Linux is gonna get really big....

Vista is messed up and you have to agree with a lot of what he says, but, Linux is not the answer.

The minimum for Home Basic is 512MB not 500. There is almost no way you can get a modern PC to have 500MB of RAM, even if the system used shared integrated video.

He just must not have caught the error.

I have to agree with Fuzzy. My employer's rollout of a Novell based thin-client (Suse 9.1) is running into one problem after another. And we are instructed to order all new Windows PCs with XP for as long as possible. After that, any PC with Vista pre-installed it to be wiped and have XP manually installed.

XP is a very stable OS with good support from the vendor and a long period of shking out the bugs.  When it was released it had many of the same type of complaints that Vista has now.  Same thing with Win95.

I like a lot of things about Linux but it's not ready for prime time.  Much of this has to do with the support model and third parties.

I think it has it's place, but I don't think it will be on business desktops.

linux will never be big unless the OS can support all major hardware and software the way winblows does. this is the reason why we are stuck with microshaft,trust me when i say IF linux had a great GUI like winblows and supported all major hardware and software like winblows can,i would blow out winblows and install linux in a heart beat ,but since linux can not support all hardware and software for now we are stuck with winblows.now my question is....is there any way i can get a mac OS to run on a pc?

edit

also linux would have to have a 1000% completely customizable GUI as well

My wife and I tried Linux recently (Unbuntu). We both came to the same conclusion. It's one big pain in the rear to get the simplest thing done.
The CD is now a coaster, and we're back to XP.

There's no way linux will ever be taken up by the masses unless they make it more about use-ability,turn on a windows machine it's all there and easy as pie right down to installing any software,turn on a linux machine and the majority would think wtf it's even more complicated if you have to use the command line to install anything and don't get me started on mounting drives

EDIT: No you can't run OS natively on a pc but you can if you...
WWW Link

All well and good but...until something is done 'microshaft'...lol, I like that, will have us all by the short hairs...bummer.

Gotta agree with xscorpx, Linux is not a user friendly OS. Linux has ALOT of work to be done before it can be considered a user friendly OS. It goes right down to installing applications. There is no EXE you just click on or dragging the Icon into Applications(OS X) and that will really screw the majority of users up big time.

Some... yes but it is very very pale in comparison to what Vista is doing.

Then again, some applications don't run on Vista, but almost NO high end software (read here Adobe, Autodesk et al) run on Linux without some major MAJOR work, and even then...

I'd love to see Linux be more compatible, because I love Beryl But it's not the solution right now...

BTW, I don't use Vista either!

if we all look back to when XP was first released, it was messed up too, service pack 2 bought windows XP into the mainstream, vista is the same. every new o/s will have some teething problems. there are so many different system configurations out there that to expect a problem free run is not possible, as more and more people send bug issues into microsoft they will start to build fixes. this is the reason i will not be upgrading to vista until the first service packs

sounds to me like bill is just in it for the money...and screw the consumer.....thats nice, but im clinging to my xp like a life raft!! hey UVAH thanks for the article man, you ROCK!

I think that's a very one sided article.. I don't have Vista yet, but what I know about it and what I understand, it isn't that bad.
Sounds more like tabloid speculation and 'hippie-like attitude' to me: Microsoft will rule the world! zomG!

Gotta remember one thing...the bigger they are...the more noise they make when they hit the floor. Like Ma Bell...too big is not necessarily a good thing. If Bill was really smart...he'd embrace an ever increasing PC market and create an O/S that will do it all...without the DRM...the restrictions...and all that good stuff. Open source, though highly unlikely, seems a good way to go. Who knows...maybe there's a person out there that can take his O/S beyond what it is and make it much more user friendly than it is.

Open source tears big projects apart.
Look at how incompetent GIMP, Blender and Audacity are. tsk tsk tsk.

Linux- Unless you really want to spend more time self-indulging in tweaking using command-line, it's not for you. I *think* most people here would agree with me.

What a load of B.S. kitty.



"Bill" is in it for the stockholders.  The stockholders are in it for the money.  That's the whole point.  There is no money in OSS unless your business model is support.  For MS (not Bill)  to make money they need to have consumers give them money.

