If Linux is the future, why everyone but geeks and companies are foolish enough to not use it?
Every once in a while, there is a stupid amateur troll like this.
Pro tip: this is a forum for advanced trolls, you need to go to troll school first to post actual troll threads here. But do not despair, just take part in the discussions in real threads on the forum, and you'll learn from experience until you have the required level of troll XP to successfully post troll threads lol
I really appreciate the effort in trying to educate the OP, mate, but I think the wording gave his intentions away...
But I really appreciate it, I'm all for not giving up on seemingly hopeless cases too!
He's at liberty to redeem himself by qualifying his question of course, but it was very short for a genuine question on such an elaborate subject that has been discussed so much on this forum.
There are almost as many posts in the linux subforum as there are posts in the windows subforum.
Oh and don't get me wrong, I basically agree that not using Linux is "foolish", but then I'm biased as fuck lolz...
Fix the drivers and make everything not based on Terminal (installing the Nvidia drivers requires you to type in Terminal) and I will say it is the future.
not all distros require terminal for the drivers. manjaro comes with non free drivers and now has a GUI for choosing drivers and kernals
You can do it in Yast in Suse no Terminal needed
Not really. Desktop linux needs to be a lot more developer-friendly before it can go mainstream.
OK, I went off on a strafing run there, I sincerely apologize to the OP if his intentions were genuine.
Allow me to redeem myself:
- "everyone" already uses much more linux than they use a commercial software console. There is no such thing as a "Windows-user", in that every aspect of the modern life of, well, everyone, is dominated by systems that are governed by software that uses the linux kernel in one way or the other. Without linux, there would no running water, no power grid, no telephone, no defillibrator, no parking meter, no programmable thermostat, no airplane, no car, etc... so the first premiss was incorrect to start out with;
- using commercial software consoles or other closed source software is not necessarily "foolish". There are uses for it, and there are reasons why not everything can always be solved in open source. I don't always agree with those reasons, but like I said, I'm totally biased, and everyone makes his own decisions on how to do things. An example of something that is hard to open source, is for instance a nuclear strategical control system. That is definitely also based on open source, as it runs a linux kernel based operating system, but it doesn't run an open source version of linux, and it runs a custom version of the linux kernel. It's debatable whether or not spacecraft for instance should also be fitted with closed source proprietary linux systems. In the US, NASA seems to evolve towards the closed source proprietary linux version provided by Intel, even if there have been more problems with it than with Debian, which is what they previously used in autonomous spacecraft like the Mars Rover projects;
- consumers tend to use the software that comes on the hardware they buy, they don't tend to care about what's on it, and that's not a matter of "foolishness", that's a matter of ignorance, not only of the consumers themselves, but also of the governments, that allow proprietary software to be preinstalled on purchased hardware. This might also change in the near future, in Germany for instance, there is a strong movement towards making a law that prohibits consumer-purchasable hardware to be pre-infected with commercial closed source software, but that's not that easy to implement, because for instance it would mean that CPU's, GPU's and smartphones could not be sold, as they also contain proprietary closed source software.
- consumers also tend to prefer open source based software loaded devices over others, which for instance is why there are about the same amount of Android devices sold per day as there are Microsoft Surface tablets sold per quarter. Consumers don't do this because they care about linux or open source, they do this because linux works, it's a step up in terms of performance, reliability, and ease-of-use. In that sense, Linux is not the future, but it is very much the present, and commercial closed source software consoles are the past.
I personally like this google spyware, especially in Android 5.0. So pretty.
Yeah it feels like flame bait.
To OP, if you are a MS fanboy you should be a Linux fanboy since Microsoft is.
Guess who is a top contributed of code to the the Linux kernel- Microsoft
Guess who is part of the Suse Linux Enterprise Server Alliance-Microsoft
Guess who open source .NET so it will work better with Linux-Microsoft
Guess who's Hypervisor is built around Linux virtual server-Microsoft
Join the Linux Fan club everyone is doing it even Microsoft.
Yup lol, it will almost break my heart to de-Google-ify it... hang on... not really lol.
AOSP is open source. GApps are optional lol
If you put GNU/Linux on every computer in the world people would complain for a couple of days "because it doesnt look the same" then they would get on with watching cat videos and porn.
Thats also the reason Windows still has such a large market share, people don't care, at all, whatsoever (its really sad actually). You could tell them microsoft records every mouse movement and it would still have a large market share so long as computers are sold with microsoft products installed.
I agree 100%
I personally don't. Unfortunately, as a consumer product, desktop linux is worse than windows (never thought I'd put those three words together). That's why less than 2% of people use it on their desktops (as you said, people use what works better).
There are many problems that need to be solved before linux becomes a viable option for someone other than open-source enthusiasts.
They use what's in front of them. Windows 8 is a big change from <7 and because it will come preinstalled people will just get used to it because they don't care (even if they don't want it) or don't know how to change it.
I dont think I would agree that desktop Linux is worse than windows (not significantly), it has its areas that need improvement, so does windows. I think something desktop Linux lacks are good UI/UX designers and momentum to implement them, leaving Linux to lack behind a bit in 'modern' looks whatever that is every year. Plasma 5 for example is excellent but it will be a while before everything is ported over and consistent.
edit: id like to know what your major areas of improvement for linux are? I have mine too
Good, I'd rather the bulk of the half wit Windows users stayed with Windows. That 2% is people who know what they are doing and long may it stay that way.
So?
Linux is on your car, your bank's ATM, Phone, your TV, Tablet ,most Websites and their servers
Only thing Windows server is used for is exchange, Legacy stuff and Xendesktop apps.
Linux won.