Making Windows more like Linux!

[mbokil]

I found this ironic quote from an eweeks article. You have to read it for a good chuckle.

By Jason Brooks
"..The next step, which isn't yet slated to be part of Windows Vista, is building into Windows a rigorous, broadly embraceable software mangement framework, such as the one Debian GNU/Linux offers. As in Debian and other Linux distros, we'd like to see every piece of software in the core Windows installation -- from the kernel to the little applets that live on the task bar -- track back to a package that includes application binaries, config files, and scripts, and informationj about the other packages whcih the software depends..."

Maybe Windows Vista II will have a decent package management system. I think that will be coming out sometime in 2008.

Oh, how the tide has changed...

[nyinge]

I believe this will give users too much control over the OS, and that usually has not been a part of Microsoft's intention.

Edited for some spelling errors.

[Thetargos]

Originally Posted by nyinge

I believe this will give users too much control over the OS, and that is not usually a part of Microsoft's intentions.

Why if not, invent the evil notion of the registry, I wonder

[mbokil]

I believe this will give users too much control over the OS, and that is not usually a part of Microsoft's intentions.

I believe this comment is exactly true. The issue of conflict of interest is one problem that prevents windows from being ccompletely ustomizeable. I think this points out a fundamental difference between open source and commercial software and OS's: decisions concerning usability in commercial software are effected by product promotion and market control. Microsoft might actually oppose a package management system since it could make it too easy for a user to click remove on IE and then click on the Firefox browser package to replace it everywhere in the OS. Decisions that will effect future sales are taken very seriously and if a new package management feaure would allow users to unbundle Microsoft applictions from the OS then they could lose control over what users purchase.

[JN4OldSchool]

To carry this line of thinking even further: Part of the success of Windows is that anyone can use it without screwing it up to much. Everyone from 90 year old grandma to your 3 year old. As long as you dont start madly deleting program files or get into the registry Windows is fairly bullet proof, at least as far as user error. People with absolutly no knowledge about how a computer operates can sucessfully run Windows day in and day out. These are the people who are lost with an OS like Linux where you need at least a little knowledge of the command line and file tree to use it. Most Linux users just wont recognize that the majority of people dont want to know how their PC works, where things go when you download them, how to manually install and execute a program. They wont take the time to learn a few simple commands. They just want to click on a pretty icon. This is the reason why Linux will never take the place of Windows. And this is a good thing. If Linux were to become like Windows where would we all be? The last thing we need is another Windows like OS. Personally, I am happy with things as they stand.

[sailor]

I don't quite agree that windows is fool proof or that "anyone can use it without screwing it up to much. Everyone from 90 year old grandma to your 3 year old".
My 20 year old children screw windows up regularly, even though they consider themselves to be computer literate. They have me to rely on to fix things and therefore they don't learn anything about maintaining their system. On a windows system most folks login as an administrator, making it real easy to trash their system or allow spyware, virus or trojans to be installed/executed.

If linux had been the default system everyone used, windows would seem alien and hard to use. THe resistance to change is the main issue in this type debate. Linux is easy to break and sometimes harder to configure, because of the unlimited control you have, but with distros like Ubuntu, Xandros and Linspire you don't have to be a linux geek to have a usable and stable system.

I am not trying to steer folks away from Fedora, but a more user friendly option might be the best to get their feet wet before jumping into a more standard type distro such as Fedora, Debian or SuSE.

[JN4OldSchool]

I don't quite agree that windows is fool proof or that "anyone can use it without screwing it up to much. Everyone from 90 year old grandma to your 3 year old". My 20 year old children screw windows up regularly, even though they consider themselves to be computer literate. They have me to rely on to fix things and therefore they don't learn anything about maintaining their system.

Yeah well .... I cant really argue with you when I seem to be reformatting my 16 year old's Windows PC about once a month...Dont know what that boy does to that thing...

[sailor]

To be honest the problems are generally something they download (spyware bundled with some cheezy app) that causes the most problems...

