Sincere Question...What Does Linux Offer A Computer User?

[Tsuroerusu]

(especially releases such as gnuSense)

I wish they had that good a taste in name, but sadly they don't: gNewSense - http://www.gnewsense.org

[eddie]

Since we dumped Microsoft, we have not had any real problems and actually we do more than when we had xp and win2k. I refuse to run vista on a machine unless I am getting paid to do it. I am not sure we actually have anything that will run it decent anyway. Even my brother who is a card carrying Microsoft good ol boy will not run Vista. He is even starting to think about running linux at home. Even if xp ran fine for someone now, how long will that continue since it is discontinued. How hard are Microsoft employees really going to try to support it with updates How long will third party software be supported for it? I see the same type of mental gymnastics and arguments come into to play as when the world went from dos to a graphical environment. ".....but dos just works!" You have to ask your self one thing. If windows so great , why did microsoft invest in novell after it bought suse.

Leo Laporte said today that he not only likes linux, but he uses it at home.

[Tsuroerusu]

why did microsoft invest in novell after it bought suse.

To say Microsoft invested in Novell, would be the same as saying Novell invested in Microsoft. The only thing they did was pay each other a bunch of money in exchange for the "promise" (aka covenant) to not sue each other's customers for infringement of each other's patents. It's absolutely not as if Microsoft said to Novell "Here's a bunch of money, go pay people to write GPL-licensed software!" or something like that.

Leo Laporte said today that he not only likes linux, but he uses it at home.

I'm sure he does, probably to keep his Macs backed up ...

(I'm sorry, but I'd have to see with my own eyes that Leo actually uses a Linux desktop at all, because this guy is such a hypocrite when he claims that he isn't a Mac fanboy)

[hellonorman]

Since we dumped Microsoft, we have not had any real problems and actually we do more than when we had xp and win2k.

Could you give more detail?

[eddie]

Copyright 2008 (c) all rights reserved
It took me a while to get rid of my crutch using xp. Talked about these things so much I hate to be boring.
Though we have bought some used items off of ebay and replacement parts locally, we have not had to get any new machines or major equipment upgrades. We have picked up quite a few machines for free that have made excellent spare parts and extra machines. Linux hardware requirements are a fraction of what is required for the latest windows and osx. When I travel i just take my 500mhz ibm thinkpad with me. It is all I need. Also too you can have equipment networked such as scanners and printers, so you do not have to have four of everything.
I like compiz so that I do not have to have multiple monitors at one workstation. When I need to I have been able to use multiple monitors since redhat 9.
We do not have to worry about viruses and spyware cleaning everyday. Updates are pretty much automatic. We have a plethora of software to use without paying money upfront. Everthing from networked accounting to cad and even educational software. We run our business on linux.
I do not have to spend time worrying about licenses as much as I used to. I have a file cabinet full stuffed with license paperwork and etc for several commercial operating systems.
LTSP (linux terminal server project) has been the biggest boon. We can run thin clients or old diskless legacy machines as clients. No machines to image or upgrade except the server. if one of the clients goes down, it only takes literally just a minute to replace it back into use. I can not wait to use mythtv with the thin clients I have as front ends.
Customizing server,nas, desktop, and laptop installs is a breeze with network installs from our local repos. I can setup a specialized linux box in a fraction of the time it takes with windows. I know about ghost and all the tool available for windows. It is still easier for me to do it with linux.
With linux, I do not have to have a specialized server for every little thing like windows. Servers can have multiple uses. My person server does web, file, audio media and etc.
I like all the specialized live distros such as I can set up a cluster in minutes. I call them my cows. Being from Texas, I like that euphemism. geexbox makes a great sound server. etc
I like that the web has so much free info when I have issues I can not figure it out. for windows you are pushed to go to a paid site to get some answers. Not that I ever have.
Security is relatively better and networking is a breeze to setup. So many free tools to use also. I do not feel safe using microsoft products. Not only for issues but their phone home with my private info practices.
I do have wine reluctantly on one box for the driver for windows only network printer server. When I build my new server, it will go away.
If I need windows or any other os, I can always use a virtual machine such as qemu.
There are plenty of neat games for linux. Even some fine network games.
You can not buy an off the shelf computer system that could meet our needs. I am a registered developer for microsoft, sun and novell (which does not mean much). I do get to use some the development projects and os's. I still prefer linux.
etc etc etc

[hellonorman]

Eddie that's great and all but it doesn't really address the point of this thread.

[eddie]

I was asked to clarify why I like linux better. I did that without getting into technical issues. I did not want to waste time deploring windows doing a tit for tat. Now I wished I never replied to this thread. ciao

[hellonorman]

I was asked to clarify why I like linux better. I did that without getting into technical issues. I did not want to waste time deploring windows doing a tit for tat. Now I wished I never replied to this thread. ciao

No I asked for more detail on how you "have no real problems" and "do more than when you had xp". I asked of course in the context of this thread being what does linux offer a desktop user that would make them switch. I didn't ask why you like linux better.

