RE: [tlug] Re: Post my article on tlug.jp?

[<burlingk@example.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tlug-bounces@example.com [mailto:tlug-bounces@example.com On 
> Behalf Of Dave M G
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 12:23 AM
> To: Tokyo Linux Users Group
> Subject: Re: [tlug] Re: Post my article on tlug.jp?
> 
> 
> TLUG,
> 
> Josh has placed my article on the TLUG web site. It should be 
> invisible 
> to robots, but you can read it:
> http://tlug.jp/tmp/dave-mg.html
>

I was going to try a line by line critique, but my brain
didn't stay focused enough.  No real sleep last night.

Anyway, one thing that stands out in the first paragraph is
you used the word implication.  There was no implication.  It
was a direct statement, in bold letters across his page.  ^^;;

Beyond that, a few comments in general.  Yes, people will pay
WAY more than 200$ for their gaming environment.  Look at the
PS3.  Last I looked, the 60GB version was seling better than the
20GB and 60GB versions. ^^;;  The price difference is over 100$
US from one size to the next.

Linux adoption faces two big issues in the Consumer Market.
First, and perhaps most important, is the games.  Until there
are a sufficient number of name brand games (especially MMORPG's)
that run native under linux (No WINE, Cedega, Crossover Office etc
required), we will not be able to look at a windows user and
honestly tell them that the games are there.  If they can't
stick their Sim's CD in the drive and it start up for them,
or, double click a desktop icon (that the installer set up for
them automatically without them having to go through a dozen
extra steps) and start their game of World of Warcraft, then
they don't want to mess with it.

Yes, people are paying for an overall inferior piece of crap
because in the one (and possibly only) area that truly matters
to them, it works and Linux does not.

When it comes to blowing up space mutants, Little Jimmy isn't
going to accept close enough.

The second issue is Knowledge.  For those who don't play games,
the only thing really slowing them down is missunderstandings 
About what IS available for Linux.

With Windows and OS X, you can walk into a store and see a
Box.  I almost said pretty, but they really aren't.  The
OS X box has a certain elegance to it, but could be better.
The windows box is kind of garish and hard on the eyes.
Ugly though stands out better than elegant at times. :P

Beside each of those boxes you can see an array of other
boxes, each boasting a software title that can be used
with that operating system.

If you are lucky, you might find a familiar blue box with
a light blue star and a pinguin on it, that has been sitting
in the same corner collecting dust since the first time you
walked into the store.  An old boxed version of mandrake
or slakeware or similar.  If you are REALY lucky you will see
the bright green box with the lizard. :P  That is all.
No software to go with it.  No explanation as to what it is.
No way to know that it is anything more than another box
of software.  If a person does read the box, that leads us
to the issue of the average user not really knowing what
an OS is, or why it matters, and for those who do know that
takes us back to the previouse paragraph.  Where are the
other boxes?  You know, the application software and games
designed to run on the OS.  ^^;;

The average user doesn't know what a packageing system is,
or that it is possible in any OS to just click a few buttons
and have the software they need transferred and installed
for them in a completely automated and completely legal manner. ^_^

The modern method of transfering Linux applications is a
work of art that no windows user will ever understand. :)

But THAT is the problem.  They don't understand, because
they never look past the fact that the little green or
blue box is the only box they see for that OS.  They don't
know what Suse is, or what Mandriva or Slackware are.

They know what windows is, so they buy it.

What Linux needs in order to move into the mainstream is
an actual advertisement and education campaign.  In
my oppinion, Ubuntu, and to a lesser degree Redhat and Suse,
have given use the most important tools needed to do just
that.  Distros that are fairly user friendly, with point
and click access to applications that are thuroughly tested
for most hardware configurations.  And as much as some people
may like to purists[1], Ubuntu packaging the proprietary
video drivers by default is a GOOD thing for mainstream
users.  OH! This person is using an nVidia card.  Let's install
this version of the driver for them to go with this kernel.
Wow! It works out of the box (Ok, MOST Of the time. :P).

