This is a response to an article written by Jason Burns: Oh Linux Fanboys, why must ye tempt me so? I’d like to start by recommending this to anyone who’s interested in the whole Windows/Linux debate as it does highlight some of the thoughts around Linux users.
So I am supposed to buy that someone would spend $2,000+ on a computer, and then run Linux on it to save $100?
I think it’s unfair to base an argument solely around price. Many a Linux user can afford the money to set up a Windows machine, I’m not sure on the stats but I’ll wager many a user will dual boot in one form or another. I, for example, work in Linux wheras for my home/personal use I boot to Windows more often as I game and use Windows only DAWs.
To answer this conundrum you have to look beyond pricing (I removed Windows entirely from my work machine, my employers may not be happy since they already bought the Microsoft license) but when I can use it, I do. I often think people who do not use Linux, and more importantly see no reason to use it are baffled as to why those who use it, do.
The best way to address this would be to offer my reasons for using Linux. I now primary use Ubuntu, although I have been a past user of Mandriva, Gentoo, SuSe and RedHat. I think the root cause for me would be Linux being based on the open source ethos. This is something you either understand and buy into or it passes you by and you’re left thinking, why bother? It’s the internet’s own little slice of Communism if you like, an ideal. This may be overstating the issue but I think it’s a very important point and a great insight as to why those people use Linux. I wish for my own part that I could contribute more to the open source projects I currently use and is something I plan on doing in the future.
Specifically for Linux, I think some of the package management tools included are just awesome. Ubuntu’s Aptitude/Synaptic is great and so simple to use, having the right packge/program within seconds reach and getting it almost instantly installed is way better than anything Microsoft currently offer. I equally like Gentoo’s Portage, some people like this even more due to it’s on the fly compilation.
It’s all well and good having a great belief but if the product is not functional then it will fail.
I think open source is more than a cheap get out clause for many, I’d be remiss to say this is the case for all. But I think in the majority of home users, those looking for the cheap option will more often than not just opt for pirated copies of Windows of one flavor or another, I’m not saying this is right but I think in my experience this is the more common route.
An interesting article on the French Gendarmerie Nationale switching to Linux and saving a significant amount of money is reported on apcmag.com French police switch from Windows to Linux.
Windows decimated linux by a huge margin in all but one game.
I wouldn’t suggest anyone is under the illusion that Linux is on par with the Windows alternatives. Games being made to run specifically for Windows while the Wine project (and alternatives) are having to reverse engineer much of the code and currently making it a poor relation. Until games manufacturers see there is a market in producing Linux native software then the average Linux user will undoubtedly be at a disadvantage. The Wine project are currently doing a great job at providing Linux users with a solution and there are now so many programs available to those wishing to use a Windows program in their Linux box and this is great for people wanting to use Linux more frequently. I think it’s great to support these projects as without these Linux would be a less attractive option for many, it’s in this growing market that makes Linux more of a going concern and eventually make developers stand up and listen. Linux currently holds around a 2% market share which may not sound significant but the significant fact is that it’s on the rise (small % drop since Windows 7) over it’s lifespan. Ubuntu has done the world of good to aid its growth.
There’s definitely work to be done to catch up Windows on a gaming front but this can’t be done without games manufacturers’ support. On everything else I see Linux as a viable alternative.
So the real question do Linux users care more about free or freedom? I definately think it’s a matter of choice and freedom, no one wants to be railroaded to one option and I don’t see why it gets people goat so much that people want to use Linux. I think argument comes back to people not understanding Linux users and their want to use Linux, it does not make sense to them. This is fair enough, I say each to their own but I do take umbrage when people suggest I’m wrong for wanting to adopt Linux.






Buzz
Delicious
RSS
Twitter
#1 by lefty.crupps on December 31, 2009 - 7:54 pm
Quote
I started on Linux because I couldn’t find a decent Windows jukebox program and I seemed to be reinstalling Windows on a weekly basis. I purchased SuSE 8.1 from eBay and installed it and never went back. It wasn’t free ($) for me, but it was inexpensive.
There was a lot to learn but that, for me, was one reason that I stuck with it. After I tried SimplyMepis I couldn’t believe how much better (to me, at the time) its Debian base was over the SuSE base. I moved to Debian, then to *buntu, and then back to Debian (the *buntus just diesappoint me).
Since then, I’ve had a few others (friends, family, craigslist ad responders) join me but they want a drop-in replacement for Windows. If a new user doesn’t take some time to explore the system and right-click on everything and the time to break it and fix it, and therefor they don’t learn anything about the system, they’re not going to be happy. But once a user does learn and become more comfortable, Windows seems like the worst possible idea of an OS.
