Interesting article. It's the 'It will not run Windows programs' part that makes it hard to become a serious competitor to Windows in my opinion. I'd love to see a lot of major software applications working on other operating systems without the help of emulators. Until that happens, I'm stuck in Windows.

Nice, but that's as far as I go for now.

I like Windows (but I don't love it - blue screens, scandisks and memory/kernel dumps have left deep scars) and am looking forward to Longhorn (just as long as they deliver on the promises - I'm not keen on a lame duck OS).

I remember Linspire when it was still Lindows and it cheekily tweaked the Redmond lions tail. It has come a long way since then - more strength to their arm I say.

Trouble with becoming accustomed with one OS is exactly just that, you become accustomed with its behavior, quirks and know how to do what you want to do with it and the apps available and solve any problem that might pop up.

If you switch OS, you lose all that.

That said, I've been playing admin over our Linux file server at work for the past few months, so I'm slowly getting familiar with its intricacies, apparent counter-intuitiveness and (mis)behaviour.

I use Linspire on my laptop with a dual boot setup, Windows XP resides on the other partition...I use linspire to do alot of stuff. Now the problem is I can acsess, see and open folders documents, office files(excell,word,etc.etc) I( can do all this while in linspire..But if I try to access the linspire partition from XP it just wants to format it...Boo on Windows for not being compatible..Linspire is and it also runs much more stable in my opinion..It does start up slow but it runs very well and can acess my NTFS XP partition.I think XP needs to step up and create some compatibility instead of monopolyzing...as I say this Im buyng another copy of XP for my new computer and I will also be installing Linspire on the unit also... I guess you can say " I go both ways" LOL

Drop125 may (or may not) agree with me, but when it comes to that faster OS, i would have to say that it would have to go to a Linux Distro (Mandrake, IMHO). There are TONS of apps out there that do what most windows apps do, but i do have to admit that the linux enviroment can be intimidating at times, and that it ha not yet reached that "New User" friendly level yet.

As far as what Brad said...
"one has to wonder if Linux advocates were asleep during the 90s when IBM's OS/2 Warp wasn't just slightly better than Microsoft Windows 3.0, 3.1, and 95 (i.e. undisputeably) but massively better but still lost"

The Kernel was not avalable untill 92 at best, IF you knew where to go to get it. It probally did not hit mainstream untill RedHat came along, Late 90's. And sadly enough, Trust me, you did NOT want to mess with the early forms of Linux. To muh command line knowledge needed, and since Win95 was out by then, everyone pretty much forgot all about the great yet archaic DOS commands (No Bash commands and DOS commands are totally different, but the enviroment is alike)

So all in all, Given the next few years, whom kmows? Mabey we will be using Object Desktop for Linux...

Drop125 definitely wouldn't agree with me, but it has to be said!

Why should MS (who have nothing to gain by being filesystem compatible with Linux, assuming you know what FS your install of Linux is using) feel the urge to support Linux filesystems?

Their approach, and I hasten to add that I don't necessarily agree, is that they were there first and if Linux wants to interchange files then it is Linux that should do the legwork. Personally I would love to see a world where every OS had a common filesystem and a common system of applying themes (obviously based around WB! ), but it probably isn't likely to ever happen

(BTW, if it is an Ext2 partition then there is/was an NT/XP driver available, you would probably be able to find it with a thorough Google!)

BTW, if it is an Ext2 partition then there is/was an NT/XP driver available

Actually, Linspire uses Reiser3 (default) or Reiser4 (Advanced Installation option).

I favor Linux in a server environment. It is however pretty amusing to see people advocate Linux on a Desktop. It doesn't matter what desktop environment one uses - they're all inconsistent with each other, use different nomenclatura and as such the whole environment feels very, very inconsistent. Due to my job I _do_ use Linux on a desktop machine, and am happy with it - at home though I'd never install it. Multimedia support is poor at best (try getting 5.1 surround sound from Linux for example - possible, but only for experienced users).

