Five operating system alternatives to Windows 8 and XP

jimbo45 said:

Hi there
Unless you are a "techie" Linux is NEVER going to become mainstream -- never mind how good or bad it is there are just TOO MANY different distros, no central software repositories or no central update mechanism -- this would be a total DISASTER for any type of central IT dept. (Servers are another issue -- but you have large corporate suppliers like Red Hat).

It's always a bit touch and go when you try new peripherals -- sometimes these can only be made to work by re-compiling Kernel modules etc. -- Do you really expect your average home user --especially the older ones to do this.-.

Android tends to be a bit more successful since it is a relatively centralized OS -- OK it's Linux based but that's not the issue. People just switch on their phones and the manufacturer will supply automatically the next update.

I completely agree with you regarding the decentralization that Linux has. While enthusiasts like us might not mind, the average home user is literally left saying "WHAT DO???" in the face of so many distros each doing things their own way coupled with so many desktop environments (aka shells, like Explorer). Choice is always a good thing, but too much choice without clear elaboration in a way Joe Average can understand is pointless.

jimbo45 said:

However running Android as a full PC type OS would deliver far too many problems --for starters it's as leaky as a sieve so hacking would become endemic, there's almost no way in stopping people from installing almost anything they like -- and of most of the phone apps I've seen out there are absolutely DREADFUL -- probably knocked up by a bored 9 year old kid instead of doing his / her homework.

Now here's something that strikes me as odd: Why would we want to prohibit people from installing whatever they like on their computers? I'll admit, it's a known fact that a lot of malware get in because most people just click every link willy nilly, but freedom to install anything you like is also what has made Windows so successful as a mainstream desktop operating system. Are we taking this freedom for granted, or does most of us truly want someone like Apple, Google, or Microsoft telling us what we can and cannot install and run on our computers? I don't want to think that we as a society have stooped so low that some of us can't think for ourselves anymore.

King Arthur said:

jimbo45 said:

Hi there
Unless you are a "techie" Linux is NEVER going to become mainstream -- never mind how good or bad it is there are just TOO MANY different distros, no central software repositories or no central update mechanism -- this would be a total DISASTER for any type of central IT dept. (Servers are another issue -- but you have large corporate suppliers like Red Hat).

It's always a bit touch and go when you try new peripherals -- sometimes these can only be made to work by re-compiling Kernel modules etc. -- Do you really expect your average home user --especially the older ones to do this.-.

Android tends to be a bit more successful since it is a relatively centralized OS -- OK it's Linux based but that's not the issue. People just switch on their phones and the manufacturer will supply automatically the next update.

I completely agree with you regarding the decentralization that Linux has. While enthusiasts like us might not mind, the average home user is literally left saying "WHAT DO???" in the face of so many distros each doing things their own way coupled with so many desktop environments (aka shells, like Explorer). Choice is always a good thing, but too much choice without clear elaboration in a way Joe Average can understand is pointless.

jimbo45 said:

However running Android as a full PC type OS would deliver far too many problems --for starters it's as leaky as a sieve so hacking would become endemic, there's almost no way in stopping people from installing almost anything they like -- and of most of the phone apps I've seen out there are absolutely DREADFUL -- probably knocked up by a bored 9 year old kid instead of doing his / her homework.

Now here's something that strikes me as odd: Why would we want to prohibit people from installing whatever they like on their computers? I'll admit, it's a known fact that a lot of malware get in because most people just click every link willy nilly, but freedom to install anything you like is also what has made Windows so successful as a mainstream desktop operating system. Are we taking this freedom for granted, or does most of us truly want someone like Apple, Google, or Microsoft telling us what we can and cannot install and run on our computers? I don't want to think that we as a society have stooped so low that some of us can't think for ourselves anymore.

Hi there
For Business use most laptops are usually locked down -- not so much to "control users" but to stop illegal / pirated software from being installed -- if a corporate laptop has illegal software the corporation can get fined BIG TIME - so that's why a lot of company laptops are controlled. It does also stop a bit of tinkering so the admins don't have to spend all their time on "repairing Windows".

I've never found in my working career that you can't get a piece of software installed on a company laptop if you can provide decent justification for it - even if it's not "Company standard".

Now with the Android type apps one often hasn't a clue either on the "Provenance" of these apps (i.e where do they originate from, copyright issues involved etc etc) or how much of a security risk these are.

