I couldn't agree more, I myself havn't used Ubuntu for a very long time but I remeber that once familier with it then it is in fact a very OS to use. The phrase "Familularity breeds Content" couldn't apply more, most pc users have been brought up on windows Operating systems which makes them reluctant to switch to something new and that is because people hate change generally, unfortuantly so do big software companies and that is why you see so little big name software being ported to Linux based OS. If they advertise in such a way to portray ubuntu as a Quality product that offers a good alternative to Windows them maybe one day ubuntu will be widespread and go far but until them windows dominates the market.
THEfog On 26/07/2010 10:38 PM, "AngelicTears" <[email protected]> wrote: lol, i agreed... but then again. in my experience, when i install linux (mostly i introduced ubuntu and linpus moblin) on most of my friends system (live session) as an experiment, most of them confuse at the very beginning on usage.. that is the main reason for this bug...and again, humans in nature are too comfortable with windows system since the very beginning of computer advancement... also most users has their opinion, most review are bias (heard that fanboys / girls!) where windows fans said bad reviews on linux / open source / bla3x....like wise for linux . open source fans.... in my opinion...humans are natured to be paid for what they did, which fuels the quality of commercial software,this also applies with all commercial open source software..most paid / donate / sponsored (google chrome, firefox, thunder bird, etc) open source software are in top quality because of one thing, money......and that is not happening in open source free software..IMO that is... also IMO the only way to fix this bug is making open source software a cheap alternative to commercial software such as microsoft..not a "free" alternative.... for example, windows 7 home premium cost at xxx$ while ubuntu premium cost about 20$..that ubuntu premium will be a good OS, as good as windows in fact, and can actually compete i n the market...coz their a fees that fuel the quality of software their make... im saying that it's not bad to have free OS, but there alternative..for example ubuntu xx.xx premium cost 20$ with outstanding quality and ubuntu xx.xx standard comes free... as long as the source code is available to public, it's not wrong to charge a minimal fees to fuel the quality of the open source market... that my opinion that is.. On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Espionage724 <[email protected]> wrote: > > https://launchpa... -- Laptop: Acer Aspire Core Duo T2300E @ 1.67GHz Intel GMA 950 IGP Intel 945 Chipset 1GB RAM (512MB*2) Dual Channel DDR2 80GB standard PATA HDD Win7 Ultimate 32bit / Ubuntu 10.04 -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
