! Windows 7 Sucks

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in
:

I can't see any new OS taking off in the real world: it'd
have to run Windows and/or Mac applications or not enough
people would buy it for it to be anything but a novelty
for geeks.

Like Linux ? (Don't let *them* hear you say that...wait,
that was me that said that. I run Linux too, 1/2 the time.)

As a desktop OS, Linux is comletely useable now, for a

I don't doubt that it is - or rather, the Linux enthusiasts
have been telling me so for many years now, and I'm
inclined to believe them.

(Have you tried a Live CD ? I'd suggest Kubuntu)

The fact remains, however, that
if an ordinary member of the public, here in UK and I
suspect in US, decides to buy a computer from virtually any
of the high/main street usual suspects, and a pretty high
proportion of online retailers, he will not be offered a
Linux-based one.

Correct. Dell was selling Ubuntu boxs for a while. Maybe if
you deal with private computer shops, they may offer a Linux
box.

Linux may *never* take hold based solely on the 'great'
philosophy of FOSS. There is no incentive (money) to invest
gobs and gobs of time and effort.....and money. And then, at
any point in time, if someone has a spat, or their views
differ, that can just 'fork' of the s/w and produce their own.
That is *exactly* what happened with OpenOffice, and why there
is now Libre Office.



*typical home user*, except that 1) you need to make sure
the

So the "typical home user" - who just buys the computer,
and probably some software - is unlikely to (have the
opportunity to) actually find out.

hardware will work, and two, 2) you'd need to learn new

Well, with a couple of the more friendly distros, it's not
really a problem with the actual PC hardware, but instead,
peripherals plugged into the PC. Printer support for one.
Canon supports Linux for ALL their printers. Other companies
have limited, or no support.



Hmm ... now you're unpicking my support. To go cars again,
even if I buy something exotic like a hydrogen-powered one,
I would expect not to have to worry about whether it works
or not, only where I'm going to find the fuel stations.

troubleshooting and repair techniques, 3) some of your s/w
would need to be replaced, which would require some
investment in time to familiarize yourself with it. *Some*
of the most common home user apps are produced for Linux
and Windows, Firefox and Thunderbird spring to mind
immediately. Dropbox, Skype (although the Linux version
really does s*ck), Nero, OpenOffice/LibreOffice, GIMP,
Filezilla, Opera, Pidgin.

I think we're moving out of "common home user" here. I
suppose I mean something like the 90% level (though I am
pretty sure the proportion is in the higher nineties). I
think you'll find - sadly! - that the majority of common
users use Windows as OS, IE rather than Firefox as browser,
WLM (or, these days, a web interface) for mail (and won't
use newsnet at all - possibly using the odd forum), Office
(or at least Word) for WP, and so on. Or the Mac
equivalents for those with lots of money (or, and I think
there probably _is_ something in it, who want even less
hassle). []

I *may* be moving away, but, I wasn't really thinking by ways
of the actual piece of s/w to do whatever task, but only that
there is s/w available.

Like the browsers I mentioned, or there's Open Office, a
multitude of e-mail programs, etc.

.....here's what I always try to get across to people....they
all work the same way. If you know how to use Word, you know
how to use OO/LO Writer, or AbiWord, or Word Perfect, etc.
They all have the same UI, same menus, same features.(Yes,
small differences, so I should have said equivalent, but basic
usage is identical.)

.....so it's not really a matter of having to relearn
everything you know to switch packages.....

....let's look a NL video editors....MS MovieMaker, Adobe
Premiere, Sony Vegas, Pinnacle Studio, ULead Videostudio, etc.

All different s/w packages to do the same thing, form
different vendors, yet the majority of using each is the same.

They all let you create a project, they all have a media
'library' to choose from. In all of them, you drag-n-drop
video clips from teh library into the timeline, trim/crop, add
effects to tracks, add audio tracks, titling, etc.

It's not the actual program itself, but the concepts of what
you are doing that are important. You can edit/render video in
the free Movie Maker, the same way you edit/render video in an
expensive Adobe Premiere. (Of course, Premiere has more
features, but the concept is identical.)


SNIP a whole bunch of stuff we mostly agree about

(However, let me tell you how the 'typical' PC users that I
know works...."Dan, the printer stopped working, can you fix
it"...."Dan, can you install this for me"..."Dan, I keep
getting this error...."...etc.)


But lethargy - and, the genuine time it takes to learn
anything different, even if actually better - gave M. time
to develop 7, which - even if it is just Vista with a lot
of the bugs (including in just how it works) fixed, and
that saved them. (Along with some pretty heavy
advertising.)

Yes. And 7 was vastly improved over Vista (gold release
anyway) and is being accepted.


(PS- John...this is the most intelligent debate/discussion
I've had on Usenet in at least 6 months. Thank you.)