On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, Michael Hasenstein wrote:
Absolutely correct. BUT: There is not much Linux has to offer to many of the people now using Windows, and there used to be little for people using SOlrais & Co. We did a lot in both fields, and esp. in the server field we've come a long way. Yes, Linux worked as small server before, but without the most essential LVM and a journaling fs there was no way Linux could be used for any big essential server. Well, maybe a few people did anyway, but that wasn't the rule, but an exception. We're talking about a server with 200GB here, not your small 10GB local mailserver, Linux could do the latter already. In the Windows competition area there's a lot left to do with usability, applications, multimedia, all big topics.
I can think of a couple of reasons for people to move from Windows to Linux. * Linux is FREE (in the Free Software Foundation sense). This means you have complete control over your system. You can tinker with everything from basic kernel functions to the look of your desktop. It has wonderful scripting languages that allow you to link up apps however you want. Compare this with Windows. If you don't use MS products, you are greatly disadvantaged. Windows ties you in to the way MS wants you to do things * Linux is cheap (or even free in the sense that it is gratis). It is far cheaper to install Linux in an office than Windows. Compare the cost of Windows 2000 + MS Office to Linux + StarOffice. * Linux doesn't eat your work. Emacs never crashes (SO does, but that's commercial software for you). * Linux doesn't require constant hardware upgrades. Most office people write a few letters and need Powerpoint to produce vapid (sorry for that judgement loaded word - couldn't resist) presentations. You could do that on DOS with WP 5.1. Why do you need Windows? Linux + WP/SO looks better than DOS. * For IS people, Linux's privleges system makes sure that users don't delete shared libraries and install programs that crash the system. * For power users Linux is much better. The excellent shells available show that a command line interface can be, and often is, better than a pretty GUI. Serious computer users need something that offers them flexibility. Everytime I start up Windows, I start shouting at the windows explorer. It is one of the most annoying bits of the GUI. I can never find my files. Give me ls, locate and grep anyday. To find stuff, it's better to mount my Windows partitions in Linux and have a look. Against all of the above, Linux doesn't look pretty. For novices, it is difficult, e.g. setting up an internet connection is a hassle (although there have been huge improvements in the last few months). Also, Linux doesn't look like Windows and therefore is unfamiliar. Interesting to see whether any clever developers are trying to copy the Windows interface widget by widget. Interesting to try it with the Mac too. Linux is also missing a few essential apps: a spreadsheet that is as fully featured as Excel, and a vector drawing program. The GIMP also, as far as I know, can't handle CMYK colour separation and Pantone colours, which for a lot of people will make it unusable. On Slashdot a few people were lamenting the lack of good sound apps. However, your average user doesn't need any of these things. However, the biggest thing that Linux has got against it is inertia (especially from the corporate sector). Oh, my lord it's different, we couldn't possibly consider it. Cheers...Paul -- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/