Linux is years away from even being friendly to novice users. Frankly while it made progress, it's still a niche OS and it'll probably stay that way (on the desktop) forever. Windows has its shortcomings and it is inconsitent in places, but all in all it looks polished, feels consistent and as such is a lot easier to handle than, say, KDE or Gnome with all its rather odd quirks.

I think what Brad has said is an over generalization, and a common misnomer, when it comes to the Vendor not distributing Linux.

http://tinyurl.com/68jnf Dell Linux
http://tinyurl.com/8hmx HP Linux
http://tinyurl.com/5xzlr Walmart Preloaded Linux

Linux is making great inroads, when it comes to getting itself amongst the people. The major drawback is that it needs to overcome the "GeeK Factor." I think it has finally reached a point where it is becoming usable by one and all, if they stay out from under the bonnet, as it were. The earlier versions of Windows were not as User Friendly as most like to believe or remember. Think back to your childhood, most of us have many fond rememberences, and glide over the annoyances and bad memories. Remembering how we got somewhere, after the trip is completed is always easiest. The Key comes down to laziness, I think. Learning a New OS is not easy, and Windows lends itself to Simplicity, and ease of use. Not to mention, Windows has a great Marketing Mass behind it. This is slowly being eroded away though, as other Global communities and governmental bodies push for openess and cost reductions. This is where Linux is going to begin to erode the Microsoft line. Also it is a great North American/USA conceit to think Windows (in any version) is going to be the worlds OS. MS is fighting in the trenches to keep it's market share, contracts and growth rate, while fending off Legal disputes, the world over.

Let's not attribute overgeneralizations to Brad that aren't there (well, at least not in this thread). The comment about being "asleep during the 90s" isn't about the availability of Linux at the time. It's about learning from IBM's experience with OS/2. The comment about getting "major PC vendors to pre-load" an OS is about OS/2, not Linux. There's nothing in this tread that says that no one is shipping Linux on a laptop.

And I'm going to have to disagree with dissimulo.orator on this....

The Key comes down to laziness, I think. Learning a New OS is not easy, and Windows lends itself to Simplicity, and ease of use.

I made a living for a few years teaching people how to use their computers, and it wasn't easy. Windows does not lend itself to simplicity unless you have a good understanding of operating systems and computers to begin with. Newbies get confused, period. It doesn't matter if it's Windows, Macintosh, or Linux. Most people have a learning curve with any new software, even just upgrading to Windows XP.

And it's not fair to attribute Windows-use to laziness, either. That simply ignores the fact that the software I want to use isn't available on Linux, and the fact that Linux doesn't have drivers for my hardware, and the fact that configuring Linux to sync with my Palm handheld was a pain in the neck. I like Linux (XFCE would be my GUI of choice), but Linux simply makes doing simple things unnecessarily difficult. And I don't have time to waste on that.

Computers are like cars. I need it to start and get me to work. I don't want to have to readjust the timing each time I fill up the tank. It's the same reason I never really used ObjectBar in the past.

I agree with Brad. Linux will never achieve the difference in quality that OS/2 had over Windows 3.1. It may well become better (and in some cases already is), but never to the degree of OS/2 over Windows in 1994..

The possible monkeywrench in my opinion would be if Linux were to go the OS/2 route and natively support Windows programs. By this, I mean, lose WINE and Crossover Office. If I could simply install SPSS (a stats program) on Linux and it just worked without me having to fidget with settings in some mediator program, I'd be using Linux today.

It's easy to climb up on a soap box and declare that Windows users are lazy, but that's neither honest nor fair.

