On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 14:34:35 -0700, Chris Dunaway wrote:
> Rex Ballard wrote:
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> > Should I Really Care About Linux?
>> >
>> > ,----[ Final Words ]
>> > | ...while it's no secret that the OS (Linux) is easier to use and much more
>> > | robust than ever before, a lot of people just don't see a need to really
>> > | care about what's going on in the Penguin Land. Everyday users just go
>> > | with the majority,
>>
>> That's usually true, until their machine gets hit with viruses,
>> spyware, and pop-ups, starts crashing, and some Microsoft security
>> update forces them to reboot their computer 8 times and then on of
>> their favorite 3rd party applications suddenly stops working.
>>
>> It's those moments of frustration, when you want to take the big old
>> hammer to your PC, that you remember someone said "Linux is like
>> Windows, but it doesn't crash, it doesn't get sick, and it doesn't eat
>> spyware.
>
> How many Windows users even know someone who advocates Linux?
We're small in number but growing. Besides myself I know of a few people
who either use or have heard of Linux, most of them in my small home town.
>
>>
>> These days, there isn't a Linux advocate around who shouldn't be
>> watching those Mac ads and saying "I get that with Linux, and I didn't
>> have to spend $2000 for the computer to get it". It's really kind of
>> funny, the Mac ads are almost exactly like some proposed ads for Linux,
>> posted in this newsgroup over the last 10 years.
>>
>
> The question is, where are those ads and who is going to pay for them?
A pity SUSE doesn't try for some ads, they're a big, commercial distro,
and ought to have funds spare. It would surely be of some benefit to them.
> I can turn on the TV and find ads for Windows and Mac, but I have NEVER
> seen a commerical for any form of Linux! I see IBM commercials, but
> they don't specifically mention Linux. I don't watch a lot of TV so
> perhaps I missed them.
Probably not. I've never seen any either. We certainly would benefit from
some.
>
> I see that as a big problem. How can people switch to Linux when they
> don't even know it exists? And once MS gets all the security issues
> off of the front page headlines, people will quickly forget and fall
> back into their complacency.
But MS never seems to get its act together regarding security.
>
>> Actually, that IS the story. Vista now has 2 competitors. Apple,
>> which makes you buy their hardware, and Linux, which will run on your
>> Dell, HP, Thinkpad, Gateway, Toshiba, or Viao.
>
> But will Linux run the newest, high profile games? Games which require
> ever increasing video card requirements? Video cards which have no
> drivers for Linux? That is another problem that must be overcome.
Only for gamers. And if more people begin to use Linux, there'll be more
chance of the problem being overcome. It won't happen overnight, obviously.
> When the next great game comes out, it is certain that it will be
> availble for Windows, it *might* be available for Mac, and probably
> not for Linux.
Possibly. That *could* change. It may not for some time, but it's not
impossible.
>
> And now that the next version of Direct3D will be the same for Windows
> Vista and XBox 360, what incentive will big game software houses have
> to include things like OpenGL in their games? And even if they did, on
> Vista, OpenGL is intentionally crippled as I understand.
>
> Can Linux run the newest and greatest games? If you're not an avid
> gamer, then this doesn't affect you, but a large number of people buy a
> PC to play games on.
Which they will probably still do. In all honesty I don't see Linux
becoming a great gaming platform. It's better at other tasks, and that's
what should be concentrated on: getting it out there as a great desktop
OS.
>
> Just another hurdle to be jumped.
>
> I'm very curious to see how it will turn out.
Me too. I very much hope the situation changes for the better.
--
Kier
|
|
