"Why Linux Is Still Not Ready For The Desktop"

[mitcoes]

So it isonly that?

What he wrote is stupid.

Can you make any kind of document just after install MS WOS or OSX?: no,

Don't you have to buy MS Office or install for free LibreOffice?

Who is the idiot that would pay for MSO having LO for free that does in more than 90% the same?

About Photoshop vs Kirita or GIMP, the same

Does Photoshop come pre installed?

How much does it cost? People use to install GIMP for free unless they really need Photoshop

And if MS and Adobe would make their MSO and Photoshop products and Autodesk their owns instead of having web versions will people use more Linux? I think not at all

Drivers can be installed as Manjaro does from the installer - if you choose to -, if Ubuntu would like to do so and is far easier than doing it on MS WOS

So even you can do almost everything you can do with other OSs, plus no need for antivirus for a normal use, Linux desktop still has no OEMS that bet for it, and Canonical do not bet for Canonical hardware placement or Canonical Ubuntu's pre installed devices.

Perhaps if some big brand would make their own distro and sell it over their marketing channels as Google have done with Android and Chrome OS GNU/Linux preinstalled would have more sells, or perhaps if Deepin begins to sell pre installed at China Linux base will emerge, and of course I do not count the future of Steam Machines.

[NatTuck]

Same logic applies to Windows / Mac

"Windows isn't ready for the desktop, because it's not as seamless an out of box experience as a Mac."

"Mac isn't ready for the desktop because program-that-runs-only-on-Windows is best-of-breed."

"Windows isn't ready for the desktop because it doesn't have BTRFS support so it can't read my files."

If you expect everything to be exactly the same as what you're used to, you'll never change anything.

[Scheiker]

The title is misleading. It should say "Why Ubuntu Is Still Not Ready For The Ignorant @$$holes Like Myself"

And he used the term "open saucy". Why are we even giving attention this article.

[glxextxexlg]

Not everyone should use linux. It is fine if 10 percent uses it but not 90 percent. That would make it a mess and a target for viruses, malware and bloatware.

[Cerberus]

Guy is a moron, he installs Linux and expects the same experience as with Windows. Linux can be used by most people on the desktop as it can do a lot of things very well, but expecting proprietary drivers for everything and same software as on Windows shows lack of basic knowledge about the difference between Linux and Windows. Can Linux replace Windows for many people? Yes providing they are willing to learn and dont expect everything working out of the box on every computer. In some cases it cant replace Windows because it lacks proprietary software for certain tasks and there is no open source alternative to that software, or the open source alternative lacks features compared to proprietary software, in most cases it can replace Windows providing the user is willing to learn new things on the go. That guy needs to buy a Macintosh and let Apple do the thinking for him.

[duby229]

Guy is a moron, he installs Linux and expects the same experience as with Windows. Linux can be used by most people on the desktop as it can do a lot of things very well, but expecting proprietary drivers for everything and same software as on Windows shows lack of basic knowledge about the difference between Linux and Windows. Can Linux replace Windows for many people? Yes providing they are willing to learn and dont expect everything working out of the box on every computer. In some cases it cant replace Windows because it lacks proprietary software for certain tasks and there is no open source alternative to that software, or the open source alternative lacks features compared to proprietary software, in most cases it can replace Windows providing the user is willing to learn new things on the go. That guy needs to buy a Macintosh and let Apple do the thinking for him.

Yeah, I agree with you. I have a business customer that I have set up redhat workstations, and another I have set up linux thin clients. The folks using these machines don't have to learn anything. They just have to use the software they are trained to use. I'm sure most of them don't even know that they aren't using windows.

[gerry_here_to_learn]

the linux desktop is not ready for a man who wants a windows experience.

in other news, my car designed to run on the road is terrible because it cant go under water. piece fo shit, surely all those engineers could figure it out by now, maybe ill try buy a new car model in 3 years time and see if anything has changed.

[nightmarex]

Linux as a Windows replacement is not easy. It depends so much of the user. For web browsing you can use even ChromeOS and the user will not note any diference more than UI changes, but for workers, is a diferent story, you cannot change the workstation of a Windows user from one day to another, and there must be a good reason to do that, more than fanatics stuff.

Linux and windows may play on the same block but they are different animals. Linux is much more diverse and adaptable. The programs that run on an OS add value to it but certainly don't count as it. Photoshop is on apple as well right? So Photoshop == Windows now? That like sayins ubuntu == Linux... which is another sin the author commits. I can't be bothered to read it but it's a shame there are soo many Windows,intel and nvidia shills out there.

[Ancurio]

Michael why do you bait me into reading this awful clickbait bullshit..

[eydee]

Some points are true, linux really needs more "install and work" experience, stuff tends to require too much tweaking for the average user. On the other hand, the "PSU broke, let's order a new computer" mentality tells a lot about the article writer as well. He's also not ready for using computers as much as linux is not ready for the masses.