I think that Canonical and the Shuttleworth foundation should
be applauded for their work.  They have done so much for the
community.  I know there are those who fear that they will
become the Microsoft of the Linux world, but I don't see that
happening. :-)

Now, for the second half of the equation:
The Business Sector:

In the business world, people use what they know works.
Employees use what their employers tell them to use, and
employers use whatever they have been using for years.  In
the case of a company that started out on one of the high
dollar Unix systems, the transition to a Linux or an Open
Source Unix would not be so rough.  It would be a matter of
doing the research to find one that operated, from the end
users perspective, the same as the one they are already using,
and then making sure that all of their applications will compile
and run propperly on the new platform.

For a company that has made their way from the beginning on
Windows and NT however, there is a lot less certainty.  The
potential long term gains could be great in some cases, and
not so great in others.  The big issue comes in the form of
the learning curve.  All of their existing employees would 
have to learn an entirely new OS.  Beyond that they would
need to be sure to find replacements or ports for all of
their needed software.  If their software was all created
in house this could be potentially VERY easy or
VERY expensive.  There will be no middle ground.  For a
company that is using commercially created software,
there only option if there is not a ported version may
be to change their software completely.

For a small company, the transition can be a simple matter
of the boss deciding one day after losing his email or 
datafiles to yet another Windows bug, that he is going to 
reformat his hard drive and be rid of windows for good. :P

On a larger company though, the procedure can involve
weeks worth of work on the part of an IT team of anwyere
from five to fifty members uprgading and migrating systems.

Once the migration is over with, then comes the three
months or so of increased demand on their time for answering
trouble calls asking how to do something under Linux that
They could do under windows (ironically with Gnome or KDE
the steps are sometimes identicle, but people are mental :P).

This is not me bashing Linux.  This is me having actually
thought about the chaos of migrating from one OS to another.
I have seen the chaos that an Email or WorkBench migration
can cause in a large call center.  I can only imagine changing
OS'es all together. @.@

Beyond all of this, there is the issue in a large
company of getting it past the investors or share holders.
*shudders* That by itself can be a show stopper.

These are the realities of why Linux has not
picked up a better share of the market.

When you look at the bottom line there is more
to the price of getting a different operating
system than the sticker on the box.  Consumers
know this instinctively.  They do not however
Know what their options actually are, or what
is actually available in the Linux community.

If more casual "Web surfers," writers, and people
who use their computers for word processing and accounting
would start to use Linux, then that slow growth in the
market share might be enough to convince the game
developers to dable in writing Linux ports of their
games.  At that point it becomes almost our duty
to go out there and support those games.  :P  The more
money that the commercial offerings that are already
out there make from the Linux community, the more
companies will be willing to produce.

Those companies that are producing software for OS X
would be the obvious candidates for first attempts.  They
are already writing for a BSD derivative. :P

If we want Linux to become mainstream then that means
making sure people know it is a viable option, and what
it can do for them.

There are even games on Linux.  There are some gamers
that don't care WHAT game they play as long as the games
are there. :P  For them, Linux could be ideal. Hehehe.

And for the tie in between the two groups, as the
consumer market becomes more accepting of linux, the
business market will as well, since there will be less
of an expected learning curve during a migration.

[1] For the purists out there, you can always get GnewSense,
which has all the robustness of Ubuntu, but won't handle 3D
quite as well, because it uses the functional but hacked
together (but open sourced) nVidia drivers.  They support all
the 2D functionality, but not the 3D stuff that we pay anywhere
From 20$ to 200$ extra to get out of a video card. ^^;;
99% of the time if a person can qualify as a Free Software purist,
then they are NOT the mainstream user anyway and are thus not
the subject of this email/rant[2]. :P

[2] I know it has gotten long enough to be an article in and
of itself, but I didn't do any actual research, and it is
based totally on my own observations, so I don't think article
is the right term. :P  That, and it is in response to someone
else's article.



--
Ken

I don't think this would be a rant. ^_^