Can Linux Replace Windows?
As a bit of a follow-up to my recent editorial about the different operating systems battling it out, a few readers made comments about Ubuntu and Windows and, essentially, that I was giving Windows a little too much credit. So, I thought I would write another one here specifically to address the issue of Linux actually replacing Windows. Can it?
In short - not yet. And here’s why.
Microsoft Made The Rules
Back in 2001, Microsoft came out with Windows XP. At the time, it was essentially the only desktop operating system worth anybody’s time. At the time, Microsoft Office had won the war of the office suite. Internet Explorer had pushed Netscape out of the market by riding the coattails of Windows’s success and essentially forcing users to Internet Explorer. A legal battle ensued against Microsoft on that one, leading to the eventual loosening of the grip on the internet by Internet Explorer (although some would argue they still have a tight grip). All the time, Linux was quite popular as a server (mainly because Windows is too unstable), but as far as the desktop goes, it was mainly for geeks.
Today, open source has made a bit of a comeback.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- 2789 reads
- PDF version
More in Tux Machines
- Highlights
- Front Page
- Latest Headlines
- Archive
- Recent comments
- All-Time Popular Stories
- Hot Topics
- New Members
digiKam 7.7.0 is releasedAfter three months of active maintenance and another bug triage, the digiKam team is proud to present version 7.7.0 of its open source digital photo manager. See below the list of most important features coming with this release. |
Dilution and Misuse of the "Linux" Brand
|
Samsung, Red Hat to Work on Linux Drivers for Future TechThe metaverse is expected to uproot system design as we know it, and Samsung is one of many hardware vendors re-imagining data center infrastructure in preparation for a parallel 3D world. Samsung is working on new memory technologies that provide faster bandwidth inside hardware for data to travel between CPUs, storage and other computing resources. The company also announced it was partnering with Red Hat to ensure these technologies have Linux compatibility. |
today's howtos
|
Linux already replaced Windows on my network. What about yours?
I do agree with the idea that Windows made the rules, but it is not windows itself makes the rules it is the marketing that made the rules. Windows is only a product not the company itself. Microsoft is driven by market domination.
Besides many people got used to the way Windows works by delibrate action of Microsoft. We got used to registry instead of ini files. Microsoft well knew that with enough training developers will get used to registry and the Windows API.
So all was a well designed plan for market domination.
OpenOffice.org does work well. I do not want any M$ (Microsoft) office files. I had enough trouble with all bugs that suite has. I do not want data stored in proprietary formats which bounds you to one or some vendors like M$ did for market domination.
On the contrary Linux is not my server preference, it is my desktop preference. I do run it on my laptops, desktops and workstations. I prefer Linux distros instead of windows due to it is well designed and robust not for being free of charge.
I may fix and get help from others. You can run Linux and replace Windows. You do not need software as an service. I do still oppose the idea of "web browser is all you need". I do like my files on my laptop, with all the customization I do and all application I do run.
I want my computer and my preferences on whatever hardware I have. I am buying hardware so why hardware manufacturers does not support Linux or BSD? Being open will make it more attractive as I do look for hardware which is fully supported by Linux and BSD?
Depends on what you need
It really comes down to what you need the OS to do for you. In many cases yes Linux can replace Windows. I've been Windows free for a few years now. In other cases you may need an application that is available in Wndows without a Linux alternative.
Almost ready for prime-time
I've been Windows free for over a year now, and haven't regretted it once. I'm not a Linux expert, but I'm comfortable "getting my hands dirty", with various Googled sites helping me along.
That being said, Linux isn't quite ready to knock Windows off the top of the pile yet. Linux in general has made excellent strides in features and ease of use. There isn't anything that Windows can do that Linux can do better and faster, including games.
There's three things keeping it from being on top however.
First of all, it's still not 100% user friendly. Some distros are very easy to get started with, granted. Ubuntu, PCLinuxOS, OpenSUSE and the like are very polished and easy to use.. pretty much. There's still situations that require a little Linux know-how to get things done. Steve Ballmer equated the average Windows user's intelligence to a spider monkey. That's pretty harsh. But the general point is valid; most users don't want to know how to do the technical things.. they just want it to work. Click and go. I don't mind looking things up to figure things out.. but the "average" computer user doesn't. Linux has a little way to go yet to make it that easy.
Second, there's the sheer number of distros out there. I'm all for choice, and as a Linux user we get that in spades. But for the first time Linux user wanna-be, they will have no idea which one to get, which desktop environment will suit them better, and so on. Just for example, the first time user decides to take a look at say Slackware. A fine distribution, but not exactly newbie friendly. They fire it up, and get lost in five minutes flat, and swear off of Linux going back to their Windows OS. Or they listen to all the hype going around about Ubuntu, which is also a fine distro. Installs great, but they have no idea about Automatix, Envy and the like to install the "harder" parts. I love all the choices we get, but for the first timer, it's daunting to say the least.
Finally, the lack of major developers supporting Linux in general. There's tons of open source programs available, and their quality is typically top notch. No arguments there. But, more than a fair share of Windows users are gamers. Sure, we have Wine and Cedega, when they work with the game in question. (I play World of Warcraft in Cedega with excellent results) But more often than not, newer games won't run on it. (I couldn't get Overlord to even install, let alone run for example) Sure, I could set up a dual-boot system. But the average user won't know how to do that, nor would they probably want to. Why dual-boot when I could just stick with Windows and not have to deal with it? If Linux is to take Windows down a peg, there needs to be no reason to dual boot. A few companies have made native Linux ports of their games, such as Doom 3, Unreal Tournament, and Neverwinter Nights. But that's a rarity; most software developers don't consider Linux a viable market yet. Just because Linux is built around the open source model doesn't mean that they have to make their games open source. I would love to see the day when I can go to the mall, go to EBGames and browse the Linux section and buy a few games.
Linux has come a long way, and I'm loving every minute of it. It just has a little further to go before it can completely replace Windows as a desktop environment for the average user. As a server OS there's no competition of course.