Future: Linux will replace Microsoft Windows getting 98% desktop market!

[Joe Woods]

I'm sure that in about 5 years or so Linux will be at least as dominant as
Microsoft in the desktop market.

Currently it's geared towards the ultra technically minded person in my
opinion though.

I really love using Linux, but there are so many barriers stopping me using
it permanently. One of the biggest problems is hardware that is not
supported in Linux by the manufacturers, but this is changing rapidly.

What annoys me the most is that hardware that is supported, but not by the
original distribution is really really difficult to get working.

I've been trying to weeks to get a supported wireless network card to work,
there are so many different config files that need editing and so many
packages that need downloading. You download one package, and discover you
can't install it until you've downloaded another package, you download that
package and it can't install because it needs another package etc etc....
You look at the support files on the developer's website and see things like
"The FAQ is very out of  date, do not email us about this, we will ignore
you". You look at another support website, and find a 600 page PDF help
file. If it's possible to simply run setup.exe in Windows and that's
everything installed, why can't this exist in Linux?

I'm now left with a Linux installation on my laptop that just wont get used.
Sure I'll buy the next release and hope it's got configuration for my
specific hardware embedded in the distribution's GUI, but should I really
have to go about things like this? I believe some fundamental changed need
to occur before Linux achieves mass desktop usage.



"rkell557" <rkell557 na ceinetworks.com> wrote in message
news:3ZCA8.79$842.68 na atlpnn01.usenetserver.com...
> Choong,
>
> I'm the director of IS for a medium sized corporation.  We have been
> converting our legacy systems from proprietary platforms to anything that
is
> open.  What I have learned is Microsoft is one of the poorest operating
> systems for mission critical applications that I have ever encountered in
my
> 20 years of working with computers.  If the IBM's and the UNISYS's of the
> world had released an O/S like windows (not even worth capitalizing the
> word), they'd be out of business.  We are constantly doing reboots on our
> servers just because we know windows is going to die.  I used to be a
> pro-Microsoft person, but now there isn't a day that goes by where I'd
like
> to go find Bill Gates and beat the crap out of him.  I've even gone as far
> as writing to my politicians about Microsoft's MONOPOLY.
>
> We have ported several of our mission critical applications to Linux and
> find that it is a very stable operating system.  Heck, we've even found
some
> free applications on sourceforge.net that do a better job than our old MS
> based applications.  Although, I find that Linux is a little difficult to
> configure and find drivers for, it is as stable as the old proprietary
O/S's
> that we used to have on mainframes.  Some of our Linux boxes have been
> running for months without a reboot.  Something that microsoft will never
be
> able to do.
>
>
> "Choong Kedat Yian" <sunrock na tm.net.my> wrote in message
> news:3CA6ECBC.B222DBF1 na tm.net.my...
> > I started with Mandrake 7 and its only problem is how to configure
Netconf
> in order
> > to get the Kppp working . After the 4 attempt , i am already succesfull
> browing the
> > web with MDK7.0 , but now since 8.1 is so easy to install and there is
no
> need to
> > configure the PPP dialer , i would say that Mandrake is better than
> Windows .The
> > only thing here is that more manufacturer should join in for more
hardware
> drivers
> > althought Mandrake itself is EXCELLENT with many default drivers
database
> .
> >
> > I am now ready to buy the 3 CDs of MDK8.2
> > Choong
> >
> > "Anthony W. Youngman" wrote:
> >
> > > >"Ken Morris" <kenmo na hfx.andara.com> wrote in message
> > > >news:fp6j6ucft153fohgadvb9gpukdrk1kgh4n na 4ax.com...
> > > >> I wouldn't bet the farm on it. Although Linux may surpass some
> > > >> versions of Windows, especially Windows 9x, in stability I doubt it
> > > >> will ever get as easy to install and configure as Windows. I'm
hoping
> > > >> it does 'cause I want someone to give Microsoft a run for their
> money.
> > > >> And I'm hoping it's Linux now that BeOS is dead.
> > > >>
> > > Linux will never be as easy to install as Windows? I've got news for
> > > you!
> > >
> > > In my experience linux has LONG been EASIER to install than windows.
> > > Installing doze has been an absolute nightmare on far too many
> > > occasions. Take my current attempts with Win2K. I'm trying to install
> > > that on the same disk (different drive letter) to Win98. It stomps all
> > > over the 98 partition, reboots, and blue-screens. Installing 98 on
that
> > > machine was a real pain too - it kept on blue-screening, but when I
gave
> > > up and came back the next day it was fine...
> > >
> > > On the other hand, linux has been a cinch almost since I first started
> > > trying to install it with a distro called Universe. Even Slack on
> > > floppies was dead easy, just thoroughly boring as I swapped floppy
after
> > > floppy (30 in total! :-(
> > >
> > > How people can claim doze is easier to install I don't know (unless by
> > > install they mean "switch on and let the auto-install just run).
> > > --
> > > Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
> > > Witches are curious by definition and inquisitive by nature. She moved
> in. "Let
> > > me through. I'm a nosey person.", she said, employing both elbows.
> > > Maskerade : (c) 1995 Terry Pratchett
> >
>
>
>