Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: tlug: Success of Windows
- To: tlug@example.com
- Subject: Re: tlug: Success of Windows
- From: Jonathan Byrne - 3Web <jq@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:13:56 +0900 (JST)
- Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
- In-Reply-To: <3592F373.21FDBBD8@example.com>
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Sender: owner-tlug@example.com
On Fri, 26 Jun 1998, Alan B. Stone wrote: >You know, I think we would all agree that the only reason there are more >people running Win95 on the machines, and not running something else is >advertising. No, we wouldn't all agree that's the only reason. It helped. Apple's gross business negligence helped, too. But Windows 95 is just plain better than MacOS. > If Apple had adobted an agressive advertising plan early >on (and probably released the source code) I don't think they would be >in the shape they are today. If Apple had ported to Intel years ago like some people were telling them to (including inside of Apple), they wouldn't be in this mess. They'd be where MS is now. >The number one problem as I see it, people use Windows at home which is >fine by me, but don't come to the workplace and tell me that this is the >best OS for an office environment, because it's not. Actually, I will. Why? Applications. The best OS for an office environment, or a home environment, is the one that runs the apps you need to run. If that's an equal point, other factors come in. Factors like stability (Win95 beats MacOS), factors like pre-emptive multi-tasking (allegedly coming to Mac in late 1999 or sometime in 2000), better memory management, etc. These are areas where MacOS falls flat. These are also areas where Linux beats Windows 95 easily. So why isn't Linux (yet) the best office OS? It comes down to two things: applications (there aren't many in that area, and they aren't as good as what you get on a Mac, Windows, or even OS/2 machine), and the ease of use problem. My first exposure to Linux came the best part of a year ago, and I think I've still only scratched the surface of what there is to know, and I'm a person with 10 years of professional computer experience. What's this gonna do to an average user, one who (as someone recently stated very well on this ML) is not a computer professional, but does use a computer professionally? It's really going to knock them for a loop. All they want to do is turn on their computer and use it. They don't want to have to configure anything that can't be done from a checklist menu. They don't want to worry about file permission problems, they don't want to have to hack their .steprc file to get a program onto the menu, they dont' want to have to manually copy the icon into an icon directory to get that on the menu, etc., etc. If these issues get worked out - if Linux gets the standard, easy-to-use GUI that it needs (the thing that made both MacOS and Windows 95 the powerhouses they are), and if the applications situation improves, Linux has a shot at becoming the best business OS. And don't forget that MS also wants to put NT into that slot and is working very hard and spending tons of money on it. They probably spend more money on NT in a day than all Linux distributions spend in a year. With very small resources, Linux needs to be brought up to an ease of use level pretty near NT, and leverage its strong networking abilities, stability, and good multi-tasking under heavy load to become the best business OS. It's not there yet, though. >If you want to see a window manager that has the potential to put >Linux/Unix on the average user's home desktop, seriously take a look at >KDE. I will check that out, but I think someone said that it can't do Japanese because it was built with Qt, which has no Japanese support. Is that right? If it is, that's a real problem with KDE, becauser we need a GUI that will put Linux on everybody's desktop, not just desktops belonging to English speakers. >it really does stand a chance. Furthermore, it runs on Linux, FreeBSD, >Solaris, and several other Unix platforms. This is good. What about CDE, which also runs on lots of UNIX platforms? It doesn't seem very popular with the Linux community, but why is that? Does it really have some shortcomings, or is its lack of popularity more rooted in the fact that it isn't open source? Cheers, Jonathan Byrne Media and Content Section 3Web - Your Internet Solution! <URL:http://www.threeweb.ad.jp/index.en.html> -------------------------------------------------------------- Next Nomikai: 17 July, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691 Next Meeting: 8 August, Tokyo Station Yaesu central gate 12:30 featuring Linux on multiple platforms: i386, Sparc, PA-Risc, Amiga, SGI, Alpha, PalmPilot, ... -------------------------------------------------------------- Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp
- References:
- Re: tlug: Success of Windows
- From: "Alan B. Stone" <stoneab@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: tlug: Netscape Communicator 4x Japanese
- Next by Date: Re: tlug: Netscape Communicator 4x Japanese
- Prev by thread: Re: tlug: Success of Windows
- Next by thread: Re: tlug: Success of Windows
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links