Why Linux is important but will never be mainstream

by keneri on September 2nd, 2009 6

Many years ago, I copied a small Unix system on a floppy disk with a huge manual that I had to photocopy at university. It was a PC implementation of Unix, or sort of. I think it was version 0.99 and it was called Minix. I tried it, had some fun with it and then put away both to gather dust.

Some time later, there was a new version of a miniture PC Unix system called Linux. This looked more promising, but it was a lot of work to install. You had to set up your hadware by creating or editing configuration files. The most delicate part was the display configuration file. There was a dire warning that by setting the wrong parameters, you could blow up your screen. Back in the days of CTRs, this could indeed happen by setting incorret values for the screen refresh parameters.

It was all quite fascinating, but for obvious reasons, businesses weren’t too keen on using it. They didn’t want monitors to blow up or employees to fiddle around with complex configuration scripts.

All of that improved over the years and by 2003, one could find completely stable implementations that would install as quickly and easily as Windows. Ok, that might be an oxymoron – let’s say that they didn’t have more trouble than Windows. They also had very decent graphical interfaces. You could choose among several versions, mostly KDE and Gnome. Many will claim that the installation was “easy” even before that, but my experience was different. I tried many releases every so often and was frustrated for years with missing drivers and serious malfunctions.

Linux is “free”, i.e. you don’t have to pay any licence fees. Which is where you learn that “free” doesn’t mean “free” in the sense of “no investment in time, money or hardware”. You usually end up buying an official distribution that provides an expanded driver set and some support and you still have to invest substantial amounts of time to be comfortable with the system. The average Windows user will not find it easy to adapt. And while there’s some great software that works really well, such as Open Office, it is sufficiently diffeernt from the Windows look and feel to make the average user uncomfortable if he tries to switch.

And in sheer numbers, there just aren’t that many Linux applications when you look at what’s available for Windows.

Linux shines in some niche markets:

- File and Internet servers

- Students and academic users

- Custom developments

- any other environment where people have more time than money and are able to handle complex IT systems

Even Linus Thorvald, the creator of Linux, admitted that there simply weren’t enough applications to make Linux attractive to mainstream users.

As Linux has fanatical followers and promoters, it gets a lot of attention from the media, which announce a great breakthrough any time soon now, either for Linux or Open Source in general. Yet it never happens. The Linux share of servers is stable at around 15 – 20%, which is substantial. The desktop user market share is around 1.5 to 2.5%. With 1 billion installed PCs, that translates into 15 to 25 million people in the world. There are about twice as many Mac users and Apple now earns almost as much in profits as Microsoft (due to much higher profit margins), so if it were a commercial system, it would definitely be viable. But will it grow much?

Personally, I doubt it. It’s too complex, too fractured and it doesn’t have the commitment of a single large company behind it that would lead to significant investments to overcome the system’s shortcomings, even though HP, IBM and Dell sell pre-configured Linux computers.

Yet Linux is extremely important. If it weren’t for Linux, there would have been barely any progress in OS development. The pressure Linux generates on Windows and Mac OS development is formidable, not to mention inspirational for both. The Mac OS X is a Unix system on an Intel processor, hence closely related to Linux.

Thanks to Linux, we have some diversity, especially among servers, which means that all the systems are not vulnerable to the same kind of virus or worm attack. Monocultures are terrible in biology and its no different with computers and software – variations are absolutely necessary to increase resistance and long-term survival.

So if you have the time and inclination to do so, install a Linux distribution and play around with it – maybe you like it. And if you can find all the sofware you need, you may never go back to Windows. Besides, what really helps Linux is the availability of virtual machines that allow Linux users to run Windows and vice versa. We’ll talk about those, soon.

You might also like:

Previous Post Next Post

Comments

binit

You’re right!
I loved Linux but so many applications that I require are either missing or not upto the mark, especially the ones with good GUI.

So, to get the features of both Linux and windows, I use Cygwin/X in XP. To download I could use wget.
I could use find+grep command to run over my drives which is way easier than the normal Windows Search.
And the best thing is, I use perl to generate repetitive c#.net codes and for simulating complex algorithm or testing regular expressions.

As you said, Linux won’t be a mainstream; but learning it will increase your flexibility!

September 2, 20094:37 pm

themacmeister

As soon as a foolproof, solid and easy (including software installs and system upgrades) Linux becomes available to the masses (Mint Linux Gloria has come the closest so far), it will be downloaded faster than Windows 7 RTM was… and word of mouth will take over from there.

When people stop talking in terms of XP and Office, to more generic terms like Operating System and Spreadsheet – then Linux will have won!

September 2, 20096:20 pm

Samuel Folkes

I agree with you but I wish I didn’t. Linux is a prime example of the power of community development and open source software. Maybe the fact that it is not attractive enough for the mainstream is a good thing. It keeps it free and supported by the community.

September 3, 20099:00 pm

Selden

Ubuntu 9.04 was my introduction to desktop Linux, running in its own partition on a netbook with Windows XP. After 6 months, I find that I prefer it to either XP or Mac OS X. It’s as stable as OS X, more configurable, and (except for iTunes), 99% of the time I have all the software I need. The update processes are about equal (either is far superior to Windows updates). For the rare times when I need to run some Windows-only program, I just reboot. The last time I did so, and needed to install a new Windows application, I was appalled at how difficult and unintuitive the process was.

There is definitely a brand recognition problem (not helped by Linux fragmentation and the strange to American ears name “Ubuntu”) but on a functional basis, especially where cost/performance are involved, I’ll take Ubuntu any day, and it has become my default OS. With Ubuntu, I spend about as much time “under the hood” on the Linux command line as I do with OS X.

It’s frustrating that Ubuntu is in a niche, and likely to remain so, despite its superiority. Until Ubuntu is bundled with computers from a major vendor, I don’t expect the situation to change. Unfortunately, most computer users have so little knowledge of how things work that they can’t even explain what a browser is, and are afraid to take a step as drastic as installing a different operating system. Although I worked in IT for 30 years, I know that I had some apprehensions when I did my first Ubuntu install — followed by “Whatever took me so long?”

October 31, 20098:43 am

Vishwas

Maintaining a competition is a must. Otherwise, the world of common people would have had stopped, just learning Word and Excel. It’s the development of Linux and consequently developed utilities and s/w that lead the profit earning companies to provide trial versions of softwares. Otherwise they would not have even bothered about it.
In addition making communities, that work for opensource is not at all an easy task ( As compared to creating companies that provide salaries). It’s an additional achievement by the opensource communities, that has led to a trend, as how people can work together and lead to a development, even when there is no real salary involved.

November 11, 200910:32 am

Rob

I have heard so many times how Linux is free and how wonderful it is. I finally took the time in 2006 to install it on a machine I had. I had a lot of fun with but there was always something that sent me back to XP (and now 7). In particular it is lacking a viable mainstream CAD application. I also found there was always something that sent a system crashing and me frantically spending late nights trying to fix it. Printer drivers, WIFI, other peripherals, could suck up weekends if given the chance (and I am not saying it wasn’t fun). Free is free only if your time is free.

I also found the choice of distros to be another problem. I guess I have ADD or something but I would jump from one distro to the next trying to find the best one. I could not stay committed like some sort of male Linux gigolo. I loved it but sometimes felt as though I was cheating on my favorite…Mint.

Anyways with that being said I love Linux and I enjoy it immensely…as a hobby. I would never trust it with my family photos though…I already made that mistake once