Windows 7 a Linux Killer .. ha..ha

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=95611
http://synapsedirect.com/forums/thread/5297.aspx

http://homebank.free.fr/index.php
http://www.moneydance.com/
KMyMoney
Gnucash
Moneyplex

http://www.macropool.com/en/download/webresearch/wr3_features.html

EDIT: Sorry - forget it, it's only for Windows

I should add that I haven't used most of them. It's just the result of a quick Google search.

 

LOL - mea cupla I hadn't realized how powerful us idiots really were. Now that I know about virtual perhaps I had better dash out and get a copy of linux so that I can run the programs that I run now ?

 

Thanks tlu - I appreciate the effort and your positive response. My basic point though is that I am millions of other ordinary users are really quite happy with Windows. I don't think there is an alternative to Paperport, even for windows but that is not the point. (MaxView (the new Zealand project) is rudimentary and doesn't really work very well.). Also using Virtual or dual booting is little more than a band aid work around. I really have no interest in programs which are almost as good as Roboform. I use my machines to run programs not to run be best OS at any cost.

 

Have you tried running them with Wine? Wine is becoming better and better.

 

No - I know that I should but what would be the advantage ? I still have to pay for my copy of windows. why not just run windows ? because linux is more secure ? In 12 years on line I have yet to have a security problem - so improved security is not a motivator.

I will give wine a go just for fun but all I really want is programs that run straight out of the box with little or no user effort required

 

It would be hard to convince the academia to switch to Linux en masse. It is not a viable solution right now since many programs that schools use only run on Windows. Also, Microsoft provides heavy discounts to schools, making their products more accessible.

I agree that most computer programming courses right now are teaching platform-independent languages. For example, in my university, Java is the language used for introductory courses. Really, platform-independent languages are nice since you only have to write once and be done.

Microsoft may eventually lose their dominant position in the desktop market, however, it won't happen soon.

 

Hello,

Academia is mostly open source ...

Most universities heavily rely on unix/linux, especially for processing of signal, images, protein folding, complex mathematics etc plus les us not forget that most innovation came from universities, based on unix/linux.

It's true that quite a few students only see the ms desktop frontend, but most labs use unix/linux for whatever they need it, including big bang simulations and whatnot ...

Mrk

 

Bingo, and that is what kills some folks enthusiasm for Linux. I've been experimenting with Linux for the first time for the past month, and anyone who says that Linux is easy to learn of full of you-know-what. Those that say it is probably have been using it for a while and forget what they went through ... BUT, learning this stuff is fun as all get out, the most fun that I've had in some time on this old puter.

Acadia

 

Do you remember your first Windows experience?
How was it compared to, say DOS?
How many people are capable of changing this or that in control panel, editing registry etc? People using Windows for a long time also forget that it's much more difficult than they think.
Mrk

 

Universities are the only ones that rely mostly on open source. Once you get to the secondary-level and below, almost all of them use Microsoft products exclusively. Also, while universities use a lot of Linux/UNIX for a variety of purposes (mostly for high-powered computations, like you said), their workstations are still mostly Windows-based. I was referring to the workstations used by everyone (staff, students, etc) when I said that Linux is not a viable option yet. I didn't count the high-end computers since those are used for very specific purposes; they're also operated by a trained professional (professor, students, etc).

 

It took you a long time to learn Windows, too. But I've put many an oldtimer on their first computer using Linux. And Linux is easier to learn in that case. In fact, I won't set one up using Windows because I know the hassle I'll have removing all the malware they'll accumulate.

People say that "stuff just runs" on Windows but nine times out of ten that is because they had a professional that got it to run.

 

Ah The DOS Days is what I first learned on through a job requirement and learned from scratch.I though it was the hardest thing I ever learned.Just after I got very good and Got other people trained with it windows came along Talk about lost.Thanks to PC for dummies was a big help the rest was trial and error.I can not count how many time I screwed things up with Windows.If I had to use DOS now I be lost again.

 

If anyone has any more recent and more accurate figs it would be interesting.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070903-linux-marketshare-set-to-surpass-windows-98.html

1.34% desktop market share. Any ideas as to why this figure is so low ? My thought is that the market share is so low because of a lack of commercial software support for the retail, soho, home user. If I'm wrong what do others think the reasons are ? if Windows is so insecure and so buggy and so bla, bla why has linux not become top dog in the desktop world ? Just for the record I would love to see linux on every desktop - provided every program that I wanted would run without a band aid solution.

