On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 16:19:48 +0530 viki p wrote:
a pc for them self. What they look for is how easy it is to use in daily life without much knowledge of pc or operating system.
While it's nice to have an OS that let's people work without them having to know a lot of technical stuff, but it's weird to expect people to start using a PC without even going through a "getting started" manual. Heck, I even read the manual of my new toaster!
The steady stream of stories on /. etc. on how non-techies have done things like simply fulfilling all their basic needs like Internet access etc., to advanced stuff like using LTSP at home is enough testimony to the fact that Linux is quite usable by average non-techie home users.
2 take example of top senior executives of any organization or any senior are happy with what they have on their desktop so if they can not change then how we are going to change common
Depends on how well you convince them. My brother convinced the teachers in his school to let him install Linux in the lab just because he did all his programs in ANSI/ISO C++ and submitted a PDF document done in LaTeX as his project report. You gotta know what your seniors want.
For this you need very high level of efforts to migrate them to something of the same wave length and similar interface.
Many times people overlook the fact that the cost/effort of migration is not due to some lacking in Linux but because of extensive measures that Microsoft takes to effect lockin. Is there any platform that is easier to migrate to from MS Windows than Linux is?
I guess the longer people stick to MS, the more difficult they're making their path to migration. And there would be some who can never make it. There are people running huge business applications on legacy IBM mainframes. We all remember the temporary spurt in requirements for COBOL programmers in the closing years of 20th century to fix the Y2K bug in such systems.
understand why this kind of presumption should come across. Check last 15 years of IT industries and try to understand basic business model of all the big IT Company. They have done same things but ball game was different.
One of the biggest money makers in that time was on the same track at that to drag you in the same black hole. sale product at low cost and then cut attitude.
become their technology and they will sell it to recover as well as make n+1 out of n so this is business and every thing is fair as long as you can make money.
True. People are able to percieve this, yet they are not ready to switch, rather allowing themselves to be bled off hard earned money.
have competitor to stop them doing this. Why Novell Netware failed to sustain their popularity, may be because they could not keep their technology to the mark what users really wanted.
AFAIK, Novell lost out because they had stopped responding to customers' requirements. But I don't have much experience and this comes from what I've read about Novell's downfall.
MS can not stop any individual scholar from his development the way Mr. Linus has given us LINUX. Or neither they can stop any big organization from developing their operating system. But all are wasting their time in fighting MS in legal battle and not investing their time and money in developing something which can fight in market with all the needed things at ground level.
While they can not stop new development, they can, and have, stifled the chances of competing software reaching the market. Which is all that the various lawsuits are about. To let things get to the market, Microsoft's dominance has to be weakened.
Today if MS is making money then they are also providing fruit to lots of people just go in market and see how many developer are really working on open source/other project and how many are working on MS platform you will come to know why MS is more successful in business than others. I know their not giving chance to other products to prove but at the end if you or I own Microsoft would have been done the same things what they are doing.
That's the effect of monopoly. Breaking of the monopoly won't lead to a reduction in available technology jobs. It's not very difficult to understand that there would be more developers for a platform that sells more. It's not that MS has created all those jobs. It's that people chose to develop on MS platform since it was successful.
I am not at all a person who is pushing MS but rather I am a person who tries to understand the phenomena. 70% of the people in our LUG member must be using MS as a prime factor do they can assure you to migrate to Linux in next 3 month and I say they can not because there are lot of supporting application running which needs to be migrated on linux so guys this is not that easy.
Again, that's an effect of lock-in. BTW, quite a number of LUG members use Linux exclusively. I am one of them.
AFA porting applications is concerned, who is to port the applications? Take the case of Photoshop by Adobe. It's a closed source software, so none of the FS hackers can port it. What they did was, develop an alternative- The GIMP. For every person there is that claims the GIMP to be equivalent or better than Photoshop, there are two to cry hoarse that Photoshop is not available on Linux. The FS developers have done what they could and done it well. Film Gimp, a fork of the Gimp with additional facilities for motion picture editing is now the de facto standard on the desktops of Hollywood's computer graphic artists. If people want Photoshop on Linux, they should go to Adobe. You might be aware that Acrobat Reader is now available for Linux.
but take this positively and think what we should do to make linux more popular rather then abusing something which is beyond our control.
In a game played by many players, there are some players that handle defense and some that handle attack. A game is won with a good performance on both the fronts. A lot many members of ILUG-Bom have done good constructive work for spreading the cause of Free Software and are doing ever more. /me mostly rants :p