Now that I’ve used the OS and apps for a few years, the Freedom of Free Software does mean a lot to me. But as a new user, I could have cared less.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
#2 by m on December 31, 2009 - 9:06 pm
Quote
My first Linux was an early version of RedHat which I paid for. It is safer and far more stable than Windows. I have used many operating systems from micros to mainframes, and I find that *nix does everything I want and more. I can change the kernel and recompile it should I desire, though I have not found it necessary to customize my kernel for several years. If I want to see the code for something, then I can look at the source. I rarely have to reboot after upgrades, which is important to me because one of my boxes does 24/7 real time data logging.
There is an incredible amount of software available for Linux — I can try out new and alternative software with either a simple command line install, or a compile. In the early days of Linux it frequently took a lot of technical knowledge to deal with some of the problems and inconsistencies that came up. I have fewer problems than I ever did with Microsoft software, though I will say that Win2K was the last version that I have used. Help for Linux is rarely further away than the user community — I had enough problems with maintaining Windows software even with unlimited prepaid “help.”
I don’t play many games, PySol and FreeCiv pretty much take care of my needs in that area. But for everything else, Linux does it for me.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
#3 by Paul Murphy on December 31, 2009 - 9:12 pm
Quote
I too started with SuSe (after a breif and dissapointing run with RedHat) and I liked it, I think since my first attempts back in the 90s to get into Linux it was clear that it had come along way and I enjoyed SuSe but, like you, once I tried Debian based in Ubuntu and Mandrake based Mandriva, it was clear I was going to change.
I have liked Ubuntu since switching to it, I think it’s the ease of use and generally out of the box operation I liked, I’m lazy and still need to get stuff done. I’ve never tried any Mepis releases but might have to give it a try.
It’s an interesting different edge on the Freedom issue, I guess it’s like you say, it’s not definitively the reason I got into Linux but I think it does grow on you.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
#4 by Andrew_Swenson on December 31, 2009 - 10:50 pm
Quote
To answer the question in the title. They do come off that way because it always get mentioned: how much software you get in Linux without any cost. Any time there is a discussion on “why Linux”; it just comes up as one of the top reasons.
I do not buy into the whole “freedom” thing; nor I think that PC users should. For me it is a tool/appliance. It is about getting things done. I use Linux and Windows where it fits (without getting too emotional about it).
Like or Dislike:
0
0
#5 by Paul Murphy on December 31, 2009 - 11:02 pm
Quote
Would cost/price be your motivation for using Linux though? I’d suggest not since you use Windows when necessary. If cost were the motivating factor I would restate that most users would be solely using Linux and this is not the case. So after buying a copy of Windows why take the extra effort of installing Linux, you’ll be saving no money.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
#6 by Andrew_Swenson on December 31, 2009 - 11:41 pm
Quote
I’ll have to admit that Linux cost/price is one of motivations. If I had to pay $$$ to use Linux most likely I would not use it. If Linux was a job requirement for me then I’d pay to use it. The salary would be my ROI.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
#7 by siamyau on January 1, 2010 - 12:04 am
Quote
You forget that in many places it a choice between buying a pirated version of Windows for ±$3 and the cost of a blank CD to burn a distro. Same goes for Office, Photoshop and what not…
Like or Dislike:
0
0
#8 by Paul Murphy on January 1, 2010 - 3:57 am
Quote
It’s a valid point Siamyau that I did mention in my post
“those looking for the cheap option will more often than not just opt for pirated copies of Window”
This was in justification that Linux users are not just out to save a few pennies.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
#9 by Don Birdsall on January 1, 2010 - 2:31 pm
Quote
I use Ubuntu Linux exclusively and cost/price has nothing to do with it.
GNU/Linux is simply a superior operating system. Before I switched two years ago, I lost at least three Windows installs due to viruses despite the fact that I had appropriate protection installed.
My last new computer was purchased six months ago. It came with Vista and soon after Microsoft released a public beta of Windows 7. I played with both for about ten days and while Windows 7 wasn’t bad, once again I was annoyed with the need for virus/spyware protection. I also missed the power of the Unix command line. I installed Ubuntu and destroyed Windows.
The fact that most Linux distros are free is just icing on the cake. It will never have a licensing fee but if it did I would still choose it over Windows.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
#10 by Andrew_Swenson on January 2, 2010 - 10:54 pm
Quote
So Don.
Are you saying you’d pay $100 for each version of Brown-Poo-buntu? And shell out $300-$500 for each version of Open Office on top of that??? I don’t think so.
It is OK to be an Ubuntu fanboy, but let’s stop confusing your own wet dreams with reality of life.
Like or Dislike:
0
0