 

Hello,
I know you cannot learn an operating system quickly.
but my first OS was windows 95. never had any issues with it.
The second OS I ever used was windows me..... oh god that was terrible.....
my parents computer runs windows xp and well its got alot of crap left behind due to rubbish uninstallers. but its generally working well. only real problem is badly written third party programs.
I use vista on my pc and well since SP1 it works well.
only problem is the speed. sometimes it slows down so much I cant even move the mouse. it does come back and work thou.

99percent of what I have learned is through is messing things up and then fixing them.
The main Point is the majority of users doesn't have a clue even when the most basic program breaks. such as adobe flash not working even thou they installed it etc. Most of the time they just ask someone else. they wont even bother searching on Google.

The thing is until the main desktop applications work on linux users wont use it.
The other problem is that most windows users have never needed to use the commandline. A windows user goes to a website downloads there favourite app and in a few clicks installs it.
if a website needs flash,java etc they are prompted it is needed and they will install it with a few clicks.
On linux flash generally works like that now.
Java is a different story.
I couldn't get the default open java to work with the website I wanted to use.
So I found a tutorial on how to install and set-up sun java.
I had to search around and I think the 4 tutorial i found worked.
then I had to use another command to tell firefox to use it.

The other thing is that alot of windows users have never installed windows. so they no nothing about partitioning or anything like that.

One way forward is to ship ubuntu and other major distros on new computers.
If all the main stuff was setup such as java,flash codecs etc im sure the user would love it. of course that would most likely mean dell charging the user a bit for the codecs etc.

On my fedora install everything except sun java 5 update 11 is from the repos. so I dont need to worry about having to update everything manually.
thing is once a year or so I will need to start again for fedora 11.

What I am trying to say is the average computer user doesn't know what to do when something goes wrong on windows. they will have even less of a clue on Linux.

I think dell should take say centos or debian and create their own front ends for all the major stuff to make it easy for anyone to use. If you want the codecs preinstalled you will have to pay for them. only because its illegal to ship it with the freecodecs. hopfully they can ship some paid for dvd codecs as well. btw the reason I say debian or centos is because of the major long release cycle for those distros. the user doesn't care what operating system they use as long as they can do what they need to with it.

I may switch to centos once version 6comes out. it will be roughly Q 2010 around a month after RHEL6. then I wont have to worry about setting stuff for a whole 7 years if I wish to do that.

 

Oh God that was terrible ROFLMAO.I had the Same Experiece what was Bill thinking or perhaps he was coming off a 5 day crack binge when ME was invented. Good Gosh terrible is a understatement.

 

Your link has the link for more updated info (2008 vs 2007) http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php

"Any ideas as to why this figure is so low ?"

Maybe its the result of most all PC's are shipped with MS installed ?

IE7 & IE6 trounce all the other browsers combined, is it because the IE's are better ? http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2

Most PC users are locked in their own little world, they don't hangout in tech forums, don't know about Linux, MAC, Firefox, Opera and on and on.....

"Any ideas as to why this figure is so low ?"

Ahh yes that question again....maybe because MS fuels world economy and Linux can't ?

 

Point and click, with a hierarchy view for managing directories and files. Much less tedious than typing commands at a prompt that gave error messages just cryptic enough that if you were smart enough to know what they meant, you wouldn't be seeing them in the first place. No messing about with memory managers and config files trying to stuff things into the extended memory block to free up that precious 640k. No need to reboot every time you edit the system files to load the new settings. The ability to run multiple programs at once, background programs that were less volatile than DOS TSRs.

All in all, it was a rather pleasant experience.

Typical users don't even know what a registry is, much less mess about with it. At least, my parents and sister don't.

With that said, I've been trying out Ubuntu on a VM since a few weeks ago, and it was more convenient than I thought it'd be (except for some small snafus with repositories and MP3 playback). Most things a typical user would need were installed by default without having to do any further work. I could easily imagine my parents using it without much effort: click on Firefox, there's the Internet. Click on OpenOffice Writer, there's the word processor. Which is pretty much everything they need.

So why don't I install Ubuntu for them? Simply because there's no reason to. Windows XP is working perfectly fine at the moment. Linux and Ubuntu is nice and all, but there's no compelling reason to switch, tbh. Why run the risk of screwing things all up when there's nothing wrong with what you have right now?

And I think that's the biggest problem Linux faces. Until it can present some definite advantages, there's just no point. My parents don't want to be staring at an unfamiliar desktop and spending time learning how to do things they already know how to do. And I don't want to be the guy who recommended the unorthodox, non-mainstream OS that caused things to go wrong.

