Why Linux cannot replace Windows?

[ben_ben]

i would really like to use linux but the way you have to instal things is so hard unless you go through the list of programs you can automatically install
but there isnt a big selection
once they improve this i will use it lol

 

[Greg]

the way you have to instal things is so hard

"sudo apt-get install program" is so hard!

 

[macdude425]

but there isnt a big selection

Portage has 20,000+ ebuilds.
APT has 24,701 packages as of Debian 4.0.
Ubuntu has 24, 008 packages.
Fedora has the least of them all - a little less than 6,000.

Would you care to restate?

 

[horndude]

linuxpackages.net has loads of precompiled apps for slackware, simple as downloading it and then installpkg <pkgname> while root

most of the bigger and older linux distro's have repository sites with pre-compiled apps

wiht linux there's like a dozen GUI's to choose from, 7 or 8 browsers to choose from, same with almost everything else---usually both command line or GUI versions too

 

[macdawg]

1. harder to use than windows, enough said.
2. compatibility issues - ati drivers, windows drivers, programs schools and business use runs on proprietary Windows only, etc, etc, etc, etc.

An os needs rock solid stability and be compatible and perfectly stable with the hundreds of thousands of different pc devices & configurations out there to be used by 1/6th of the population, and not only make it compatible but make it easy to use is a gargantuan task.

Such a gargantuan task that Vista cost 6 billion dollars to develop.

Linux is developed by geniuses, and to me surprising its as good as it is already, but to think an open source project can be an easy to use os with compatibility for one sixth of the planet is fantasy.

 

[Nitestick]

the only reason linux has such major compatibility issues is a lack of effort from both the software and hardware industry to provide it. most support is from ingenious reverse engineering by some talented people. personally i think linux has far better hardware support in that device support is written directly into or patched onto the kernel.

simply put (though it sounds stupid), linux won't replace windows in mainstream use purely for the fact that windows is mainstream. because of the lack of effort by software and hardware companies to provide linux support it makes linux a more difficult operating system to use in many instances, further more the lack of effort from people to try using it dooms it to be the play thing of geeks. i'm happy with this though

 

[jaeusm]

the only reason linux has such major compatibility issues is a lack of effort from both the software and hardware industry to provide it.

That's true, but engineers like to be paid for their work. Developing for Windows is simply far more lucrative than developing for Linux. Additionally, Microsoft has provided a development platform to software developers that is second to none.

 

[macdude425]

That's true, but engineers like to be paid for their work. Developing for Windows is simply far more lucrative than developing for Linux.

Have you read Apple: A Romance, Buzz Anderson's recent blog? In it, he says that although it may SEEM appealing to work for a company and earn money, in the end, it tends to hold you back creatively, to the point where you become disenchanted with your position. There are a couple of ex-Vista staffers who will tell you this. And opensource projects allow developers more freedom and creativity in what they can do.

You, my friend, have a lot to learn about developing for corporations and the human psyche.

Additionally, Microsoft has provided a development platform to software developers that is second to none.

Can someone say GTK? Maybe QT?

 

[jaeusm]

In it, he says that although it may SEEM appealing to work for a company and earn money, in the end, it tends to hold you back creatively, to the point where you become disenchanted with your position.

Everyone has an opinion, but it is based largely on personal experience. This is definitely not an issue for me, or anyone else on my team, especially concerning creativity. Every company and development team works differently. However, I'm fortunate to work in a highly flexible environment.

You, my friend, have a lot to learn about developing for corporations and the human psyche.

That's ironic coming from you

Can someone say GTK? Maybe QT?

You're definitely not a software developer.

Microsoft treats their developers better than their end users. When I was in grad school, I used Debian exclusively. I hated booting into Windows for anything. After spending time in the industry developing professionally, my attitude toward Microsoft changed quite a bit. Other than doing embedded work, there's no other platform I'd rather develop for. The tools, the framework (.NET), and the support are currently better than anything else available. Of course, this isn't apparent to you because you haven't experienced it yourself. I can sympathize with you somewhat. I probably would have rejected any positive comments about Microsoft when I was in school.

Edit: I looked up that blog entry you mentioned, and with respect to your comment about becoming disenchanted with a position, he's right. Writing code for financial institutions will drain the life out of you because it is exceedingly boring. There is little room for creativity in that job.

 

[zmatt]

why can linux not replace windows? simple direct X. its closed and to reverse engineer is 50 years in prison. 90% of the big games out there are DX based, so linux and MacOS and everything else is limited. If we can find a way to shut out DX or to find a superior alternative windows has no technical redeeming qualities.