Can Linux beat XP in homes yet or NOT?

[Dave Ihnat]

Permit me to assume the role of Advocatus Diaboli:

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 10:59:00AM -0400, Temlakos wrote:
> First, consider the price. ...
> <<Further consideration of copying, etc. elided>>

Most users never see the price of their copy of Windows; it's just part of
the cost of their computer.

The only time the care about copying the OS is if, for some reason,
they have to reload their machine.  If they have a second machine,
they get Windows with it.

Vista is horrible right now--there are too many distributions, and the
entry level most users will get, Vista Basic, has in every case I've
encountered been inadequate for even the modest home use they want to
make of it.  But over time, vendors will know what to bundle, and M$ will
make any necessary modifications to make it marginally acceptable.

> Second, as many have pointed out, consider ease of use. 

IF the user has only to do web browsing, it's absolutely easy.
IF they have any requirements beyond that--playing music and videos,
etc.--it works.  BUT.  There are too many incompatibilities, too many
bits'o'magic remaining.

> The third issue is interoperability--that is, will Linux open documents 
> in certain proprietary formats?

I can report with real-life results from the field--I'm a consultant,
and am often asked to refurb machines for re-use that don't have
Office.  Open Office is still just not ENOUGH like Office to satisfy
Windows-trained users.  Later today, I'm going out to install MSO on a
system because the user has wrestled with Open Office for almost a year,
and finally gave up.

> But by far the most important issue is /technical supportability/. 

No, it's not.  Whether Windows or Linux, if the problem is too complicated,
users either hire someone or find a tech friend.

The single, most important issue is off-the-shelf software solutions that
simply INSTALL and run with no more problems than end users have come to
expect of Windows.  (Off-the-shelf includes downloaded packages.)

Now, that's a big "no more problems"--users have come to expect Windows
computers to be cranky, fail in mysterious ways for no apparent reason,
etc.  But still, that's a recognized failure mode.  The fact that I have
to tell someone, "No, you can't use QuickBooks.  No, Quicken will run,
but only certain versions, and there is some magic setup I have to do
for you.  No, you HAVE to remember to save in Word format if you use
Open Office, and there are some documents that won't work because they
use complex macros.  No, that package won't work because it requires MS
SQL Server"  And so on.

I'm exceedingly aware of all the issues--I worked on Unix internals at
BTL in the early '80s, taught internals there as well, and have been
working with Unix ever since, and Linux since around '94.  If you can get
away from the requirements to support legacy Windows applications or
usage expectations, Linux is already there.  But until we can, the fact that
Windows has around 90% of the market means we can't fight them until we
can functionally replace it with a box that just loads and goes.
--
	Dave Ihnat
	President, DMINET Consulting, Inc.
	dihnat at dminet.com
	773/550.0929