News - "Why Linux Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop" - Linux

This is a discussion on News - "Why Linux Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop" - Linux ; http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/rob/?p=221 For Linux to be successful on the desktop, it must give the user an experience that approaches what Apple is doing with the iPhone. The things that make Linux "Linux" need to be fully concealed. Then the result needs ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: News - "Why Linux Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop"

  1. News - "Why Linux Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop"


    http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/rob/?p=221


    For Linux to be successful on the desktop, it must give the user an
    experience that approaches what Apple is doing with the iPhone. The things
    that make Linux "Linux" need to be fully concealed. Then the result needs to
    be marketed on its benefits as a device and platform to the user who wants
    to do non-technology work.

    To be successful on the desktop, in other words, it has to follow a path
    similar to the path BSD UNIX took to become popular on the desktop - the
    path that turned BSD UNIX into the MacOS. The vast majority of folks who use
    the MacOS have no idea, nor do they care, that it started out as BSD UNIX
    (some would likely run from the product if Apple tried to market the UNIX
    part of their offering as UNIX).





    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  2. Re: News - "Why Linux Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop"

    On Mon, 05 May 2008 17:37:22 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/rob/?p=221
    >
    >
    > For Linux to be successful on the desktop, it must give the user an
    > experience that approaches what Apple is doing with the iPhone. The
    > things that make Linux "Linux" need to be fully concealed. Then the
    > result needs to be marketed on its benefits as a device and platform to
    > the user who wants to do non-technology work.
    >
    > To be successful on the desktop, in other words, it has to follow a path
    > similar to the path BSD UNIX took to become popular on the desktop - the
    > path that turned BSD UNIX into the MacOS. The vast majority of folks who
    > use the MacOS have no idea, nor do they care, that it started out as BSD
    > UNIX (some would likely run from the product if Apple tried to market
    > the UNIX part of their offering as UNIX).
    >
    >


    Why doesn't Windows have to give the user an experience that approaches
    what Apple is doing with the iPhone?

    What things that make Linux Linux need to be concealed?

    BSD UNIX didn't take any path to become MacOS, so how can Linux 'take the
    same path'?

    >
    >
    >
    > ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **


    Learn to configure your software.


    --
    Rick

  3. Re: News - "Why Vista ME Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop"

    Rick wrote:

    > On Mon, 05 May 2008 17:37:22 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/rob/?p=221
    >>
    >>
    >> For Linux to be successful on the desktop, it must give the user an
    >> experience that approaches what Apple is doing with the iPhone. The
    >> things that make Linux "Linux" need to be fully concealed. Then the
    >> result needs to be marketed on its benefits as a device and platform to
    >> the user who wants to do non-technology work.
    >>
    >> To be successful on the desktop, in other words, it has to follow a path
    >> similar to the path BSD UNIX took to become popular on the desktop - the
    >> path that turned BSD UNIX into the MacOS. The vast majority of folks who
    >> use the MacOS have no idea, nor do they care, that it started out as BSD
    >> UNIX (some would likely run from the product if Apple tried to market
    >> the UNIX part of their offering as UNIX).
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Why doesn't Windows have to give the user an experience that approaches
    > what Apple is doing with the iPhone?
    >
    > What things that make Linux Linux need to be concealed?
    >
    > BSD UNIX didn't take any path to become MacOS, so how can Linux 'take the
    > same path'?


    Another WinTroll demanding that Linux deliver what Windows can't. Of course,
    the real fact is, portable Linux is doing quite well, thank you.

    --
    RonB
    "There's a story there...somewhere"

  4. Re: News - "Why Linux Doesn't needs to on the Consumer Desktop"

    Micoshaft fraudster Ezekiel wrote on behalf of Half Wits from Micoshaft
    Corporation:

    > For Linux to be successful on the desktop


    It must extend what it already does on the embedded Linux market.
    Currently Embedded Linux sells 3 million embedded Linux Gadgets PER DAY.

    Linux investors on the desktop needs to push the envelope to go from
    1 million Linux installs per week to 1 million desktop Linux installs per
    day and Linux would by that time will have become mainstream.

