Re: Fw: [Hampshire] Killer Apps for Linux

On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 21:45 +0000, luis wrote:
> Dr Trickett, why do you think that 96% of computers users in the world
> use Windows?
>

Because the people who use them don't have a choice (corporate
environment) or don't KNOW they have a choice (home environment).

> I think I have got the answer, "it does exactly what it says on the
> tin".
>

HAHAHAH. I just installed the very very latest version of Windows Vista
on a year old Dell laptop and out of the box it didn't find the sound
card at all (Ubuntu Linux does), and has no support for flash, ogg and a
boatload of other video and audio formats that I use.

If the tin says "requires you to visit loads of 3rd party sites,
download lots of separate differently installable packages which have on
consistent package management system" then yes, vista does EXACTLY what
it says on that tin.

> I am a new Linux user, I do like to try the different distros but I will
> say that Linux will never be a replacement for Windows, as long as Linux
> remains non user friendly.
>

Maybe in *your* house. It has totally replaced Windows in my house and
my business. In fact it was a conversation on the HantsLUG mailing list
that prompted me to re-asses my work life and decide that Linux is "for
me" and that I would like to move away from supporting and dealing with
proprietary software.

Many moons ago there was a discussion on the HantsLUG list where someone
said something about how crap Windows was. I mentioned that some of us
"have to" use it at work. Keith Edmunds piped up telling us that we of
course have a choice, we do not "have to" use Windows at all, that we
are masters of our own destiny.

This pissed me off initially, and I thought "how dare he say that, he
doesn't know me!", but he was totally right. Since then I quit my job
and am making changes in my life to move towards working in the field of
Linux and other Free and Open Source Software. I would like to thank
Keith for his comment and this list which helped spur me on.

> I want an OS which it will work for me, without having to spend to much
> time "in terminal mode",

I would like to hope that is but one requirement. It would be nice if
you could do everything without touching the command line but this is
not the case on ANY computer. There is still a command line on Windows
and there is one on a Mac. Why should Linux be special and have this
requirement not to use the terminal pushed on it when the others don't?

> trying to find drivers etc etc ...........
>

You don't want vista then!

> In your opinion is there anything in the Linux development horizon which
> will come close to match Vista's capabilities?.

As far as I can see vista is windows xp with a few bells and whistles,
and this is coming from someone who has actually *used* it, not just
read glowing reviews from windows weenies.

> If there is please would
> you share it with us.
>

Tell you what, you name one of these "capabilities" of vista first. What
are you talking about *exactly*?

> So far the closest I have been is by using Novell Suse Linux Enterprise
> desktop 10.1
>

Ahh, you're talking about desktop bling? The 3d desktop?

You do realise that vista isn't available to buy yet, but you were able
to install Suse Linux and use it *today*?

Now that Vista has gone RTM, it's (to a certain degree) frozen, whereas
Linux keeps marching on, getting better, having more features (and
drivers) added.

> I know my views may sound controversial as I am speaking in a Linux user
> group, but we are still a minority and will stay this way forever.
>

Not controversial, just poorly thought out and badly executed.

> Luis
>
> P.S I am writing this mail from my new Ubuntu 6.10 installation.
>

I am typing this mail from my Ubuntu 7.04 installation with 3D desktop
bling.