Would Linux have a larger user base if there was one central distribution?

simonshort

Thread Starter
Joined
Aug 21, 2004
Messages
34
Would Linux have a larger user base if there was one central distribution instead of hundreds?

This is a paper i am writing and am looking for some opinion, both biased and non biased as part of my research.

what do you think. would it be better to have just one LinuxOS??!
 

smooth

Garrett
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
4,029
I would say possibly, but I highly doubt it.

The reason I say is, Microsoft has the average consumer brain-washed into believing that their operating system is the only worthy operating system out today. I know for me, I had never even heard of Linux until I took my web development and programming classes in college.

I think it's really cool that Linux has a lot of distributions, because it makes it where you can pick and choose which options you want to have.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
3,086
To be honest, I think the real killer to UNIX and Unix-like operating systems has its roots in the terminal. GUIs cater to a common denominator--the non-computer-savvy population--so are therefore condusive to acceptance by the largest possible audience. Since the introduction of the Windows GUI, people have become accustomed to messaging and interfacing with a HAL rather than getting to the heart of the kernel. So now, after nearly 20 years, kernels come with a huge learning curve (regardless of the interface). I think that is much more significant than the distribution.

chris.
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
4,952
Umm.... I don't think so.

Linux is free, which means barely any money for advertising. Which means a lot of people don't even hear about it.

And Linux is distinctly lacking in the easy-to-use-woth-pretty-pictures interface department. Face it. It's geeky.

Centralized distribution or not, I highly doubt it will overtake Linux.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
14,681
Well, what user base are we talking about? Linux has run more servers than any other OS for a long time (including TSG, runs on RedHat linux.)

As far as linux on the desktop...doesn't look any harder than Windows to me :confused:


Between RedHat, Novell, and IBM's linux offerings, its a multi-billion dollar product.
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
4,319
I will mirror what Smooth has said and add a bit. You must understand that Micro$ux has a large portion of the population brainwashed. And I am not just talking about the average joe user ether. My housemate repairs computers for a living. He still insists that the only place for linux is a Server and that it is foolish to try and use it as a desktop system. I have flat out stopped arguing with him about it because all he brings up is how micro$ux and built for windows programs cant work with linux.
I also want to point out the microsux purposely tries to make their programs incompatible with their linux counterparts, (such as openoffice to XPOffice), in order to keep their (illegal in my eyes) monopoly.

Edit> How did you change your star to a K on the taskbar Brendandonhu?
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
4,319
Brendan, after I figure out my ATI driver problem, you mind helping me out installing the new version of KDE? :D
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
4,952
brendandonhu said:
Well, what user base are we talking about? Linux has run more servers than any other OS for a long time (including TSG, runs on RedHat linux.)

As far as linux on the desktop...doesn't look any harder than Windows to me :confused:


Between RedHat, Novell, and IBM's linux offerings, its a multi-billion dollar product.
I bet that half the adults I know couldn't tell you what "execute the program" means.

Then again, I'm not familiar with Linux, so I guess that presumption was my own ignorance. The Linux I remember was circa 1996 when we actually hd a linux machine running here. So I guess I need to brush up on my Linux knowledge...

Oh well.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
14,681
That's why you have the menu with everything labeled as "Games", "Internet", "Multimedia", etc. as well.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
3,086
I realize that certain distributions of Linux have a really good GUI, but it doesn't make the operating system transparent to the common user. You have to consider that the majority of computer users aren't IT techs and comp sci gurus anymore. Most people are at some level uncomfortable with computing, and Wintel systems seem more accommodating because in the beginning they were more pervasive in the consumer market. Windows slaughtered Mac in the 90s, and Macs have a longer consumer history than Linux.

I think the biggest problem is consumer confidence; the GUI was designed to facilitate computing for persons who didn't know command-line interface, and Wintel was the early bird.

That was my point. Not that Linux doesn't support robust GUIs.

chris.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2001
Messages
27,087
brendandonhu said:
Well, what user base are we talking about? Linux has run more servers than any other OS for a long time (including TSG, runs on RedHat linux.)

As far as linux on the desktop...doesn't look any harder than Windows to me :confused:


Between RedHat, Novell, and IBM's linux offerings, its a multi-billion dollar product.
My latest linux box looks like this (KnoppMyth)

 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 807,865 other people just like you!

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Top