Why Linux will never replace Wantows

[CoolJavelin]

I am a newbie to Linux, but I have YEARS of experience with computers. I started with an SWTPC 6800 kit my dad bought me when I had a broken leg back in the early 70's. It ran SMbug as an operating system and used a cassette tape recorder as mass storage. That was fun.

I moved to 1mhz Z80's and CP/M shortly thereafter and I have never seen a faster word processor then the old Word Star editor.

I went to school and used their IBM System 360 for some courses learning Fortran, COBOL, LISP, Pascal and even System 360 assembler.

When Billy boy joined with IBM and released DOS, all was peachy keen. Dos was stable, but kinda slow, but what do you want form a paged memory 1mhz processor.

Then came along Doors (ok, Windows, but they acted like doors.) There went the reliability. Programs didn't play well with each other, system crashes, etc...

Each version of Windows was worse then the previous. They touted more stability, but really they weren't. They touted more security, but the same trash talk.

In the background, Linux was being developed. Stable, Secure, Best of all, FREE using the GNU approach.

Being GNU was a good concept, everyone and there mother could make and distribute their own version. I went to DistroWatch.com: Put the fun back into computing. Use Linux, BSD. and there are, My gosh, is that right? 349 different distributions of Linux.

This doesn't include the distros that never made it to the list.

I have never in my whole life spent so much time learning a new tool as I have with Linux.

From what I have learned so far (2 months now, and I am no dummy,) the 2 biggest problems are, 1) all the different distros put the software in different places. Even the Linux kernel can be in different directories depending on the distributors whim, and 2) there are so many different ways to achieve the same outcome and each distro used a different one. Different desktops, different editors, different tools for changing permissions, the list is endless.

Because of these 2 issues, when it comes time to install an application, either the app. designer has to have 50 computers each with the capability of booting into 6 or 8 different distributions so he can test each and every installation, or the user has to compile the program for his own machine. Of course, he will have to download and install a compiler that was made to work with his distro.

Having a community is a good thing. It allows for free flow of ideas, but it is a double edge sword. Too many cooks going off in too many different directions and since they are not working together, someone like Mr. Gates can throw some money and take over the world.

Lets face it, If I want to install a program in Windows, I click "install" and I am done. All the folders are uniform, most programs appear in "add remove programs" Easy cheesy, Parcheesi. This is an incredible security risk that Msoft is just barely beginning to address with Vista.

That kind of ease will be nearly impossible in Linux, and that is why Windows will always beat Linux.

But, I do have a suggestion that will make that kind of install a lot easier for application designers.

There needs to be a "compatibility" file in the root folder with read access for everyone.

This file should have the Linux critical stuff listed on the left, and a corresponding directory on the right.

If I need to know where the xyz.r file is, I don't need to know what distribution I am accessing, just read that file.

All the distributors need to agree that this file should be distributed along with their distribution. My guess is there is already some kind of file like this on most distros, but, again, it is in some random directory. Or it is on their hard disks and is not sent along with the distro.

Of course, keeping with the tradition of most Linux programmers not wanting to type long filenames, the filename will probably be abbreviated to fil, (for File Installation List) and it will be in the folder called etc/rc.d/some.deeper.folder/very_abstract.name_v.0.0.0.2.3.3.2.1.

I also recommend distributors begin to rename folders to names people can understand. Use names like "startup" for startup scripts. If you need more then one, they can be called "startup.root," and "startup.user.markie"

Just venting,
Mark.

[Freston]

Welcome to the forums!

Everyone is entitled to a rant once in a while. The thing is, I understand your rant. But packaging the application is not the job of the programmer. Building a distro specific package is what the packagers at the distro do. Or, in some instances like Slackware amongst others, the end user can compile the source code into a Slackware compatible package.

Keeping a database of all files isn't far fetched. I use updatedb and slocate to build the database and extract info from it respectively.

One thing you seem to be missing though. In Redmond it isn't as easy to install new software as you claim, ergo clicking install>next>next>agree>finish. You have to go outside (where be dragons ), take your car, drive, find a parking place... you catch my drift. And then take out your wallet and pay for the application. Now I've spend more money on FOSS than I've ever done on proprietary software (not counting NES games), it's not the money. It's paying for the parking space that gets me

Linux is free. It's not free of difficulties, I grand you that. I hate it when I did everything right only to get obscure errors that seem to have something to do with something not set correctly and leaving it as vague as that. Or worst, no error, exit status 0 but it doesn't work. Grrrr

[bigtomrodney]

I am a newbie to Linux, but I have YEARS of experience with computers.

Everyone likes a rant now and again. But you should know that every Linux troll starts with that line

Here's the thing. You say Linux will never replace Windows. I say it already has for a lot of people. No one really cares about another analyst,blogger or pundit making predictions - opinions are no use when put up against hard facts. Let's just see what happens.

Don't feed the trolls guys.