Subj : Re: Live CD
To   : CHARLES ANGELICH
From : Alan Zisman
Date : Tue Sep 13 2005 07:19 pm

-=> CHARLES ANGELICH wrote to ALAN ZISMAN <=-


 GH>> To stay on topic ("Windows") I argued for Linux at the
 GH>> Senior Center computer lab ... with a GUI setup just like
 GH>> Windows. The answer was : "If you're gonna do that, why
 GH>> not just go Windows!" Alien mindset!

 AA>> A sad commentary indeed. :( MS has succeeded in
 AA>> brainwashing them to think no alternatives exist.

 AA>> But what was your answer to their question?

 AZ> There is, in fact, a bit of a debate going on right now
 AZ> about how to increase use of Linux as a desktop OS (rather
 AZ> than as a server OS)... one side is arguing that Linux
 AZ> needs to become more Windows-like. The other side suggests
 AZ> (as in GH's anecdote) that if Linux becomes more
 AZ> Windows-like, then users will see it as a cheap Windows
 AZ> knock-off, and feel like they might as well stick to 'the
 AZ> real thing'.

 CA> There is a third group that believes it is the lack of
 CA> application software that discourages people who consider
 CA> changing over to Linux. I consider myself a member of that
 CA> third group.

There's also the 'hardware support' issue-- though that (along with ease of 
installation) has vastly improved over the years I've been trying out Linux. 
Now most distributions I try auto-detect the display and sound card on my Dell 
laptop, which didn't use to be the case. WiFi cards remain an issue (as do 
things like Win-modems); the older WiFi cards I've tested almost all work, and 
are auto-detected. The newer models that I've tried tend to lack drivers, 
however.

And there are issues with software installation-- I've gotten very frustrated 
trying to install standard things like Firefox and OpenOffice upgrades, unless 
there's a version auto-downloaded by the particular distribution's own 
software. 

 CA> re: "More Windows-like"

 CA> Whatever Windows has managed to do well or even just acclimate
 CA> the typical personal computer user to would have to be
 CA> addressed by any OS attempting to go mainstream. Avoiding the
 CA> pitfalls of releasing unfinished applications, the constant
 CA> need to patch the OS, and maintain a reasonably stable system
 CA> is also a factor in NOT being more "Windows-like".

 CA> re: "stick to 'the real thing'"

 CA> This is probably what stunned Linspire (Lindows). The marketing
 CA> made it sound too much like a Windows clone even though that
 CA> was never really true.

Possibly interesting read: "Is desktop Linux stuck on stupid?"
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=419&tag=nl.e589

.... Inet mail to: alan at zisman dot ca
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.40
 * Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

.