Who do newcomers give up on Linux?

[KefMaster]

I think linux could go far if people worked together on resolving issues instead of competing on who's program or application works better that who's, or on who's application is closest to the way microsoft does something. Together we can move forward.

[suomy1k]

I have used linux on and off for about ten years, when I started using linux the one and only reason for giving it up and going back to "windows" was the extremely difficult task of installing new software. That is one area that windows beats linux hands down. Even now with RPM's, DEB's using yast yum or what ever it has become easier but can still be an absolute nightmare sometimes with dependencies or trying to still perform the ancient task of compiling and make. With todays advanced operating systems it is absurd to have an end user compiling and making software. just my .02

I setup servers and small networks as a side job for people and constantly try to get people to switch to linux. recently I managed to get a non profit organization to go totally linux (suse of coarse, 10 desktops and 1 server) Still their main complaint is trying to install software and the lack of a robust email client like outlook (maybe I just do not know of one).

anyways thats just my thoughts

[oldcpu]

Originally Posted by suomy1k

I have used linux on and off for about ten years, when I started using linux the one and only reason for giving it up and going back to "windows" was the extremely difficult task of installing new software. That is one area that windows beats linux hands down. Even now with RPM's, DEB's using yast yum or what ever it has become easier but can still be an absolute nightmare sometimes with dependencies or trying to still perform the ancient task of compiling and make.

I know some of us have different perspectives on this observation. I posted my views here: openSUSE Forums - View Single Post - Who do newcomers give up on Linux?

As long as one is sticking to an application that is on one of the known major repositories, I find Linux significantly easier than Windows when it comes to installing applications. That is one reason why I recommend new users stick with OSS, non-OSS, Update, and Packman rpms. They are less likely to have problems in such cases. Its only if one decides to install an rpm they found that is "outside" of the nominal repositories that there may be problems.

The other day I noted I wanted to install opera and use that browser. All I did was type: zypper install opera

And it was installed.

It would have been significantly more work to install under Windoze. I would have had to go to google, search for the web site, navigate the web site to find the download page, download the app (which is not always straight forward), find where on my hard drive the app ended up, then scan the app with a virus checker, although maybe I need to first update the antivirus definitions in my virus checker. Then start the install process. I would typically get a few (sometimes more, sometimes less) zone alarm firewall warnings about the app while it is installing. I would have to search on the web to see if these zone alarm warnings mean anything. This typically takes me a LONG time. Then after the app is installed, and I launch the app, I get even more zone alarm firewall warnings. I have to search those again on the web, which takes an even larger length of time.

I do NOT find that easier than "zypper install opera". No, I find Linux much easier.

BUT I do concede there are applications outside of the nominal repositories that are not packaged as easily for installation, that Mac Users, Windoze users, and Linux users have trouble installing. Typically its easier for a Linux user to compile build (as they are mostly built for Linux) but not always.

A problem we have in Linux is the excessive duplication of effort of packagers from multiple distributions repackaging over and over the same applications for users. It would be much easier if one app (outside of specific kernel dependent apps such as drivers) installed on all distributions without this excessive duplication of packaging effort, but unfortunately the various distributions are not able to agree on a common file structure and common config file setup for Linux to make this practical. Hence fewer applications are packaged given the resources assigned to packaging, that would otherwise be necessary if the same resources were applied without this excessive duplication.

[hendersj]

On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:12:00 +0000, GofBorg wrote:

>> Can't argue with this one. Some people have no desire to learn new
>> things, either. That doesn't make their way of doing things the best
>> way, nor is it any reason for those of us who are motivated to not try
>> something different.
>
> Well now you just sound like an Apple advertisement. :-)

Learning to use a Mac also requires learning. ;-)

Jim

[syampillai]

Originally Posted by suomy1k

... the lack of a robust email client like outlook (maybe I just do not know of one).

anyways thats just my thoughts

Even though it is a bit heavy, I use KMail (and Kontact) and it is really feature-rich. I am not sure about any features that Outlook has and Kontact doesn't have. (Of course, I am not familiar with Outlook's Exchange Server integration).

[Chrysantine]

Originally Posted by syampillai

Of course, I am not familiar with Outlook's Exchange Server integration).

The Exchange integration is pretty tight, which incidentally made Apple introduce Exchange support in Snow Leopards Mail program.

Essentially the things you get "out of the box" on Outlook with Exchange are

- Public folders (think of them as mail/file/news containers that are shared)
- Shared contacts
- Shared calendars
- SMS / MMS services
- Centralised task management (and sharing)

Essentially they offer basic groupware functionality.

If you want to breach into the corporate sector you'll need an Exchange and Outlook replacement, with relatively good integration with other tools (Office Suite, Sharepoint) or it's hopeless.

[syampillai]

Originally Posted by Chrysantine

The Exchange integration is pretty tight, which incidentally made Apple introduce Exchange support in Snow Leopards Mail program.

Essentially the things you get "out of the box" on Outlook with Exchange are

- Public folders (think of them as mail/file/news containers that are shared)
- Shared contacts
- Shared calendars
- SMS / MMS services
- Centralised task management (and sharing)

Essentially they offer basic groupware functionality.

If you want to breach into the corporate sector you'll need an Exchange and Outlook replacement, with relatively good integration with other tools (Office Suite, Sharepoint) or it's hopeless.

Hmmm... I suspected something of this sort.
Fortunately, we use google apps and my guys are pretty comfortable with that. (By the by, it is free for me since I was one of their beta testers).

[frosch62]

People give up on linux because they are too lazy to learn something new, and find computing a necessary evil that they don't wish to spend one spare minute doing. So when they've learned (after torturing themselves) once how to send an e-mail, install a program, etc. in Windows, why would they want to learn linux on top of it? Besides, they can't play games like on Windows. It makes no sense otherwise, as they fork out money by the boatload specifically to avoid changing! Thus the uproar with Vista! Telling people who could never change any program anyway that they're more free because they're computing with linux (and then comes the typical "*#&$, my @^#$ing wireless doesn't work!!!) isn't helpful. It has to be more usable to convince those in positions of power (in terms of exerting influence over computing habits), who are themselves mostly inept at computing, to adopt it. Once you see students growing up with linux, it will have become what Windows is: what they know.

I don't think it's much more complicated than that.

Macs, as were mentioned, get the attention they do because of the marketed hipness and aesthetics, as well as their commitment to unity throughout the OS. Oh, and did I mention you can play games?

[GofBorg]

> Learning to use a Mac also requires learning. ;-)

Very much so, it is BSD after all. Although I wonder how many Mac users find
themselves in the shell that often.

[hendersj]

On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:21:57 +0000, GofBorg wrote:

>> Learning to use a Mac also requires learning. ;-)
>
> Very much so, it is BSD after all. Although I wonder how many Mac users
> find themselves in the shell that often.

Probably depends on the skills of the user. :-)

Jim