system- and that's not accommodating the possibility that they have a piece of hardware for which there's no driver.
When I got this laptop, it had two partitions (for some reason known only to Dell). 18GB was hived off as the D drive, which was available for Ubuntu. I bought an "idiot's guide" magazine with a distribution CD on the cover. It installed easy enough, then went through its update routine. My main requirement was video editing: I tried Cinlerra first, which would not run. I forget the exact error message (this was six months ago) but internet searches suggested I need to edited a config file. It still didn't work. I ditched that and tried Kino, which worked, but then it turns out that there was no driver for my ExpressCard firewire device.
I gave up and went back to the Windows partition. When I eventually needed my 18GB back, it took an internet search to work out that it's GRUB you need to get rid of really, then you can just format the drive, but even removing GRUB isn't straightforward- in fact for a novice it's fraught with danger.
I'm not thick, but age and a career change from IT to photography ten years ago have meant that I'm not as involved with current developments as I used to be. So despite referring to myself as a geek, it's in mentality only- in practical terms, I'm out of touch.
As I say, it would be great if Linux overtook Windows, but I can't see it happening. The difference between XP and Vista
should have dramatically tipped the balance from Windows to Linux, but it didn't happen. When one of my geekier friends tried Vista, he abandoned it for compatibility, bugs and performance problems. He kept his Linux server, but for his front end went to MacOS.
I could see Firefox stealing a huge chunk of the browser market when I first tried it, and it has. It won't overtake IE until 2014 though, and that's only if the current usage trends don't change (which Chrome may affect). The reason it is bucking the trend for open source alternatives for other applications (such as operating systems) is because of its simplicity of purpose: Firefox isn't Linux- while I think Linux is better than Windows mostly, being better doesn't always equate to a winner. Look at VHS vs Betamax...
As to the IT dept thing, I wasn't suggesting IT depts don't keep the systems running and the PCs virus* free. I was suggesting that your typical user can now manage their own workflow without having applications written for them by the IT dept which require intervention if they go wrong. I worked at British Steel 20 years ago, and the sales manager used an office suite called "Smart". He had umpteen complex spreadsheets with hundreds of little macros to shuffle his data about. I told him it would take two or three days to reorganise that into a simple, fast bespoke program. He passed on the offer- his system belonged to him, and he could maintain it unaided. Getting programmers to write something that could be shared with his co-workers offered only advantages to the business and his coworkers, individually he lost much and gained nothing.
Sorry for rambling. I've been coming back to this on-and-off during the day and it's got a bit disjointed.
* I'd love Linux/MacOS to beat Windows, or FireFox/Chrome to beat MSIE, just for the diversity, but it would also be fun to watch all the people who currently rave about their supposed immunity to them will find out why it is so.