 

btw what i would love to see if a freeBSD distro that has the following:
Graphical installer
Choice of desktop environment for example Gnome,KDE,XFCE etc
Most importantly a graphical package manager and updator.
Adding a graphical package manager for ports,drivers and other freebsd packages would make life soooo much easier. Making sure it also manages to update from say 7.0 to 7.1 without breaking any applications or settings. I think PC=BSD and desktopbsd should join forces and create the package manager I discriped above.the ports collection has pretty much every application you will ever need. freebsd kernal is lighter than the linux kernal.
I dont like the PBI crap that PC-BSD created...
I dont see the point.

 

There is the key question: Why use Linux instead of Win for a desktop OS? The world will need some pretty good and clear reasons before large numbers of people change. That's point one. I can think of some obvious reasons, yet somehow that doesn't seem to have enough weight with the general public.

The other point that needs attention is desktop OS vs non-desktop. Sure, Linux probably dominates in the server market, but not in the desktop market. Why? Another question that needs a good answer.

There will always be a certain segment of the population who will say "I need application xxx and only Win has it" etc etc (Photoshop for example). The rest will find Linux replacements for their favorite apps and do fine.

I'm sure the main reason why Win dominates the desktop is that it has been sold most on every new PC for years. And so, every bit of hardware works with Win and there are apps for everything you need. Will Linux ever move into such a position? Another good question.

My own feeling is that Win is here for good and will dominate for years to come, unless MS absolutely fails in some major way, shape or form. Linux will probably dominate the server and technical market, while Win maintains the desktop market. Might as well accept what is....

 

A slight irony here. My guess is that most users would see Wilders and linux users as locked in their own little world.

I wrote earlier that I thought that desktop linux would not really become main steam until commercial software houses came on board. I still think this is so. Based upon some of the replies I also think that an attitude change will also be required with a better understanding of the "normal" computer user. Just claiming that linux is best and that anyone who doesn't see this is a fool is hardly the best way to promote an idea.

 

And slam dunking those who may feel a little bit intimidated in the beginning (but are still willing to try).

Acadia

 

You are in a Linux forum claiming Linux users are wrong. We aren't in a Windows forum promoting Linux. If you think someone needs an attitude adjustment, maybe you ought to look in the mirror. Or just go back to the Windows forum.

 

Direct comparisons are futile, Windows is technically inferior, aesthetically superior in terms of GUI, in terms of core, the basic design has been flawed from day one. After all Windows never broke any new grounds, all it did was borrow here, steal there. Having said that, people due to Windows being marketed from day one with PCs are predominantly used to the Windows interface, anything new and they find it intimidating, its not that Linux GUI is poor, in fact, Linux GUI is far more transparent in its functioning and way more detailed, however that same attribute scares the regular Windows user who till date has been using an OS where everything is hidden. MS conveniently hides its system log deep into the control panel. No one really cares to look there at the myriads of errors listed on regular basis, in case of Linux, you will see those very errors listed in your home folders. Of course Linux will not have its share as they entered late and had no support from hardware vendors. Till today, none of the IM clients work reliably due to proprietary issues. There is no reliable way to do video and audio chat, this may seem trivial but many folks use their PC for this very purpose of staying in touch with their near and dears. Also there is issue of gaming, Windows is far ahead. Linux needs a total revamp of their GUI subsystem, currently just like Windows bloated registry and inferior file structure, GUI in Linux needs work. The video card vendors have not yet been able to come out with a decent driver, there is issues of audio as well. So all in all, Linux is far superior to Windows and therefore comparisons are futile, however Linux can improve its GUI subsystem and you will see way more Linux than Windows. Almost all Windows users are sick and tired of virus and hacks and MS's piss poor marketing approach of selling a flawed OS and then charging for updates and if Linux weeds out the last few issues, MS will have serious losses for sure.

 

lewmur I do apologize. I hadn't appreciated that I had wandered into a Linux only zone. The title of the thread intrigued me and I had assumed that the idea was to try and determine why an excellent OS (Linux) had so far failed miserably in the desktop market. To be fair all but one of two of the replies encouraged me into thinking that intelligent debate was to be encouraged.
Had I realized that this was not the case I would not have joined in. I can see now how my comments might be misinterpreted as poking fun at the afflicted.

 

I think everyone needs an attitude adjustment ...

I don't see why using software has to be mutually exclusive. It can be inclusive. There's no reason why you shouldn't be using both Windows and Linux as you see fit.

Mrk