And my daughter complains when I tell her to backup or lose it all...she usually loses most of her stuff and acts as if it's my fault...

[JN4OldSchool]

yeah, I get that look "well you are the one that built this PC so it is YOUR fault." The funny thing is I built an identicle PC I run FC4 on and it runs like a champ. My son did have a bad hard drive, but since I replaced that the hardware is just fine. He just refuses to update his AVG, run his anti-spyware apps and he has no idea what he is doing even in Windows. But this reinforces my earlier point in that no matter how hard I try to teach him and show him how to do things he just refuses to learn. He wants to play games, surf the web (probably porn, but he's 16 and I dont want to go there...) and download music. He couldnt care less about how his OS works or how to maintain and administer his computer. I had thought about setting him up with FC4 but I really dont know that this wouldnt just make things worse. But at least I wouldnt have to keep reactivating the Linux.

[mbokil]

This is the reason why Linux will never take the place of Windows.

Usually when you see words in comments like never, always, etc. it indicates more or an emotional response then a rational one. In psychology we cause these cognitive distortions -- overstated negative views on things which are out of alignment with reality. I setup a linux Fedora box for my mother that is locked down and has all the applications she needs on the desktop as launchers. She is a windows user and doesn't care what she is using -- that part you are correct on. But for her linux has become her desktop so your statement has already been contradicted. Whether linux becomes the standard for desktop use is another matter. That I am not too concerned with. Whether I can help people who are looking for a way out, seeking stability and security, reduced cost I can help them.

[nyinge]

The main cause of a crippled Windows is mostly due to its Internet Explorer, according to my experience. Since this is usually the only opening door to the Internet for most regular users, I just don't get why Microsoft didn't completely rewrite IE from scratch with security oriented. I mean, they are probably doing it by now in IE 7, but it should have been prioritized long ago.

Just a thought... Making IE an open-source project. That's a step closer to making Windows more like Linux.

[JN4OldSchool]

But for her linux has become her desktop so your statement has already been contradicted.

And I switched from Windows to FC4 also, so what? Windows still holds over 90% of the desktop OS's out there, so my statement is NOT contradicted. But let's not split hairs or imply meanings here. I take your point as far as grammatically correct English goes, I wish you would take mine in the context it was given. I cant argue Windows is better than Linux because I dont believe that. My point is that MOST people will not take the time to learn the things they need to switch to Linux today. Is it because Linux is any HARDER to use than Windows or simply that people dont care what they are using as long as it works? Probably a little of both. You stated that you have set up Linux for your mother. You did all the work of loading the OS and configuring it and left her with a "locked down" PC that works as well as Windows for her. I would say it works way better than Windows for her. But most people dont have the luxory of their own personal computer administrator. I would like to see how mom would have fared if she had to set her own PC up. I would venture to say Windows would have been much easier for her to install and run. Please dont misread what I am saying here either. I love Linux. I would hate to see Linux get to the point that it becomes another Windows clone for "everyone's" desktop and lose all the configurability that makes it what it is. I just hate the "us vs. them" mentality that many people hold. There is a place for Windows and a place for Linux. This is a good thing, it is all about choice.

edit: lol, I was re-reading my post and noticed my signature and avatar. well, it is what it is...I dont hate Windows, but I do want more people to switch to Linux. Sometimes I play the devil's advocate in posts, but I do firmly believe that many people would end up loving Linux if they would just give it a chance.

[dishawjp]

I'd have to agree with a lot of the posters here in that most computer users don't care about their OS and don't want to learn how to manage it, and will continue to use Windows as long as that's what comes on the new computer that they purchase.

I have gotten literally dozens of perfectly good computers over the last several years; either for free or nearly free, given to me by Windows users who truly believed that they needed to buy new computers when the only thing wrong was that their OS (Windows) was loaded with viruses and spyware. The most recent one was a P3 933 that with the addition of a bit of RAM, a 128 MB Nvidia video card and an internal CDRW is now my oldest daughter's FC4 box. It had WinME installed on it and could barely boot. Now it screams.

