Thursday, October 22, 2009

Will the Year of Linux ever happen?

I don't know. If it does, it will take a long time to do so.
Let me present some information before we begin:
I am a Windows user and .NET programmer
I have already had my “adventures” in the Linux world, I've tried Suse, Ubuntu and Kubuntu (many versions), OpenSuse and maybe some other I do not remember.
My idea about Ubuntu 9.4, which I just installed: very good. I am really surprised about it.

I installed Ubuntu again 2 days ago, because I wanted to have some backup solution if my Windows failed. It started using it to configure it and I felt very comfortable with it, the only thing I miss is a mature environment to .NET development (I know about mono, but my past experiences with it weren't very good, I will wait some time to try it again. I wanted to try use Wine or Crossover to run Visual Studio, but they do not support it). If someone has any idea, I will be happy to try it.

To support my idea that the Linux year will take a long time to happen, I will try to show some scenarios to help you to understand it.

Users are stupid, but Linux doesn't know that.
Yes, they are. All a user knows is to click next, they can't even read what's written!
Linux usability improved a lot recently, Ubuntu is a very user friendly distribution, but it hasn't reached Windows level. I will give some examples:
“Synaptic Package Manager”, that is the name used in Linux to the feature named “Add/Remove Programs” in Windows. If my grandmother is using a computer, she will very easily understand what “Add/Remove programs” means, but what does a “Package Manager”?
Even if the user tries to use the package manager, he will have to download some things like that, in order to listen to mp3: gstreamer0.10-plugins-ugly; libxine-extracodes, etc. How will he discover it? (Remember, users do not google!)

The process “Question-Google-Answer-Do it” is pretty straightforward for people who work with computers and I, for instance, really enjoy using command line. But for non-experienced users, it is not like that, they just do not google and the command line scares them. Windows has a big advantage there: they have all kinds of wizards, making easier to the user to use them. They have a help system in a wizard form, it asks the user about what is going on, the user checks the checkboxes and some possible answer is given at the end. Yes, everybody knows that the answer will not help in 99% of the cases, but it makes the user feel better, more comfortable.

Linux is more secure.
Yes, indeed, there are much more viruses for windows than for Linux (if there is any). In my point of view, that only happens because Windows is running in more machines. Nobody wants to create a virus to target a SO that is running in only 7% of the computers all over the world, you want to catch the big fish.
The antivirus running in windows may give a sense of protection (event if it is not true). The user will feel safe using windows with an antivirus, they won't feel any need of changing their SO.

I feel comfortable with Windows, Linux scares me.

Yes, unfortunately.
Many users do not know Linux, but say that it is not good. They have a prejudgment about Linux and do not want to try, they have been using windows since it started, why change now?
Changing to something new requires that the user leaves the “comfort zone”, and that may be hard to many.

Distros, distros, distros.
Choosing a distro to install is the first problem of someone who wants to start using Linux. Imagine yourself entering a place to get a sword. You do not know anything about swords, and you have many options, all for free. You ask for help, but nobody can really help you, once “it depends on your needs”. Yes, they are right, it really depends on your needs, but nobody know your needs, neither do you. How to choose it?
That may disappoint the user: if choosing the distro to install is hard and frustrating, imagine how it is to use the system? He may give up trying without even starting.

Talking big!
Companies. Windows or Linux? That's even more complicated. (Let's talk about companies in general. Software companies may have others constraints)
For desktops you have a choice: you can install a Windows, and pay for it, but your employees will know how to use it (they have been using it for years) or you can install Linux, for free but the majority of your employees are going to need some time to get used to it.
I would choose Linux, specially if my company uses only one system, where the user won't see the desktop, but then we have some points:
The employees are all used to the office package, is open office an alternative? (This question I will let for you to answer: someone who learned Ms office for years will be able to start working with Open Office without problems?)
Old programs, they were not made to be used in Linux (probably they are not portable), they will have to be developed again. Is it worth?

For servers: for sure, if Linux is used, the company would have a third party support (like Red Hat) and that isn't for free. I don't know exactly the prices, but I imagine it is not very cheap, the price may match Microsoft or even be lower.
I think the server segment will be the first that Linux will beat Windows (if that happens). There the users are more experienced and have more knowledge. They are also not afraid of learning something new.

