Why Home Users Absolutely Shouldn't Use Linux

  octal 18:54 25 Aug 2007
  Jimmy14 19:10 25 Aug 2007

1- I know people who bought systems from vendors with no operating system installed because they prefer Linux. I did pay for the operating system that came with my laptop but don't forget because I like Linux, I dual boot it with my current operating system so I am getting use out of both and not throwing away the operating system that I paid for.

2- A lot of programs are free and open source such as Firefox, thunderbird, VLC, Java and many more.

3- Ubuntu works perfect on my acer laptop. I installed it alongside Vista and I didn't have to get any drivers for it. It automatically picked up my Centrino wireless card and I was on the internet within seconds. I can plug my lexmark printer into the laptop and it will recognise it straightaway.

4- His method described of installing programs in Linux is totally wrong. I double click a file and enter my password then it installs the program for me. I am definitely not the "nerd" in this case.

5- Saying that many linux distributions are very buggy and unstable is completely untrue. Ubuntu linux has been available for years and currently they are working on a new version which will be released at some point later in the year. The latest stable version which is Ubuntu 7.04 is a excellent distribution. Why complain about something that is so sophisticated and free?

Someone needs to get a life.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 19:11 25 Aug 2007

All the Linux users will be fuming at their rigs in the cellars of their elderly parents' house and vowing never to eat another Big Mac for at least 2 hours ;-))))


  Kate B 19:21 25 Aug 2007

Just an observation - I think it's helpful to post a quick summary of your link when you start a thread rather than just the link. Sometimes not everyone wants to wade through another webpage; and I'd particularly ask that if it's a YouTube video or something that's a bit NSFW that folk give a very quick indication of what their link actually is. Thanks, guys.

And apologies for the hijack.

  octal 19:25 25 Aug 2007


  Colin 20:58 25 Aug 2007

FE or Kate B. Are they the same person?

  robgf 00:41 26 Aug 2007

The only really good reasons for not considering Linux, are if you play a lot of games, or try a lot of different software. As the choice in Linux is very limited compared to Windows and installation can (but not always) be tricky.

A good tip for printers etc, is to plug in everything you intend to use before installation, odds are that Linux will then sort them out itself, during installation.

The smaller Linux versions can be a good choice for older systems.
A lady friend of mine had Windows 98se on a fairly low spec computer and she had problems fairly regulary, that I usually had to correct, she would also forget to update the antivirus and antispyware.
She used the computer mainly for emails, internet and writing.
So I installed Puppy Linux for her, after some initial resistance, she now loves it. It's faster and a reboot will sort out any problems and there is little chance of a virus/trojan.

There is a learning curve with Linux, with a distinct and annoying lack of documentation on some aspects, but if your computer usage is serious, rather than frivolous, it can be a good choice.

  Forum Editor 00:48 26 Aug 2007

No, they're not, but I can understand why, at times you might think so.

As far as I'm concerned octal, there's nothing wrong with your link - nobody has to read a web-page if they don't want to.

  Forum Editor 01:02 26 Aug 2007

I agree with much that the article's author says about Linux, and about some of the people who use it on home computers. The comment that " ...if your computer usage is serious, rather than frivolous, it can be a good choice." is a classic example of the type of thing you'll hear from Linux users when they want to claim that the software is for 'serious' computer users, rather than for the common herd.

They're right of course - Linux isn't for the common herd, if it was it would have gained far more ground a long time ago. It's a serious operating system for people who run web-servers for a living, or for corporate network operators who need a high level of security at the server end of the business. I work with Linux all the time in both these environments.

Linux has failed to fulfil the claims that have been consistently made for it over the years - to wit, that it will scythe through Microsoft's market share, and reduce the Redmond giant to a mere shadow of its former self. I've been hearing it for years and years, and it hasn't happened yet.

  robgf 02:08 26 Aug 2007

"The comment that " ...if your computer usage is serious, rather than frivolous, it can be a good choice." is a classic example of the type of thing you'll hear from Linux users when they want to claim that the software is for 'serious' computer users, rather than for the common herd."

That isn't what I implied at all. I don't consider myself a Linux user, I use XP most of the time, just "playing" with different Linux distros, for my own amusement.
I play too many games and test too much software to consider using Linux all the while.
Perhaps serious was a bad choice of word, I meant if your needs are met by the preinstalled and usually practical software, such as office, graphics, email, etc. Then Linux may suit you.

The main reason in my opinion, why Linux hasn't caught on, is the lack of easy to understand documentation. And if you post a query in a Linux forum, the answer will usually be far too technical for most of us.
Open source software for any operating system seems to have this documentation problem and I have lost count of the number of OS programs I have deleted because there was either no help file, or a completely inadequate one.

Windows is much, much easier, to find easy to understand help for and this is its great stength.

  octal 08:15 26 Aug 2007

Maybe I can put a comment from the other side of the fence. The last Windows operating system I had was 98SE. Obviously I knew I would have to replace it sooner or later, so I made a decision to try Linux rather than XP because a work colleague gave me a copy of Xandros version 1.1 because he couldn't get on with it.

I used that system up until version 4 which I think is a period of about 3 years, I have switched to another Linux distribution earlier this year. I don't play many games because I get bored with them. The thought of having to go back to Windows, especially Vista even though I've never used it, frightens me because even using Windows 98SE it didn't feel like I was in control of my own machine.

Don't ask me anything too technical about Linux because I probably couldn't answer you, I can install programs via the command line, just, but I can't remember the last time I did that. If you look on the forums there's plenty of people on there like me who haven't a clue what they are doing, but the help is there if you are willing to put in a little effort yourself and not give up at the first hurdle.

Oh, and the work colleague who couldn't get on with Linux? He informs me he has installed Ubuntu and couldn't believe how much Linux had improved in just a few years, good job life doesn't stand still and we have choices in this world.

And the guy who wrote that article obviously hasn't touched Linux for years, at the age of 18 that surprises me, it appears he is speaking past tense, or the article is written tongue in cheek as a wind-up which is the way I'm reading it.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

OnePlus 5 review

See the work of famous artists playing with toys

iPad Pro 10.5in (2017) review

Comment faire une capture d’écran sur un Mac ?