[Gomer_X]

For me, I've used XP less and less because it just gets broken and there's no way to fix it. The standard answer is to wipe and re-install. For me, that means installing Windows 98 then upgrading to XP, then downloading a billion updates and drivers. It's just a pain, so I leave it alone. There's also the issue of losing all my personal data and having to re-install applications.

At least Linux is fixable and easy to re-install. It's much more up to date and secure. I've run separate /home partitions for years, so losing data after a re-install isn't an issue.

So in a nutshell, I use Linux because it works and Windows doesn't. I've worked on computers for a lot of friends and people I know, and Windows doesn't work for them either. The only reason they don't switch is fear of the unknown.

[hellonorman]

For me, I've used XP less and less because it just gets broken and there's no way to fix it. The standard answer is to wipe and re-install. For me, that means installing Windows 98 then upgrading to XP, then downloading a billion updates and drivers. It's just a pain, so I leave it alone. There's also the issue of losing all my personal data and having to re-install applications.

I have no idea why you would have to install 98 to upgrade to xp as that's not how xp upgrade discs work.

At least Linux is fixable and easy to re-install. It's much more up to date and secure. I've run separate /home partitions for years, so losing data after a re-install isn't an issue.

I find the reality is that the things that break on linux are things that just work on xp or osx. So while you can say it's fixable most of the time you are fixing something that you wouldn't have to give a second thought to in those other os's. If you put the same amount of thought in saving you data through an xp re-install losing data wouldn't be an issue either.

So in a nutshell, I use Linux because it works and Windows doesn't. I've worked on computers for a lot of friends and people I know, and Windows doesn't work for them either. The only reason they don't switch is fear of the unknown.

The problem is that if they get over the fear of the unknown they eventually get to the reality that desktop linux isn't really more stable and they likely encounter non or limited functional hardware and find other things that they can't do on linux that they could on windows.

I don't write these things as some claim that xp or vista are perfect. I see the benefit of some of the things you talk about. But then again I am also in the .8% of computer users who likes to tinker. The problem is that these things are unimportant to rest of the 99.2% of computer users and aren't likely to get a desktop user to switch.

[mikeschoon]

I don't write these things as some claim that xp or vista are perfect. I see the benefit of some of the things you talk about. But then again I am also in the .8% of computer users who likes to tinker. The problem is that these things are unimportant to rest of the 99.2% of computer users and aren't likely to get a desktop user to switch.

Is it really a problem, though? Is it more important to be in the other 99.2% or is it important that you enjoy tinkering with Linux? I personally don't care what other people do. If others want to waste their time and spend all their money on a company that is only after their money, that's fine by me. I'll stick with the companies and developers that actually care about sharing intelligence and getting things done instead of figuring out wow to squeeze every last dime out of me.

[karst]

So this is a serious sincere question I'd like to pose. I'll be honest and say that I find myself spending more time on my xp computer because everything works and I've not had any problems in the 4 years since I installed it. I've begun to question exactly what advantage linux offers me as a DESKTOP computer user.

I'd prefer to stay away from stereotypes, cliches and fud. With all the talk of being ready for the desktop and needing more exposure I ask...what does linux offer for a desktop/laptop user that would make them switch?

I need more details. The question is far too vague.

What is your primary use of computers.
what is it that initially drew you to try linux.
what are your modes of entertainment. mainly hobbies and other interests.

You ask what advantage linux offers YOU as a computer user. I do not know you and therefore it is impossible to make any viable judgement. Perhaps we could sit down have a few shots and chat?

[jturning]

Freedom. You have the source code, the OS, software you want, all without being bled dry for every little piece of software. There is just a lot of really cool software and capabilities with Linux over Windows. Right now I'm using my laptop with Xwindows forwarding through SSH from my desktop of Thunderbird and Akregator and they are working just as if they were running on this computer. SSH even allows me to grab files from the desktop whether using the laptop or my XP machine at work along with a SOCKS proxy for work. This is just standard software on my distrobution. There are many such examples that for me make Linux a superior experience.

But with that said, in many ways Linux is a work in progress, and does require some tinkering on occasion which some of us enjoy. There is a lot of commercial software not available on Linux, and some Linux equivalents haven't arrived yet. For many they are chained to Windows for a few programs. Map and GPS software packages even make me keep Windows XP on my desktop in a partition. And I still have my Vista partition on this laptop which I only boot to update lately.

Security is better with Linux. Even with Windows running free anti-virus and anti-spyware, computers get rooted. I have co-workers whose Windows machines that have been owned even though we're running commercial grade anti-virus and anti-spyware behind a corporate firewall. And the tests show no anti-spyware package catches all, and a recent interview with an industry professional showed that none catch many rootkits. In the current climate where hackers take over legitimate sites, and Microsoft is so slow to patch, you just aren't safe on Windows. And Windows support is very pricey if you don't have a friend to help you out. Not to mention the expense if your identity is stolen. Your only real solution is to re-install the OS and spend endless hours re-installing all your software anyway.