Microsoft probably spent more money designing Vista than we will ever make.  They do know the business and they will make money and we'll get a good product.



I disagree.  Installing apps in Ubuntu (my distro of choice these days) is very easy.  And depending on what you are using your PC for, your linux disto will work fine. (Most people I know browse the web, chat, and use a spreadsheet or word processor.)

I always recommend OSs to friends that ask that do what they want for the least amount of money.  You want tech support, games,  price, cuting-edge technology, etc., make a matrix and pick the best fit.  It's an OS, not a religion. 

Linux, like any other OS, is the answer to the 21st century plague known as Windows. Linux has it's world...the backbone of the internet runs on it. However, as pointed out, until they get "exe" compatible type installations and get away from all the command line usage, it will remain unfriendly to those that can't grasp its use.

Ubuntu 7, has an available 3D desktop driver enhancement that threw me thru a loop...Linux models have had, and are still developing 3D desktops that blow anything MS has ever come up with...right out of the ballpark. But, they need development. They need support. An idea can't get off the ground if someone always falls back on "that's not the answer" and walks away.

A distribution that has a ton of applications ready to go as soon as you're done installing, puts MS's $500 to $1,000 suites right into the piracy bins. All free.

But...the right tool for the right job. And, there are tools for you to run any OS you want to.

A skinnable Linux?? Now that would be awesome as well. WindowBlinds for Linux!! (now watch those of us that brought it up or support that not get a royalty check in the mail)

This is unrealistic. MS knows everyone hates DRM. But let me ask you? Do you really believe Microsoft runs the world? Microsoft is under pressure to either support ever-stronger DRM, or not play DVDs. Look how much longer it took for Linux to be able to play a simple DVD than Windows. This wasn't developers being lazy, this was CSS being a protected asset. I hope you don't buy DVDs, since you're supporting DRM in the forms of both CSS and Macrovision. The restrictions aren't there because Bill wants to restrict you, they're there because the companies who own the content want to protect it. Even Stardock protects their assets. Apple doesn't let you play iTunes songs on anyone elses mobile player? Open Source has a downside. The greatness that is open source doesn't pay the bills in most cases, which is why it's a coin-toss if an open source package will be great, or just confusing.

Why oh why they cant make it as easy as windows to install "everything" I have no idea. When they do..it will flourish, until then.. not as I see it.

vStyler, I disagree. When there's everything to INSTALL on Linux, it'll flourish. The majority of people will pick the OS that can do the majority of what they want to do. If one OS can do all of it, but can be annoying from time to time, I'll probably deal with it's issues over an OS that can do some of them, but not all of them. The hassle of dual-booting back and forth is too great. Problem is, the tasks which need the most system (like games) are the ones that still need Windows. So using a hidden VM that starts up on boot for those tasks isn't an option either. People used Windows before Autorun made installs nearly automatic, and Linux could easily add the same techniques. But you're still limited on what you can install.

Therein lies the problem. No OS does it all...not even Windows. A bigger problem, isn't whether or not games can or cannot run on Linux, or Mac...they can. The issue lies with the popularity of Windows, and it's DirectX influence. Who are MS to say that all games must be written with that code? Game developers focus primarily on what the masses are using....and there are some great game titles that run just fine on Linux or OSX. But..as with the OS (any distro of it), it needs support from the community at large in order to start the ball rolling on developers branching off to do games and other apps that don't depend on Windows.

From watching MS grow...it's OEM providers have made it king of the hill. You buy a machine, you get Windows. You buy music, you get DRM. It hasn't been until really recent, that the Linux community as well as DRM free music..is starting to see the light of day because large OEM builders, and music providers, are seeing what we've been telling them the whole time: We want choices when it comes to the machines we buy, and how we're going to use them.

Start making your choice when it comes to buying a new machine...if it starts to favor open source, the pillars of the MS empire will crack.

The point I was trying to make. The bigger they are...MS should, by now, realize that the tide is ready to turn. I like my XP and hope to keep it which is why the way Vista is being dished out I reserve my right to remain skeptical.