  5. Re: News - "Why Linux Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop"

    "Rick" stated in post
    AI-dnSI4KsKCH4LVnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@supernews.com on 5/5/08 2:54 PM:

    > On Mon, 05 May 2008 17:37:22 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/rob/?p=221
    >>
    >>
    >> For Linux to be successful on the desktop, it must give the user an
    >> experience that approaches what Apple is doing with the iPhone. The
    >> things that make Linux "Linux" need to be fully concealed. Then the
    >> result needs to be marketed on its benefits as a device and platform to
    >> the user who wants to do non-technology work.
    >>
    >> To be successful on the desktop, in other words, it has to follow a path
    >> similar to the path BSD UNIX took to become popular on the desktop - the
    >> path that turned BSD UNIX into the MacOS. The vast majority of folks who
    >> use the MacOS have no idea, nor do they care, that it started out as BSD
    >> UNIX (some would likely run from the product if Apple tried to market
    >> the UNIX part of their offering as UNIX).
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Why doesn't Windows have to give the user an experience that approaches
    > what Apple is doing with the iPhone?
    >
    > What things that make Linux Linux need to be concealed?
    >
    > BSD UNIX didn't take any path to become MacOS, so how can Linux 'take the
    > same path'?


    OS X is partially derived from BSD Unix... FreeBSD and Mach, really. So,
    yes, the BSD Unix based OS that is popular on the desktop is OS X... that is
    the "path" it took to become popular on the desktop.


    --
    Satan lives for my sins... now *that* is dedication!


  6. Re: News - "Why Linux Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop"

    On Mon, 5 May 2008 17:37:22 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/rob/?p=221
    >
    >
    > For Linux to be successful on the desktop, it must give the user an
    > experience that approaches what Apple is doing with the iPhone. The things
    > that make Linux "Linux" need to be fully concealed. Then the result needs to
    > be marketed on its benefits as a device and platform to the user who wants
    > to do non-technology work.


    This is absolutely true and is the way the industry is moving.
    The geeks are not going to like it but the end users are adopting it.

    People are interested in a total experience and multimedia is at the center
    of all of this.
    They want their PDA, phone,iPod etc to seamlessly integrate with their home
    system and they want their work systems to sync with their home and
    portable devices as well.

    People are not interested in sifting though racks of hardware to find
    pieces that *might* work with Linux.
    They just want things to work and as the population ages, the boomers, this
    is even more important.

    Linux is just too much of a PITA for people to use.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  7. Re: News - "Why Linux Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop"

    On Mon, 05 May 2008 22:46:13 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

    > On Mon, 5 May 2008 17:37:22 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/rob/?p=221
    >>
    >>
    >> For Linux to be successful on the desktop, it must give the user an
    >> experience that approaches what Apple is doing with the iPhone. The
    >> things that make Linux "Linux" need to be fully concealed. Then the
    >> result needs to be marketed on its benefits as a device and platform to
    >> the user who wants to do non-technology work.

    >
    > This is absolutely true and is the way the industry is moving. The geeks
    > are not going to like it but the end users are adopting it.


    Then why isn't WIndows moving that way?

    >
    > People are interested in a total experience and multimedia is at the
    > center of all of this.
    > They want their PDA, phone,iPod etc to seamlessly integrate with their
    > home system and they want their work systems to sync with their home and
    > portable devices as well.
    >
    > People are not interested in sifting though racks of hardware to find
    > pieces that *might* work with Linux.


    People don't have to sift through racks of hardware to find pieces that
    might work with Linux.

    > They just want things to work and as the population ages, the boomers,
    > this is even more important.
    >
    > Linux is just too much of a PITA for people to use.


    Then why do you and your family use it?

    --
    Rick

  8. Re: News - "Why Linux Doesn't Work on the Consumer Desktop"

    "Rick" stated in post
    D_mdnQj6WPAPTILVnZ2dnUVZ_tzinZ2d@supernews.com on 5/5/08 8:33 PM:

    ....
    >> People are not interested in sifting though racks of hardware to find
    >> pieces that *might* work with Linux.

    >
    > People don't have to sift through racks of hardware to find pieces that
    > might work with Linux.


    Correct: they can use another OS instead.



    --
    When thinking changes your mind, that's philosophy.
    When God changes your mind, that's faith.
    When facts change your mind, that's science.


+ Reply to Thread