Craig: I will say it again, I like Linux. What I remain to be convinced of is its applicability to general computing. I'm not a Windows VS Linux type of guy, they each have their own uses and so long as we agree on that, we're working from the same page.
OK, so far I've only mentioned what I don't like about Linux. This isn't about me being biased in favour of Windows (anyone who knows me will testify otherwise) it's just damn laziness (couldn't be bothered to type it all out).
If I wanted a mission critical file and email server, I wouldn't be heading in Microsoft's direction in a hurry. My feet would be firmly on the Linux side of the fence, oh yes.
If I wanted to cluster a few machines together to photorealistically (with caustics etc) render my 500 trillion polygon scene, Windows 2003 would not be something you'd find installed anywhere.
There are a lot of other more trivial things that Linux beats Windows for, but let's not pretend that it's ready for mainstream. There's a lot of very clever technology in Linux and Linux applications, some of them prove that it's capable of anything (ie. Cedega, Wine) and really demonstrate how good the OS and its kernel are. Linux doesn't need clever technology, it needs clever management.
If there was one Linux distro, it would make things a lot easier on Mr Average Joe. I know, it's completly unfeasable for this to happen and it isn't what Linux is about, but this is where it becomes obvious just how different Windows and Linux are as OS's.
There are various distributions of Windows of course, they just happen to all be made by Microsoft. What this results in is a fairly common experience between their products. The desktop environment is hugely optimised and standardised and has been subject to some rigorous planned design. KDE and Gnome are capable of so much more than Windows that it's not even funny how bad Microsoft's offering fares. Nice anti-aliasing, transparency options that are actually useful, complete control of the desktop and how it is rendered. All good stuff.
I think part of the problem is a lack of standardisation. Where is the option to change my monitor refresh, on RedHat, Suse, Mandrake, Gentoo, Ubuntu? Those are just the names I can recall right now, I'm sure there are dozens of others. It seems trivial, but it's exactly this kind of thing that your average user has no patience for. I'm not an average user and it tests my patience!
How do you control mouse acceleration? All distro's I've used will let you alter mouse properties in a graphical way from the config menus, but to really get it sorted you need to drop to a console and get stuck in with a text editor.
Which leads me onto my one real pet peeve with Linux, why is Vi or Vim a standard editor? It's a brilliant editor but lord, it is not easy to learn. It is certainly not logically deductable as to how to use it when you load it.
Emacs is pretty darn great, almost an OS in its own right. How to save a file though? Ah, gotta read the docs ;)
Petty, yes, but it serves to illustrate a larger point. Linux is not as accessible as Windows for the amateur enthusiast. You can learn much of what you need to know about Windows in an hour. Learning how to use Vim can take 15 minutes alone.
If you've got the time for it, Linux will probably make you a more productive individual, but it's the initial outlay in time and energy that scares people off.
I will continue to evaluate new distributions when they come out, just to see how things are progressing. I was quite impressed with Fedora Core 4, but ran into defective documentation when I wanted to install Eclipse. By all counts, it should have been installed as per my installation options (of which there were many) but alas, no. Maybe running it under VMWare was to blame, I don't know.
I will rise up in glory, the day that Linux has more market share than Windows. Until that day, I'll sit and wait in hope, continuing to use XP and, in the fullness of time, Vista.
OK, so far I've only mentioned what I don't like about Linux. This isn't about me being biased in favour of Windows (anyone who knows me will testify otherwise) it's just damn laziness (couldn't be bothered to type it all out).
If I wanted a mission critical file and email server, I wouldn't be heading in Microsoft's direction in a hurry. My feet would be firmly on the Linux side of the fence, oh yes.
If I wanted to cluster a few machines together to photorealistically (with caustics etc) render my 500 trillion polygon scene, Windows 2003 would not be something you'd find installed anywhere.
There are a lot of other more trivial things that Linux beats Windows for, but let's not pretend that it's ready for mainstream. There's a lot of very clever technology in Linux and Linux applications, some of them prove that it's capable of anything (ie. Cedega, Wine) and really demonstrate how good the OS and its kernel are. Linux doesn't need clever technology, it needs clever management.
If there was one Linux distro, it would make things a lot easier on Mr Average Joe. I know, it's completly unfeasable for this to happen and it isn't what Linux is about, but this is where it becomes obvious just how different Windows and Linux are as OS's.
There are various distributions of Windows of course, they just happen to all be made by Microsoft. What this results in is a fairly common experience between their products. The desktop environment is hugely optimised and standardised and has been subject to some rigorous planned design. KDE and Gnome are capable of so much more than Windows that it's not even funny how bad Microsoft's offering fares. Nice anti-aliasing, transparency options that are actually useful, complete control of the desktop and how it is rendered. All good stuff.
I think part of the problem is a lack of standardisation. Where is the option to change my monitor refresh, on RedHat, Suse, Mandrake, Gentoo, Ubuntu? Those are just the names I can recall right now, I'm sure there are dozens of others. It seems trivial, but it's exactly this kind of thing that your average user has no patience for. I'm not an average user and it tests my patience!
How do you control mouse acceleration? All distro's I've used will let you alter mouse properties in a graphical way from the config menus, but to really get it sorted you need to drop to a console and get stuck in with a text editor.
Which leads me onto my one real pet peeve with Linux, why is Vi or Vim a standard editor? It's a brilliant editor but lord, it is not easy to learn. It is certainly not logically deductable as to how to use it when you load it.
Emacs is pretty darn great, almost an OS in its own right. How to save a file though? Ah, gotta read the docs ;)
Petty, yes, but it serves to illustrate a larger point. Linux is not as accessible as Windows for the amateur enthusiast. You can learn much of what you need to know about Windows in an hour. Learning how to use Vim can take 15 minutes alone.
If you've got the time for it, Linux will probably make you a more productive individual, but it's the initial outlay in time and energy that scares people off.
I will continue to evaluate new distributions when they come out, just to see how things are progressing. I was quite impressed with Fedora Core 4, but ran into defective documentation when I wanted to install Eclipse. By all counts, it should have been installed as per my installation options (of which there were many) but alas, no. Maybe running it under VMWare was to blame, I don't know.
I will rise up in glory, the day that Linux has more market share than Windows. Until that day, I'll sit and wait in hope, continuing to use XP and, in the fullness of time, Vista.