I agree for home use if users hose up stuff or download illegal software then it's up to the USER but in the business world apart from the legal costs involved if pirated / copyright material is found being used on a company machine security considerations are also paramount so that's why I can't see Android as ever being used as an alternative to windows on company computers.

If Tablets are ever issued by companies to individuals then we might see something else - but I'm sure a basic Android tablet being hooked up to a company Lan would not be looked at with any great enthusiasm by any self respecting IT service dept.

As for too much choice -- I can agree too -- I always remember my first visit many years ago to a large Supermarket in Los Angeles -- I literally was lost in the aisles in deciding which of the 45 varieties of Lettuce should I buy -- as a youngster back home in Iceland -- you were lucky if you could find 3 - and this type of stuff always had to be imported (nowadays with relatively cheap energy a lot can be grown under glass but I still would think 45 varieties might be a tad too many !!).

Cheers
jimbo

Golden said:

jimbo45 said:

Whether we like it or not there ISN'T any alternative to Windows and there really isn't likely to be any either.

I disagree....there are several excellent distributions around, and its far easier than it used to be, or is made out to be.

Try LinuxMint14 or Zorin....it has almost everything the home user needs.

I aggree with this. Zorin is amazing, although being Linux based it still won't run your games or specialist software. Mint 14 is also a great OS.

I've been playing around with Mint 14 Cinnamon lately (in a VM), and I'm quite impressed with it.
Much more so than with the latest Ubuntu.

Wenda.

bigseb said:

Golden said:

jimbo45 said:

Whether we like it or not there ISN'T any alternative to Windows and there really isn't likely to be any either.

I disagree....there are several excellent distributions around, and its far easier than it used to be, or is made out to be.

Try LinuxMint14 or Zorin....it has almost everything the home user needs.

I aggree with this. Zorin is amazing, although being Linux based it still won't run your games or specialist software. Mint 14 is also a great OS.

Hi there
Please follow the post -- For Business users it won't wash -- the whole point of SEVERAL distributions kills the whole idea. Business needs a CENTRAL distribution with a well defined upgrade mechanism.

Distros like Linux Mint might be "The flavour of the month" one day and another one later -- look at Ubuntu -- at one time hugely popular but now not so much "The top dog". The other problem is that what happens when the developers get fed up / move on to another project, fork critical applications etc. -- Look at things like the old X-Server etc. There's just NO long term continuity that a commercial organisation like Ms (or even "The Fruit Company") can provide.

There are of course some hugely talented developers who maintain these types of distros but it's too much of a "Disorganised set of hobbyists" for a serious business to base its IT strategy on.

As a home user you can say -- OK I'm fed up with this distro -- I'll choose another one -- but changing the OS in a large business doesn't work that way -- loads are still running XP. It can take YEARS to change an OS as there are loads of other systems that have to be tested properly too.

I'd also say typical home users just want to get home -- run their computer -- plug in a piece of software and know that it works.

What does a non techie home user do say when they buy a new printer and want to install it in their computer. - Usually the manufacturer supplies a disk - and hey presto it install and works. The user knows "I'm running Windows" and just installs the software.

Are the manufacturers going to supply 97 versions of their disks to support loads of Linux distros all running with different levels of kernels etc. - What happens if a typical home user get "Compile error". --Most users I know wouldn't have a clue what that meant in any case.

Cheers
jimbo

@jimbo45
I was speaking of freedom to install and run software from the perspective of the home user, where you directly own your computer and are solely responsible for what you do on it. With regards to business and enterprise, tons of legal and financial factors make them a completely different story from home usage and the prohibition of "willy nilly" software installations and executions is oftentimes justified to avoid getting into legal troubles which can and will kill companies.

In short, I largely agree with you. I just didn't realize you were primarily talking from the enterprise POV.

this article is a joke. they talk about business users not wanting to change from XP. first, what screwed up business still uses XP likely still uses horse-drawn carriages and will be out of business soon anyway. If an IT department still doesn't have a plan what to do after XP and relies on articles like that they are not worth anything.

Second, how would businesses run their accounting, excel, CAD software etc. on chrome, Linux, Mac or a tablet etc? If you do photoshop/website design etc. Mac may work. but for all other real work there only is windows. Not because windows is the best OS, but because all productivity software is for windows. that is why even the Apple fanboys the first thing they do is use Windows in bootcamp and buy an MS Office copy when they do actual work with their Mac.

Those alternatives to windows are fine for someone who is NOT a business and just browses around, checks email and facebooks (unfortunately W8 caters to that crowd)