I work in an academic institution and regularly get computers that need nothing more than a new OS installed to run well. I generally give them to students who either don't have computers at all or have really old hardware and can't afford newer equipment. They all get some version of Linux installed and configured and a bit of instruction on how to use and maintain it. You'd be surprised at how well almost all of them take to Linux and how rarely they have any serious difficulties running and maintaining it. The difference is that they don't get a choice of an OS (just like people who buy almost any new computer) because I refuse to illegally install an OS and wouldn't install Windows on a computer even if it were legal. If I were to legally install Windows (cold day in hell there), it would increase the cost of the computer from free to about $200.

But the point of this post is that most users just want to point and click and when things don't work right any more, they just assume that their computer is old and needs to be replaced. Computers have gotten so inexpensive that most people can afford to just toss them every couple of years. They find that easier than actually learning anything about using and maintaining them properly. And I don't see that changing any time soon. It's just like the fact that you rarely see people grubbing around under the hoods of their cars. They either take them to a specialist (mechanic) or buy new ones. I would actually be interested in finding out how many Linux users work on their own cars. Probably a much larger percentage than the general public.

Those of us who do have an interest in how computers really work and want or need to be really productive quickly ditch the Microsoft operating systems. But we are and will likely always be the minority of computer users.

Just my $.02

Jim Dishaw

[mneptok]

Let's clarify.

Most users do not care about how their computer functions, just that it functions. A true statement.

This being the case, Windows has the market share it does not because the average user said, "This is just much easier to use," or "It's easier to install," or "There are more apps for Windows."

They use Windows because it's the OS that came with their computer, and most people do not care about how their computer actually works.

If it was simply a matter of using the easiest OS to install and maintain, BeOS would have become the market share leader years ago. Jean-Louis Gassee (Be, Inc. CEO) offered to give BeOS away for free to any Dell, Gateway, Compaq, etc. that would ship their machines dual-booting Windows and BeOS. Microsoft knows that most people use whatever is installed for them. They went to Dell, Gateway, Compaq, etc. and said, "If you ship one machine with a dual boot, we will revoke your license to distribute Windows." Meaning, if you ship BeOS on one single computer, you cannot ship any machines with Windows. Game over, BeOS.

Linux's biggest hurdle is not ease-of-use. It's not making it more/less like Windows. It's not quality or availability of apps. It's control of the MBR on machines in Best Buy, OfficeDepot, Staples, CompUSA, and Fry's.

Read Scot Hacker's He Who Controls The Bootloader.

And convincing the Dells of the world that they will have to re-train their technical support staff to support not only 80-year old grandmothers struggling with Outlook Express, but also trying to compile a custom kernel for scanner support, is not going to happen. These companies spend enough money trying to get clueless end users functional with Windows. They're not going to add to their bottom-line costs trying to support another OS unless there's a really, REALLY good reason.

"Because Linux is better," is not a reason these companies are going to accept when looking at a millions-dollar retraining project.

Sad, my friends, but true.

[JN4OldSchool]

DISHAWIP hit the nail squarely on the head. That is what I was trying to say. And I for one started working on cars when I was 13 back in the early eighties. I have had some classic rides since then and finally settled on air cooled VW's about 10 years ago. I now have a bug and a Ghia. You are right, people who tinker will generally tinker with anything. If you can modify it or soup it up I am all over it. I also cant argue with MNEPTOK except to say that a part of the reason a lot of people find Windows easier MAY be the fact that everyone else uses it. So when you do have a problem it usually isnt too hard to find a solution. Uncle Bob, Your boss, your neighbor, the Geek Squad... In Linux, with the number of distros we have, it just takes a little more digging. Once you know where to look for the answers it isnt bad, but as a recent newbie I can attest to the fact that I had a million questions and really no one to turn to for the first month or two. But in a way this is good because it requires you to just roll up your sleeves and dig into the OS. I have learned way more in 6 months of Linux than I did in 10 years of Windows. But you have to be the kind of person who enjoys stuff like this. And most people arent.