« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Interesting article  (Read 1468 times)

worker201

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,810
  • Kudos: 703
    • http://www.triple-bypass.net
Interesting article
« on: 20 August 2006, 23:56 »
Interesting new theory about why Linux is not the number one OS in the world, and how to fix it:
http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktopmyth

I don't necessarily agree with the article, but the author does have some good points.

 
Quote
This is why people "choose" Windows. It's already been chosen for them. It's everywhere. I didn't choose to use Windows when I was growing up any more than I chose to be a US citizen. I was born in the US, and I was born into Windows for all practical purposes.
Logged

GenuineAdvantage

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 372
  • Kudos: 449
Re: Interesting article
« Reply #1 on: 21 August 2006, 02:47 »
Me being middle middleclass, I don't buy any of this.

Too many assumptions and it's the same thing that's said all the time if you put it in a nutshell.

Linux isn't going to take over the top. People should just accept that. I've run into enough problems with even it's installation to know this. And yes, because the world of hardware caters to windows. Linux will grow sure, but it won't be #1. It is a character living in windows' dream.
Logged

piratePenguin

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,027
  • Kudos: 775
    • http://piratepenguin.is-a-geek.com/~declan/
Re: Interesting article
« Reply #2 on: 21 August 2006, 04:39 »
What a huge bloated article. I read right up to when the pages purely about Windows started.

Somewhere near the top he said people claim "this year will be the year of desktop Linux" every year, and he just assumed the only reason people had to say this is that GNU/Linux gets more features, which is completely wrong. Many people would say both GNOME and KDE surpassed the Windows XP and even Vista desktop environment a long time ago. The difference now is that we have more people/businesses than ever trying to take things to the desktop, and I think that'll continue - there's a shit-load of money to be made.
Logged
"What you share with the world is what it keeps of you."
 - Noah And The Whale: Give a little love



a poem by my computer, Macintosh Vigilante
Macintosh amends a damned around the requested typewriter. Macintosh urges a scarce design. Macintosh postulates an autobiography. Macintosh tolls the solo variant. Why does a winter audience delay macintosh? The maker tosses macintosh. Beneath female suffers a double scum. How will a rat cube the heavier cricket? Macintosh calls a method. Can macintosh nest opposite the headache? Macintosh ties the wrong fairy. When can macintosh stem the land gang? Female aborts underneath macintosh. Inside macintosh waffles female. Next to macintosh worries a well.

H_TeXMeX_H

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1,988
  • Kudos: 494
    • http://draconishinobi.50webs.com/
Re: Interesting article
« Reply #3 on: 21 August 2006, 04:53 »
Oh man, while reading that article I kept wondering when they would get to the point ... what is really stopping it ? and I scroll down and down and down .. and fuck I must of missed it :(

Well, maybe I didn't miss but gotta make sure. The point was that Linux isn't ready for the masses because the companies selling desktop and notebook computers won't make a profit off of selling computers pre-installed with Linux ?
Logged

worker201

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,810
  • Kudos: 703
    • http://www.triple-bypass.net
Re: Interesting article
« Reply #4 on: 21 August 2006, 07:12 »
The author's main premise seems to be that installation of an Operating System is unacceptable, and that the key to sales growth is to have the OS come preinstalled on your computer, thus hopefully dropping the number of times you ever need to install to zero.  I disagree with this.  But I still think there is some interesting and valid shit in between the first and last paragraphs.
Logged

hm_murdock

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,629
  • Kudos: 378
  • The Lord of Thyme
Re: Interesting article
« Reply #5 on: 21 August 2006, 08:47 »
Every year is the year of Linux on the desktop, as more and more people use it.

If I had a working peecee now, I'd run Ubuntu on it. Why? I'm just way too used to Not Windows. I like Mac, but I also like Gnome. I like KDE. I do not like Windows. Using Windows, I am constantly reminded of doing something in 1995, why? Because a dialog box hasn't been re-designed since then, or some shitty UI convention has remained. Inconsistent, stupid, and downright BAD human interface is all over Windows. Vista will  be the same way. MS forgot what UI means, taking it to be "appearance theme" rather than "the way the user interacts with the software." Vista still has the same archaic dialog boxes, unchanged since Windows 95 with Internet Explorer 4. The same shit-tastic concept of "drivers", which is actually a carry-on from the days of DOS/Windows when you had to install these shitty little drivers to make your SoundBlaster Pro work, or whatever. Instead of modernizing their device driver methods, they just tacked on a Plug and Pray system and kept using the same shitty drivers.

Next, there's the obsession with awful graphic design. MS makes the ugliest themes. THE UGLIEST. The worst, the ugliest, the shittiest. And people who make software for Windows? They make the worst. Everybody I know uses Winblows and I see their screens and it HURTS me... it's so fucking ugly. From AOL IM to Yahoo, even Firefox on Windows is shiteater ugly. I can run MS Office XP with its crappy bulbous molded plastic look, and then run OpenOffice on KDE or Gnome, with OO using the Office XP lookalike theme, and guess what? IT'S NOT AS UGLY.

The big thing is that MS goes for garish. Not flashy, just gaudy and garish. They don't have translucent plastic with glass elements, or opaque plastic gradients, no... it has to be bulbous, curvy plastic, with shitty translucency effects, awful gradient effects, et cetera. SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY. There's no thought or reason, it's just a bunch of guys who took graphic arts classes at the Redmond Community College pushing the same pixels around. Now they work with ARGB rather than 16-bit color or 8-bit color, or 4-bit. Now icons look like 3D rendered junk rather than shitty cartoons. It doesn't change the fact that it's not actually attractive or elegant. It's garish and ugly.

SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY
SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY
SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY
SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY
SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY
SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY SHITTY
Logged
Go the fuck ~
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »