Vista Backlash
March 7, 2007
Vista backlash.
This is an article I read today, really the point of this post is to “plug it” (although it was a featured post on wordpress.com so this isn’t really going to help). The article talks about how people who have actually tried to like Vista have gone back and really, there is now “WOW”. For the open source community this is good news, people don’t want to have to use Vista are going to start looking for alternatives. Moving to Apple involves buying a new computer whereas Linux only needs a CD Burner (or in the case of Distros like Debian and Ubuntu, simply an internet connection, being able to now boot up in the installer and download the rest of the files) and obviously an internet connection.
For almost everyone except gamers and those who need to use professional apps such as Photoshop and 3DS Max etc Linux will do whatever you want it to. According to a top game designer, (sorry I can’t remember his name so I would understand if you don’t believe me on this) DirectX 10 won’t really be uesd extensively until Mid-2008. Microsoft is dying. Microsoft fanboys will disagree but that’s because they’re too blind to see what’s happening.
March 7, 2007 at 1:43 pm
I love it, ‘Microsoft is dying’. lets just face it, MS could release 5 absolutely awful operating systems over the next 20 years and I guarantee you they’d till be the majority OS. Its the ‘except’ that does it, theres always an ‘except’. ‘This OS is perfect for everyone except people who want x or y’. With Linux, its what you mentioned above, on Mac its almost the same problems. Windows may be buggy, ugly, bloated, insecure, expensive and closed source, but its going to be there for the foreseeablre future, we’re just going to have to live with it unfortunately
March 7, 2007 at 8:36 pm
When I say that Linux is not good for things such as gaming and use of a lot of “professional” apps it is because it isn’t where the majority of the market resides. If people who can actually start using Linux for everything do, then companies will (should?) notice the shift and start making products for it. Linux isn’t necessarily bad for gaming, (Unreal Tournamnet series, Doom etc), it’s just that it has few games other than puzzle/arcade games (Tetris!!).
March 8, 2007 at 12:49 am
Thats the common mis-conception. Even if market share of Linux increased, you wouldn’t find a proportionate amount of companies writing programs for it, because of, ironically, Linux users themselves, i’m not a major open source fan-boy but alot of Linux users use the OS because of their dislike, nay, hate of proprietary systems, DRM, and closed source code. So for a commercial program to succeed under Linux, it would have to satisfy the core Linux demographic, ie, these so called ‘fanboys’.
In order to satisfy them it would have to be open source, free or next to free, sans DRM or closed code of any knid, how could a commercial development survive under these conditions? It couldn’t.
Although of course, that argument is assuming increased usage of Linux without an idealogical, demographic shift towards your everyday PC user, i.e, if most people using Linux in the future were former MS users, then commercial ventures would survive and succeed due to the fact that the users are ‘used’ to software that way(closed, DRM etc.)
So, in order for Linux to successfully expand, ironically, it needs to become more like MS to offer a viable business model for companies.
Which in my opinion would destroy the ‘community’esqe feel to the OS, its like communism, great in theorey, but just doesn’t work in largescale practice
March 8, 2007 at 3:23 am
Quote:
I’m not a major open source fan-boy but alot of Linux users use the OS because of their dislike, nay, hate of proprietary systems, DRM, and closed source code.
Yes, while this may be true for a lot of Linux users there are also those who move to Linux because they want a system that actually works (ie: doesn’t have an automatic crash feature built in :p). I moved to Linux, not because I’m an open source fanboy (I love the idea of open source and do actually read it sometimes) but I’m not too bothered with commerical software (assuming they don’t try to rip you off *cough* maya *cough*).
Commerical companies could easily survive coding their software for Linux. Once you get all the “core” stuff out of the way (ie: OS, music/movie player, word processor and the like, which can all be obtained free for Linux) you will have plenty of money left over (ie: top version of MS Office 2007 here in Australia is around $1100 :o) people are more likely to buy whatever they feel they need and won’t mind spending more cash.
March 9, 2007 at 9:00 pm
Well don’t we all love the built in crash feature?! And the tinge of the BSOD is just lovely!
You do make a good point about the commercial pieces of software, if you dont have to buy Office etc. you will have money left over, but i dont see how that would make people buy more software! If you’re after saving $1100 by getting OOo, your going to try and get everything for free! If you download one song from Limewire, you won’t react by going, ‘Oh great, now I have more money to download songs from iTunes!’ You’re going to think, ‘Well, if i got that one for free, why can’t I get the rest for free?…’ (Excluding the illegality of Limewire of course)
This would be great for open source developers, as more people would be using their software, but not so good for those trying to make a living out of selling their software!