My argument isn't that people should abandon Windows for Linux on what they think of as a desktop computer. Win 7 is an excellent desktop and there is little reason to switch from it.
Well, unless you're a business, such as DaimlerChrysler or Autozone, and want to avoid ridiculous licensing hassles and paying much more money for each user.
My argument is probably that, if they want or need to switch, it's now roughly as much work, learning, annoyances, etc. as Windows. Does running Windows require no work or learning or tips or effort? Please.
The big Windows advantage is that it is made of a framework and vocabulary that people are already aware of. Most people have heard of the "Control Panel" as the place where they might go to switch settings and such, and most people will not recognize Gnome's "Control Center".
Quote:
|
However, the iPad is not a point of comparison because unless you jailbreak it, it isn't a computer, rather a companion device that needs iTunes on a PC or Mac
|
Not requiring another device is not the definition of a computer.
Increasingly, all people really want is a browser, and however they get it is fine with them.
Quote:
|
To your average user, a PC is an appliance, and you can buy parts, programs, and accessories for it at Target, Best Buy, Wal-Mart, or around the corner.
|
Buying parts, programs, or accessories for it at Target, Best Buy or Walmart is not something most people do. They used to buy Turbo Tax and yes, Quickbooks -- but now, like almost all software, Turbo Tax and Quickbooks have online versions. And if you browse the dwindling software shelves at Target you will find it is almost all games (that people haven't figured out how to use Steam for yet), educational software, and add-ons for The Sims.
And a computer is increasingly an appliance, yes. But what kernel are you going to run if you build an appliance? (Everyone with a TiVo is running Linux and they don't know it...)
And if you have Powerpoint problems I feel bad for you son. I got 99 system problems but sharing stupid business slideshows nobody really wants to see ain't one. This is not part of the argument, but Powerpoint exists because public speaking is most people's #1 fear. It's a crutch, and when people stand up there and just read their slides, I get irate.
But me, I'm a ham, and a born natural. I love public speaking, being up front and delivering to the people. Slides just distract, unless they are charts/graphs and such. I don't want people looking at the screen and reading, I want them looking at me and listening.
As for free OpenOffice not being an acceptable alternative for $300 software, I would say that depends on who's buying. These days
Office sales are down, and use of Google Docs is way, way up.
That means if open source and/or Google Docs can't open a Powerpoint, that is now a problem for Powerpoint, and not the other way around.
Microsoft agrees; that's why they're moving to Open XML formats.
A $400 computer with $500 of Microsoft software is marginally more useful than a $400 computer with free Ubuntu. I agree with that sentiment. It's just not $500 more useful.