On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 01:01:19AM +0300, Micha Feigin wrote: > Second is the fact that most people just use the OS they get with their > computer and are afraid to try and replace it. Plus, they already paid > for the M$ license (even if forcefully/unknowingly) so why switch to a > free one after you already paid for something. Same thing with macs/osX, > where its even harder to get linux to work. > Linux need to change its public image and start coming pre-installed.
You're aware that this has already started to happen, right? Lindows are/were doing exactly this with cheap PCs sold by Wal-Mart in the US. > There is also the problem of too much options. Unlike M$ where people > exactly what program does a given job, on linux there are 10, and when > there are so many its actually sometimes harder finding the right one > for you or even finding what programs there are to do a given job. > Too much choice can sometime be as much a liability as not enough (as > much as I like the options). My impression of Lindows has been that they're presenting single applications for each niche, fixing this problem for their target audience. I'm quite sure others will follow. As far as Debian is concerned, we have our niche of providing maximal choice and power and I think it's right that we stay there. Many of the early contributors to and leaders of Debian wanted to make it something that could work well as a base for more customized distributions, and that seems to be succeeding quite nicely. To those who say that Debian has too much flexibility and choice for Mr. Average, I say: that's OK. Not everything has to cater for Mr. Average, and that still doesn't stop us doing useful things one level back and catering for the people who cater for Mr. Average. > Don't take from this that I don't like linux. I think its much better > then M$ and there are no alternatives for me for some of the things that > it offer, but its exactly those things that make, at list for the > moment, to be a non-option for the Joe-Public m$ user. I think there's a lot of work to do before we're ready to replace the major proprietary operating systems completely, but the situation is improving year by year so I don't see any grounds for despair. The balance is still swinging Microsoft's way, but is beginning to tip with news of organizations like the city government of Munich and major banks switching over, which erode the document format lock-in that Microsoft Office has had for many years. Once organizations are no longer locked in to what the organizations they deal with use, the balance can only tip further. In my opinion, it's only after that happens when we need to be ready for home users. Office use leads this kind of thing, and is easier because businesses can afford to hire sysadmins and provide basic training to smooth over the wrinkles. Only after that happens on a large scale do you start getting lots of office workers thinking "hey, I wonder if I could use this to handle things at home?", and so on. So I don't think it's necessary to prophesy doom because there are still problems that would confuse those who aren't so technically literate. We've got time to work on these, and it makes sense to be realistic about our audience in the meantime so that we don't do a disservice to those who are already interested and capable. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