I do I-net Support this very moment, for a very large National ISP that is the backend for Many of the Mom and Pop Telcos'. The majority of our calls come from people that do not take the time to research their problems or even attempt to learn their OS, or troubleshoot their problem before hand, or to even determine where the fault lies. This is Laziness. Windows does lend itself to Simplicity. I defend my assertion. Almost every program has the same basic features/ Structures FILE EDIT VIEW TOOLS HELP. Left Click Enacts Decision or engages actions and Right Click determines Information or Choices Properties, OPEN or NEW etc...CUT EDIT PASTE. This is how Simple it is. Laziness manifest itself in inorderly file storage by users, inorderly program installation by users, NOT reading program documentation or process of prior discovery practices before adopting a program to use. A lazy User is the guy/ gal with five gazillion icons, files and artifacts strewn over their Desktop. Windows up to XP always tried to be uber backwards compatible and benevalent to prior software as to make itself easy on the User, and the Users software environment. The installation routine has become one, two, three... away we go.. out of the box.
Computers are not like cars, toasters or any other domestic appliance. That is another misnomer. Computers are business appliances that have been moved into the home environment, and are now being adopted for domestic uses. You are attempting to take something more complicated that what was used to send Astronauts to the moon, and dumb it down for mom and pop user to be able to use it easily. That in and of itself defines Windows simplicity.

I also make the point that Brad is offering an over generalization because he is attempting in his statement to make the similarity to OS/2's Vendor distributtion, seem to mirror the development of Linuxs' Distribution. Being available in Walmart, one of the Nations biggest distributors is not to be considered a detriment, also not to mention DELL one of the Nations Best PC Distributors along with HP, who swallowed up Compaq. And who was responsible for toppling IBMs' Desktop Lock? Compaq.
The Driver issue can be addressed, because Hardware Manufacturers make Drivers for Windows, where most of the Driver dev for Linux comes from its' User base, but that is starting to change. Manufacturers are starting to adopt Driver dev for Linux. This is one of the reasons why PC Builders are starting to offer PC with Linux on them. They are doing the Dev right there, and for their PC Build Product Lines. The problems arise when Joe Home Builder builds a UBER System, with bleeding edge Hardware and cannot get drivers for everything. Common chipsets and hardware do have drivers.
I am not a bleeding heart linux user, I owe my livelyhood to MS and Windows, and its support. If everyone had 1/10th the knowledge they needed, our staff would be reduced drastically.

Good Lord! Did I type all that? Sorry.. Got on a toot there.

dissimulo, I have too delt with people who had no clue on how to use their computers. Computers have no equivalent in the "Real World(TM)". Therefore, no OS will ever be "simple". They all must be learned. How logic, on a Mac, is it that dragging the floppy or the CD to the trash will eject it? Logic would say that such an action would erase its content. How logic is it on Windows that you must press the Start button in order to shutdown?
I have delt with people who didn't know what "scroll up" or "scroll down" meant, although they owned a computer. I have delt with people who didn't know what copy or paste meant, or what drag and drop meant. All these things we take for granted are not "simple" when you've never heard about them before.
A computer newbie will feel just as stupid in front of Windows, a Mac or a Linux machine. When you don't know how it works, you just don't know, there are hardly any guessing possible.

paxx, you make a good point. Bias exist in the eye of the knowledgable I guess. I'm not trying to say Windows is for Idiots, or be demeaning, but it is pretty simple to use and the Interface is fairly self explanatory, if the user actually tries to think about what they are doing. Granted there are many inticacies, that the casual user might not happen upon, but the basic functionality, is fairly straight forward. A far cry from the autoexec and config.sys days by far.

Citizen dissimulo.orator ...ya got it arse-about.....it's not 'Windows is simple'...it's 'Linux is NOT simple'.

Ma and Pa Kettle CAN use Windows because it does not demand of its users..."you bloody better be wearing a propeller cap before you dabble with me"...as Linux does.

Windows CAN be used and abused by the brain-dead and the idiot savant alike.....everyone finds his own level....from 'click and giggle' to 'chuck the gui...I do it command-line or not at all'.

Linux has only one level....the 'dabbler' gets jaded and departs....leaving the 'I've invested in a wardrobe of propeller caps so I'm sticking with it or bust' devotee.

Ma and Pa Kettle look like dorks if they wear those caps...so they stay away....