Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop

[dragonbite]

Originally Posted by ram88

Today while browsing my friends on Facebook I'm visited the Windows 7 Fans page...

I didn't look at the Windows 7 page, but was looking at the openSUSE, Ubuntu and Fedora groups and an interesting thing is the openSUSE group seemed to be the largest! Followed closely by Ubuntu and distantly by Fedora.

[Wrath5000]

I didn't know whether to laugh or shout because of this article. A couple of statements bothered me, however:

So everything was in place and it looked really good. The security nagging is about the same level as Ubuntu.

You call it nagging, I call it reassurance.

After years of working on XP and Ubuntu you forget what a decent graphics interface looks like...

Yes, those horrible, horrible rotating cubes!

[caf4926]

I have installed the Beta in a VM. Incidentally it is determined as the 'Ultimate' version. Install size was a little over 6GB. Nothing about it makes me inclined to write favorably on the matter. I gave it just shy of 1GB RAM and performance was fine, but then I had nothing running to sap it up like the required AVirus app.

I guess it's true, the panel is kde like, but the kickoff/start is very much Vista. But as whole - under the hood, it's just the same old windows with another face lift.

If you found Vista unsatisfactory - and went back to XP, then you'll likely feel the same way here too. Though the slight improvement in memory footprint and use has made it a more useful OS.

There is the usual smattering of free basics here and considering this is the 'Ultimate' edition and a 6GB+ install. There is little to show for it.

[saahne]

Originally Posted by KaptRoger

Linux is an unstoppable force.

Agreed. None of the hardware companies want to be dependent on Microsoft. The same goes for an increasing number of end-users who are also trying to avoid lock-in and get a lower TCO (especially true given current economic conditions).

Microsoft's problem is that there is a slow and inexorable move towards commoditization of their core products. This is happening most obviously in the server and embedded markets but it's probably inevitable that it will eventually happen on the desktop--although this probably won't happen quickly. They'll fight it all the way. Linux did quite well initially on netbooks (commodity laptops) and Microsoft had to do a rethink--keep XP going and cut the price to OEMs, and get Windows 7, really Vista SP2, a lower resource version, which has to be a Microsoft OS first, out the door ASAP. It will be interesting to see what they think they can charge for it. Vista was not a smart move on their part. You don't want to trash your brand when you are trying to resist commodization. Apple is in a stronger position in this regard.

[BenderBendingRodriguez]

If you have ever tried OS from Apple You'd see they go the same way that microsoft, hiding the belly of the OS from everyone. It serves two things:
1) makes the users idiots (something breaks up they start crying)
2)blocks them from tinkering with the OS (many updates Apple server break things).

I installed Mac OS X recently and find nothing special in it. Just a *nix system with covered all "breakable" folders. It may be good when they put it only on their hardware but it would fail if you want to put it on every hardware out there. Linux compared to Apple is light years ahead if it goes about the compatibility.

[ionmich]

I am so glad that 93% (or whatever it is) of the world's computer users of Windows are finally going to get a product that actually works. It can only make my life better. I won't have to listen to their endless complaints about viruses and software that doesn't really work. It should also reduce the stupified looks of disbelief when I say I don't use a Mac or Windows machine and therefor I can't help them

Will I switch to Windows 7? Perhaps, if it turns out to be more reliable, cheaper, and runs on my dated hardware.

Don't hold your breath, folks!

[BenderBendingRodriguez]

Oh stop here, every OS is good if You take care of him, every OS has some mayor flaws (even Linux though they get fixed as things progress). I had Windows XP, Windows Vista, now i got Mac OS X and openSUSE. And i never had any problems with windows, problems with linux were caused mainly by my lack of knowledge of the internals. Most of the average Joes will like Windows 7 as long as there are no problems with it, average Joe will face problems no matter what OS he will use so in order to Linux rule on desktops is to be user (average Joe) friendly yet keep advanced features for experienced users. That's what i think.

[robopensuse]

This Desktop thing is silly. Let's say MS come out with something great, who does it hurt? Mac yes, they lose sales and market share.

KDE - no, they are subsistence project on crumbs
GNOME - no, commercial server side ppl need something

So actually no Windows product can 'kill' Linux Desktop. Linux isn't reliant on Desktop success for funding. Are MS threatened by lower profits, if Google Docs and Amazon cloud type stuff take off?

What if MS stumble and fall from grace? Losing control of another market? Can they match an entrenched, freely distributable system, that's modifiable by OEMs?

The Desktop, despite us caring about it, becomes less and less important, as the consumer generally prefers dedicated devices, and don't like the complications of general purpose PC. Compare Game Console to PC gaming, DVD & HDD players to Media Centre PC.

Eventually something will marginalise and replace Windows. BSD will OTOH never die!

[GofBorg]

> If you found Vista unsatisfactory - and went back to XP, then you'll
> likely feel the same way here too. Though the slight improvement in
> memory footprint and use has made it a more useful OS.

I don't think so. Windows 7 is spot on and it will be a contender
particularly in the enterprise market. The requirements are much lower. It
runs beautifully even in a VM. Vista would not only dog the VM, it would
take the host along with it. I can run Windows 7 VM's and W2K at the same
time and my host OS doesn't even strain. You can tell than Windows 7 is a
lot like Vista, but in other ways it is vastly different. I don't agree
that is is a fair characterization to call it Vista SP2. I've worked with
Windows 7 for two days straight, and it is the first OS since Windows 2000
that I actually feel good about...and in fact the shop I work in is still
98% W2k, so it would take an awful lot to sway my opinion against W2k which
I still find to be more relevant than Vista or the Romper Room XP.
Our intention at this time is to wait for 7 and migrate at that point. I'd
stay with W2k, but it is getting harder to support, just as any old version
of Linux would be. Personally I love Linux and I use it as my primary
desktop and have used on a server level since 1995, but it is still a poor
fit at the desktop for the applications we use as a business. Keep on
plugging though at least you've got MS paying attention again.

[saahne]

My point was that broadly speaking when operating systems offer more or less the same features, functionality, easy of use, etc. to a broad range of users, then cost becomes a significant factor on purchase/use (i.e. the product becomes a commodity). Of course there are other factors such as familiarity, lock-in, marketing, etc. which make what may in reality be disadvantages appear as unique features offering real added value over some free option and for which users should shell out cold, hard cash. The problem for Microsoft and other companies that sell proprietary software is that time and economic pressures are not on their side.