I find Linux much faster on the same hardware. Especially Fedora 8 vs. Vista, which is a big difference in boot up and runtime performance not to mention the boost from not running anti-spyware and anti-virus. After having used Linux for a couple years, I personally just don't like to have to use Windows. I have to reboot my work computer daily as it slows down and becomes a pain to use. And I put work in to keep my XP machine working well at work. How many clueless Windows users have I had to tell about defragmenting their disks, where they come back later and say it made a nice difference.

So in summary, there are points for Linux with Freedom being the largest. Today, Linux isn't ready to just replace Windows for every user. For those that could run Linux you have to explain the big picture of the revolution that is happening with Free Software and Open Source, the cost advantages vs proprietary platforms, security, current drawbacks to Linux, and let them decide. If nothing else you've educated them to the software world and they can take a look at a live CD or install on a partition to try without ditching Windows quite yet. You just might have planted a seed that will later sprout when Linux does become that Windows replacement for everyone.

If we don't let the corporations and big money corrupt the process, Linux will evolve to a full replacement or at least one that will satisfy normal users.

Bugz

[hellonorman]

I appreciate your response.

Freedom. You have the source code, the OS, software you want, all without being bled dry for every little piece of software. There is just a lot of really cool software and capabilities with Linux over Windows. Right now I'm using my laptop with Xwindows forwarding through SSH from my desktop of Thunderbird and Akregator and they are working just as if they were running on this computer. SSH even allows me to grab files from the desktop whether using the laptop or my XP machine at work along with a SOCKS proxy for work. This is just standard software on my distrobution. There are many such examples that for me make Linux a superior experience.

None of the functionality you describe can't be done on windows machines. Whether the software comes with the os or is easy installable is really of little consequence. I really don't think most people feel bled dry. I paid $99 for my copy of xp and have used it for four years, all the while being up to date and not having to reinstall to get the latest software. I've paid $50 for a top notch video editor and $50 for anydvd. The rest of my software is free cost. I hardly feel bled dry.

Security is better with Linux. Even with Windows running free anti-virus and anti-spyware, computers get rooted. I have co-workers whose Windows machines that have been owned even though we're running commercial grade anti-virus and anti-spyware behind a corporate firewall. And the tests show no anti-spyware package catches all, and a recent interview with an industry professional showed that none catch many rootkits. In the current climate where hackers take over legitimate sites, and Microsoft is so slow to patch, you just aren't safe on Windows. And Windows support is very pricey if you don't have a friend to help you out. Not to mention the expense if your identity is stolen. Your only real solution is to re-install the OS and spend endless hours re-installing all your software anyway.

I agree that security is a big selling point. Most people become very interested in linux when the security aspect is brought up. Unfortunately as I have said previously it becomes moot when coupled with lack of functionality. Most feel safe enough with antivirus and spyware detectors.

I find the reinstall argument pretty weak. I find the reality is that you have to reinstall linux far more often than windows to keep up to date.

So in summary, there are points for Linux with Freedom being the largest. Today, Linux isn't ready to just replace Windows for every user. For those that could run Linux you have to explain the big picture of the revolution that is happening with Free Software and Open Source, the cost advantages vs proprietary platforms, security, current drawbacks to Linux, and let them decide. If nothing else you've educated them to the software world and they can take a look at a live CD or install on a partition to try without ditching Windows quite yet. You just might have planted a seed that will later sprout when Linux does become that Windows replacement for everyone.

If we don't let the corporations and big money corrupt the process, Linux will evolve to a full replacement or at least one that will satisfy normal users.

Aside from the live cd you could have written this 10 years ago. Still not ready for the desktop. The foss community still hasn't shown that it can do the tedious work of fit and finish when it comes to desktop software.

[Gomer_X]

I have no idea why you would have to install 98 to upgrade to xp as that's not how xp upgrade discs work.

You're in need of a clue, then. That IS how the XP discs work. I don't OWN a full copy of XP. I own Windows 98 SE full and an XP upgrade, so I have to install 98 then upgrade.

I find the reality is that the things that break on linux are things that just work on xp or osx.

An example would be nice. Your reality is nothing like mine. In fact, it's just the opposite. I've never had a signed driver brick my system on Linux. I have with XP. The MS approved driver for my nForce 2 chipset screws my system every time.

If you put the same amount of thought in saving you data through an xp re-install losing data wouldn't be an issue either.

Wrong again. Everything I really need on Linux is in /home. Putting "C:\Documents and Settings" on a separate partition and mounting it in XP is not trivial and requires a lot more thought than in Linux. It also doesn't have the same effect.

The problem is that if they get over the fear of the unknown they eventually get to the reality that desktop linux isn't really more stable and they likely encounter non or limited functional hardware and find other things that they can't do on linux that they could on windows.

Have you actually USED the Linux desktop in the last 5 years? Linux is FAR more stable and far more likely to support my hardware (especially since your original post focuses on XP). You originally said you wanted to avoid cliches, stereotypes and FUD, but that's all I'm hearing from you.