On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Steve Ellenoff <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes, sorry, I should have qualified my statement to mean a huge > success as a Desktop OS replacement, since it's success in other > roles is undeniable. >
While Ubuntu and Fedora and their upstream projects are certainly working hard at making a usable desktop for everyone, I really don't think there's a coordinated effort to displace Windows.There are lots of "switcher" success stories, but I'm not going to fight anecdote-with-anecdote. It won't replace the gamer contingent when Direct-Whatever is the target API. It won't replace Excel-running beancounters who cling to their overly-complex worksheets (OpenOffice.org is a worthy competitor, but it's not going to convert every obscure line of Excel Basic or Excel VBA or god-forbid, OLE Automation). If someone's willing to learn OO.o, there's not much you can do with one you can't with the other. It won't replace companies who insist they are addicted to Exchange shared folders, contacts and calendars. There are equivalent but not identical solutions from many other vendors, but some company's (PHB,imo) management consider this a deal breaker. I have never run into a data entry clerk thrilled to learn to use a new version of my program, never mind a new operating system or GUI. (They're just as unhappy with Vista Aero as they would be with GNOME.). There's a huge resistance in that contingent. On the flip side, Gen-X/Y'ers get a new phone every year and learn a new UI. They can sit down at a Mac or a KDE box or Windows and get done what they need to. The relevance of OS is fading. The only reason for Windows continued popularity is bundling and inertia. Businesses aren't going to switch until they decide the cost of retooling is less expensive than the bundled, discounted software plus support plus virus, worm, malware problems, firewalls, botnets, spam scanners and upgrade costs. As a developer workstation, I don't think Linux can be beat. I'm really happy with Vim and Git and FireFox and FireBug and Apache and Ruby on Rails hitting MySQL or Postgres. I can do it all on my local machine, free of licensing costs, or distribute it over many machines (development, staging, demo, production) at no further expense, other than commodity hardware and bandwidth. Many of my fellow Rails developers prefer OS X. It is shiny. But the only ones I know running Windows explain they do that because "they have to," usually because it's a company machine or their spouse has some Windows-only need. Of course, if you're trying to develop Windows-only software, it's a poor fit. Q: what's the most popular brand of web browser shipped last year? A: Nokia Steve E, I'm sorry you had a tough time. Hardware compatibility is always an issue. And wireless vendors are notorious. The situation has improved in the past year. However, if you have a no-name laptop there's a good chance the no-name commodity parts are going to be hard to get working. A name-brand machine is better. I have Linux and *nix variants running in the office on PowerPC, Intel, AMD., Geode, and ARM-based machines, Dells, HP, Lenovos and Macs. -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
