On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 06:27:08AM +0100, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
> > Linux is still too much of a "geek" operating system. You're not thinking
> > like a consumer; they want the thing to work, work now, work without their
> > intervention, and they *simply don't care* how it functions. Much like
> > cars, really.
> No, for me linux is in no way more "geeky" than Windows[tm]. I agree,
> for many users a computer just has to work. but those do not need more
> than 5 keys or they are confused by possibilities.
As a geek, your opinion on this matter doesn't really
count. Similarly, neither does mine, or likely anybody else who
managed to find this mailing list.
> > And Windows XP really isn't bad; it's a good, modern OS (though
> > architectually needs work), that's fast and reliable, and compared to the
> > abomination that was Windows Me, it's a Godsend. Remember, your average
> > consumer knows absolutely nothing of the computing world; that's how AOL
> > made all its money.
> I have enough experience with Windows[tm] to know that the "easy,
> intuitive, reliable, ... computing with Windows XP[tm] is just marketing
> schmock. And to what it leads you see with all these worms spreading
> around and interfering even experienced users who know what they do (my
> mail account is still flooded by this damn Swen virus coming from these
> nice Windows[tm] machines).
It isn't just marketting schmock. It is millions, if not billions of dollars
spent trying to *ensure* that either you, or friend of yours, can navigate
Windows enough to get you going. Linux has not infiltrated the desktop
market enough to have this status.
As for the worm/virii comments, this is uninformed anti-Microsoft
hype. The most dangerous exploit in any system, is the user. Microsoft
Windows is a platform designed to be convenient for these sorts of
people. It is part of the equation that makes Windows a more favoured
choice than Linux as a desktop platform. Your technical arguments
don't sell copies of Linux, nor do they discourage the purchases of
Windows. They are techie geeky arguments that don't make sense to the
rest of the world. The rest of the world sees a platform that is
intuitive (even if this is a result of marketting influence) and
productive (even if it just that they don't know any better, and the
'productivity' comes at the cost of security, etc...).
Microsoft users don't have to use Outlook. They don't have to open
attachments that they receive via email. They don't have to enable
java script. They don't have to install IIS. They do, because they
want to. These same users would prefer these same sorts of applications
under Linux.
mark
--
mark@xxxxxxxxx/markm@xxxxxx/markm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