Conclusion
Linux really impressed me. Ubuntu 9.10 is coming next week and I will try it. But I think, in order to beat Windows, Linux will have to improve and get closer to the “next-next-finish” philosophy (which some Linux Users really hate). On the other hand, people will have to get used to Linux, and it will happen very slowly, but I think it is going to happen, since schools are using Linux in their info labs.

The only reason I would go back to windows would be the mature .NET Framework which doesn't exist until now in Linux, this is the why I have dual-bool ;). But this is just the beginning, I will have to use it more to be sure. I haven't tried to use Skype or play some MSN game with someone, let's see if it works.


Ps: thanks for visiting this blog. The first 3 days I got 15 visits and 1 follower, that's great! Thanks for the support. Please let me know if you have any ideas to make it better, and feel free to express your opinions on the comments.

7 comments:

  1. I agree with you in some points, but there is more things to think about:
    * My experience in windows trying to play a video: I´ve tryed clicking in the video-file: Just the sound worked. So I try to discover which plugin or codec I had to install... After 3 tries, I gave up! I went to linux, clicked in the file, the software asked me "I dont have this video-decompresser, Do you want to install YES or NO?". I clicked YES and watched the movie in 5 seconds. (Next next finish ?? hehehe)
    * My experience trying to change a NRG image to ISO image type... I had to google for a software, install, support shareware options, and nothing worked. In linux there was a command line called nrg2iso *file1 *file2destination. DONE... Off course, it was a command line. But you have to agree with me: The windows option was hard to accomplish as well.
    * Firewall? Damn, I hope grandpa joe wont have to understand what a firewall is, antivirus update and anti-spyware :-S

    My conclusion. I know that windows is still much easier. But in my oppinion, when all software were written to work in linux (yes, Android, Palm, Synbiam and other mobile OS), this time they will say: "Hey, the software I use in my mobile works in my PC!"...
    Maybe google will accelerate the year of linux. We have to wait :-)
    Thanks for your post Oscar! I like your blog!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well... nothing so serious to discuss. But Im wondering why compare always windows with linux? Or for example, the year of X, Y or Z? You know man, the year of something is a buzz word to press. But, its a stupidity think for example, which all windows users will change to linux, and so on.

    There're two so different worlds, and to me is waste of time discuss this. Really.

    I prefer to use linux, and for now, MacOSX. Why? Because turn things easier to me. But I'm not worried to compare with another plataforms. As a brazilian quote "the neighboor grass always will be more beautiful and green".

    Feel free guy, try linux, try MacOSX. And use the OS which makes you happy. :P

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hey guys! thanks for commenting. That was the idea of the post: posting something I'm not very experienced with to get some feedback from some experienced users. And that worked.
    The nice thing is that you both are Linux users, while I am (or was) a Win user, so we can get a nice conversation that may bring something to us

    @Tony Tonelada:
    Yes, you comment that via twitter and made me thing. From the beginning: windows has a LOT of erros and a lot of things is not very easy there. (Some things you just can't do)
    What I noticed when you wrote in twitter is that I think that win users are used to this kind of error in a way it doesn't bother us anymore. It happens so often and there are worse things (blue screen) that that just doesn't bother us anymore. But of course its a problem and that is bad.

    And yes, once we have an app that runs in your mobile and your pc, things are going to change, maybe it is going to change to linux.

    And yes, I just skipped the point that firewall/antivurs and so on are not so easy to handle, thanks for making me notice it.


    @Gabriel Stein
    Hi...
    I don't think you understood the idea. The idea of the post was to show my opinion about the year of linux (the year where linux is going to be leader in marketshare). The comparison to Windows just took place because Windows is the leader now, but I am not trying to figure out which one is the best.
    The idea is to present, from a point of view from a Win guy, why Linux does not have a bigger marketshare.

    At the same time Win and Linu are 2 different worlds, they "fight" for the same market, so somehow they are correlated, you will have to compare both of the in order to make the decision which one you are going to install, but the choice will be completely personal.


    I have some questions that keeps coming back, if you have an idea, please let me know:
    -Why is Microsoft so hated in the computer world, and other companies that sell software, like Apple are not?
    -MacOS is as open as Windows right? Why is Windows so hated and MacOD not?
    (ps: I know MacOS was developed over BSD, but they do not publish the opensource and you have to pay for it, just like Windows. Please let me know if I'm wrong)


    If you want to publish something in this space, send me the text, link and email (if you want) so I can post here and we can discuss about it :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. huahauhau. Guy, is the easier questions which I ever heard in my life... lets start to answer it?

    -Why is Microsoft so hated in the computer world, and other companies that sell software, like Apple are not?
    First thing: its not open or not open. The main difference between microsoft and apple is: Microsoft Sales software like "will solve all problems of the world, like crime, hungry people in Africa and so on..." but it didn´t! There's a lot of bugs, systems crash when you need and when you realized which you paid $200 for a crashing software with a better marketing adivce... you will feel so angry!

    Apple? Just sell software which works. There are problems, but the main goal of apple is "make things which works" and if didn't work, there are patches and fixes to do that. But apple don't have a marketing like "We will save the world!!" its different!


    -MacOS is as open as Windows right? Why is Windows so hated and MacOD not?
    (ps: I know MacOS was developed over BSD, but they do not publish the opensource and you have to pay for it, just like Windows. Please let me know if I'm wrong)

    No, its not more open. Its BSD license, like the BSD TCP/IP protocol which MS stollen from FreeBSD and didn't give a line of code back to community.

    And I prefer to pay $60 to buy a closed software which just works and are simple, than pay $200 for a system which tries to save the world and can't do it.

    And Linux will have his year when his community stops discussing about GNU/Free Software /Opensource/KDE/GNOME and the sexual orientation of angels than develop a unique Linux which works.

    URL: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/6/19/05641/7357

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't think it is that simple.
    Sorry, but I do not see Microsoft saying that they are going to solve all problems in the world.
    With a fast search, I found out that a Mac OS doesn't cost $60, but can cost until $230 ( http://www.amazon.com/Mac-OS-Version-10-5-6-Leopard/dp/B000FK88JK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1256652927&sr=8-1 )
    windows 7, varies from $180 to $290, not that difference.

    Apple has many problems, some you can see here:
    http://macmagazine.uol.com.br/2009/03/13/ipod-touch-explode-no-bolso-de-crianca-pais-processam-a-apple/

    http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/200912/3225/Apple-faces-lawsuit-over-exploding-iPod-Touch

    I still don't understand the difference between Apple and Microsoft. To me both are normal companies, with many things to hide.

    And, unfortunately to many people, Windows works. It's not "paying XX in something that doesn't work". It works, it is good, if it wasn't, it wouldn't be the leading OS in the world. At least the companies wouldn't use it for servers and databases.

    ReplyDelete
  6. C'mon! I saw the old version, and its normal to be expensive, to users migrate to the new version.

    Look this: http://www.amazon.com/Mac-version-10-6-Snow-Leopard/dp/B001AMHWP8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1256653827&sr=1-1

    People don't use Mac's or Linux because there some problems, like radical fanboys and massive and weird advices from MS. Its like sell something as a Ferrari, which will broken and will fail in the most important phase of your life, and sell a popular car, which works and can brokenin few situations.

    And yes, I totally disagree, MS sell their OS like "we save the planet" and doing terrorism, is the way to convince people.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Nice! it is really cheap.
    But still, I will have to buy a new computer to run that, it is only Mac compatible, right? And Macs are really expensive.

    Man, about fanboys. Sure there are many, but for that Linux and Apple have a lot of fanboys. Radicals, independent of the thinking, are dumb by definition.

    And once more: I don't see any terrorism or anything like that in Ms world. I mean, nothing that the others don't do.

    And again, windows IS good, that's a fact, so is Linux and Mac. You may not like it, but the fact is: it is good, and that is not something I decided, the numbers are there to prove it. Windows is not so unstable anymore, and there are lots of advantages of having closed source (just as there are disadvantages).

    ReplyDelete