3 ms·
The rich configurability and diversity inherent to Linux have not done much against simply because they are optional--if you're confused and don't care, you can
by tikhonj 15y ago
The rich configurability and diversity inherent to Linux have not done much against simply because they are optional--if you're confused and don't care, you can simply get Ubuntu and not worry about it.
The real problem, for the "common user", is that you cannot waltz into your neighborhood Best Buy and get a Linux laptop. To run Linux, you have to realize that the operating system is not part of the computer, care enough to install another one and spend a bit of effort getting it to work with whatever computer you have. If half the $500 laptops at Staples, for example, came with Linux, it would be much more popular.
There are, I think, two core reasons people cannot easily buy a laptop with Linux: Microsoft and Apple. Microsoft for its anti-competitive behavior and virtual monopoly; both companies for unrelenting marketing that presents only two options--the patently false Mac vs PC dichotomy being a perfect example.
I know from experience that completely technologically inexperienced people are perfectly happy with Linux as long as they're not the ones installing it. The fact that they could possibly be running KDE instead of Unity does not worry them in the slightest; in fact, particularly with Ubuntu, very little does worry them. My roommate, for example, has had fewer problems with Ubuntu than with Windows, and they were easier to handle.
In short, Linux adoption is not limited by any inherent qualities. In fact, if we just look at the sort of people who would install any OS at all, it controls a large part of the market; however, this is just an unfair a comparison as looking at the market in general.
- muppetman 15y agoI understand what you're saying and as I've just realised in another reply, I wasn't really that clear. Linux the kernel is widely adopted and a huge sucess. But the GUI aspect, the bit the user actually interacts with, isn't. There's so many choices. A vendor can't just built a single binary easily like they can for Windows/MacOS. It's this, the fragmentation of the user-space that's my concern. WebOS is built on Linux anyway, that'll never be a problem. You can "can simply get Ubuntu and not worry about it". I know that, you know that, most technical people know that. I guess it's not too hard for most non-technical people to figure that out, but look at Linux Mint. It's suddenly taking off in a big way. How do I know which one to pick? Which one is going to run the apps I need etc? It's that - the confusion - that I worry might also happen to WebOS if 10 different builds are released.
- kermitthehermit 15y agoThe vendor's troubles with shipping hardware with Linux don't lie in "extreme fragmentation" or "hard to decide which distribution / software stack to sell the hardware with". Just so you don't think about it again: it's mostly Microsoft blackmailing people into not selling ANYTHING but Windows on the hardware. If you think that's not true, you should really think of the time when ASUS was selling netbooks with Linux. I recall reading a lot of stories about vendors being blackmailed by Microsoft - stop selling hardware with Linux or you will not receive any more rights to sell your hardware with Windows.