Linux is for Losers

Thought that title might get your attention…

Yep, Linux is really best suited to those who have been shut out of purchasing commercial operating systems and applications. As I thought more about the trials and tribulations of installing Linux on my NEW laptop that came fully loaded with a valid OS license and lots of applications (MS Works, etc.) for only $749 I realized that I am of the fortunate set.

While others who are as fortunate financially may love to use Linux systems, they are still at the “tinkering” stage. Sure, you can make the OS and applications work, but there is almost always a compromise.

The things I couldn’t compromise were sound and music. While I’m no huge audiophile, my computer needs to be able to play, record and edit sound/video without too much tinkering. Sure there are Linux applications that allow you to do these things but they really didn’t work all that well on my system without a bunch of kernel tinkering. Not worth it.

Others without the financial means to have a valid Microsoft/Apple OS will undoubtedly be happy with these systems. As far as I can tell, there is no huge difference between Microsoft Office and OpenOffice. For my usage, OpenOffice is much nicer in many ways.

Does Linux offer an advantage outside the cubicles of “tinkering” technocrats? Sure – in certified systems for those who can’t afford a licensed OS and applications. I just checked an online PC configuration tool and without knowing the compatibility of all the components a fairly powerful “bare-bones” AMD/Intel machine can be assembled for under $400. I’m sure with volume pricing that could be much less.

So where would this free OS machine work best? Underfunded school districts, community centers, job training sites, etc. Would it be bleeding edge, no. Would it do 95% of what Macintosh/Microsoft systems can do – I believe so. As mentioned above, open source applications are awesome and I believe that certified systems would allow them to work without kernel tinkering which would put them on par with the big OS manufacturers.

For a radical experiment in open source computing and cheap systems see the One Laptop Per Child project.

So for now I’ll stick with my statement that “Linux is for Losers.” But those who have been left behind by the sheer economics of entering the information age will soon catch up as open source systems become more available.

Advertisements

11 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

11 responses to “Linux is for Losers

  1. “An Os for people with no money”thats a bit insulting to an OS that most of the internet runs on don’t you think?

  2. Ah yes, another MS fanboy with the brain of a spider monkey. You do realize ofcourse that without GNU/Linux you probably wouldn’t be able te post such insulting nonsense.

  3. You are a funny man! I like the bit about Linux is for losers. It’s so rude and mean that someone attempting to make a serious discussion or feedback to an idea would immediately have discredited himself to being a boorish troll, insecure to the point that he has to bring everyone down to his level by tossing out lame insults to a community of people who freely make a conscientious decision as to what operating system they wish to use. Your satirical use of broad belittlements of people; their intellect, their right to freedom of choice without belittlement, their monetary situation; and operating systems is outrageously funny. This remains droll only as long as it is satire. If this was intended to be a serious review of all the different distributions of Linux in any way that can be considered helpful, informative, respectful, or useful in any way, it failed. The clumsy attacks would be rendered useless by anyone who even remotely understood the concept behind Linux. Even without that, the barbed comments and insults would thoroughly discredit you from any semblance of balance or objectivity in this matter. But obviously this is not the case since no one would ever attempt to so barefacedly affront ones intelligence with this pack of drivel unless it was meant to be humorous.

  4. Only 5 of the top 500 supercomputers run windows. According to you the others can’t afford it, right?http://www.top500.org/charts/list/31/osfam

  5. Google runs Linux…’nuff saidI have a monthly income of $20,000, all my computers run Linux. Linux stands for choice, it stands for freedom, it stands for stability.So, SHUT THE FRIKIN TRAP…

  6. I don’t want to flame you or anything, but money has nothing to do with Linux takeup. Many ultra-portables come with Linux already, with everything working – no compromises. Running an OS which requires anti-virus software is a compromise isn’t it? I’m sure that if you look you’ll find a Linux OS that involves no compromises for you (Xubuntu, Mepis, Mint, or Suse all spring to mind).I also don’t understand the “Linux is for losers” comment. That implies that someone who can’t afford Windows or OSX is a loser. That’s tarring an awfully large population of the planet. For the record, I can afford them, but the compromises that come with come with them are too much for me.

  7. Hmm. I’ve used Linux for editing audio, multi-track recording, and advanced video editing, and I’ve never once tweaked the kernel. You must have tried the wrong distro.

  8. You are a Certified idiot

  9. Wow! Who knew that would be so controversial! Holy moley!

  10. Wow – Linux people are INTENSE! My comments were intended both as satire and as a challenge PC makers to be more involved in the process of building Linux compatibility…I understand that economics have little to do with Linux use for those who have technical skill to build and maintain their systems.Those who buy (or can configure) systems that are specified for Linux will be fine. That, unfortunately, does not account for the majority of “big box” computer consumers.As an FYI, in Oct. 2008, I reinstalled 64bit Ubuntu Linux (8.10) on my HP Pavilion dv2415nr laptop and lots of driver issues have been fixed. It works great for the most part. DVDs don’t play well but I kept a small partition with Windows XP for native Windows apps.

  11. I suppose I was a bit too harsh. I was pretty angry when I posted my answer and it didn’t come out sounding very nice. If you want, I’ll delete it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s