Top 7 Reasons People Quit Linux

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by Pika, May 1, 2009.

  1. Pika macrumors 68000

    Pika

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #1
    Today from PCWorld: http://www.pcworld.com/article/164205/why_people_quit_linux.html

    Some guy wrote a list of the Top 7 Reasons People Quit Linux. Personally, I think that lists like this are, by themselves, one of the reason people quit Linux. We have a great deal of readers that are Linux users and we’ve even spent some time with Linux ourselves. We find that people usually respond to Linux help better when people aren’t making fun of you the whole way. OMG!!! Really? Yup.

    The wording in that alone sums up what many people have found in the linux community or lack there of. You are in insider or a NOOB, ubuntu forums and a FEW other placed are tolerant of non linux users asking simple questions but it seems like few.

    Windows and Mac OS are designed for Desktop use, Linux is missing the design part, it is a collection of projects that provide similar desktop functions to Windows and Mac OS but hardly offer a unified desktop experience.

    I admit Ubuntu is trying really hard to glue those parts together and provide a unified experience, along with some other distos.

    I keep TRYING linux as a desktop OS every few years and always find it lacking, it is a great server and EXPERT OS, but not a average user desktop.
     
  2. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #2
    I completely agree. I stopped reading after the second point, because I hate when people write like everyone in the world is an idiot other than themselves.
     
  3. Pika thread starter macrumors 68000

    Pika

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #3
    Now this is the way you discuss Linux shortcomings in a positive and productive manner. This guy does a great job cutting through the BS and giving a great presentation that everyone can understand…even when he was having problems of his own during the presentation.
     
  4. CarlisleUnited macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2007
    Location:
    Nederland
    #4
    I never used to see Linux as a viable alternative OS but after switching to OS X i have seen the light and now have it running as my main OS on windows
     
  5. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #5
    You've been running your main OS on Windows???? :confused:
    What does that even mean?
     
  6. dsnort macrumors 68000

    dsnort

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2006
    Location:
    In persona non grata
    #6
    Meh, I'm running Eeebuntu on an Eee PC, it's alright. It's stable, the desktop is easy to learn and use, has some great animations, lots of customization you can do.

    Plus, it has a lot of apps available. Most apps you will ever need are in the Synaptic Package Manager, just check the box beside the app you want, and then click Apply Changes, go grab a cup of coffee while everything downloads and installs. Simple.

    Personally, I think they've done a bang up job for a bunch of volunteers.

    Problem is.....

    Eventually you'll find something you want to do with Linux that can't be done without opening a Terminal and slinging bash commands around the country side. In my case, it was an app I wanted to run that wasn't available through package manager. When I printed out the installation instructions, they were almost two pages long, size 14 font, single spaced. I got halfway through the first page and found no less than 8 procedures I was going to have to research to get done. I gave up.

    I like it for my little eeeper, as a media player/ light document worker it's great.
     
  7. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #7
    Up front, I think that Ubuntu is one of the best Linux out there available for the desktop.

    Agree.

    I read the whole article and his tone remained the same.

    Thanks for the link. Interesting presentation.

    :confused:
     
  8. elppa macrumors 68040

    elppa

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    #8
    I short: People don't use Linux because they're too stupid to use it, unlike me.

    I like this bit:

    The Mac has the big two - Adobe and Microsoft as well.

    While we're busy generalising - this is a typical Linux / open source advocate's viewpoint and it is plain wrong: whilst usability and user experience are slightly more abstract concepts, they can still all be studied and discussed.

    Yes usability can mean different things to different people, but there are plenty of good examples to learn from a bad examples to critique and learn from.

    When comparing systems Linux buffs typically have plenty to say (and in some cases are pretty vocal) about how OS X is dummed down or lacking certain features. The fact they completely miss is that by providing extra features for the sake of providing extra features you add clutter to the interface, complication and confusion. Good design is about knowing what to leave out - just because you can put something in, doesn't mean you should.

    Its all well and good having the most feature rich software in the world, but if no one can figure out how to use it, then it is no good. This is amplified when looking in the consumer space. This is very different to business software because people aren't paid to use it. They have a choice. Not only should the software be fairly simple to pick up, it should also reward the user and give them a fun and elegant experience. This is because you are not just competing with other software, you are competing for that that user's attention and time.

    Making books and calendars and other keepsakes iPhoto is great fun. Given the choice of using some of the Linux equivalents for this stuff, most people would rather mow the lawn, do the ironing or sort out the garage. In short - other stuff.

    One of the best example can be seen between the GIMP and Pixelmator. Pixelmator is a good example because it couldn't be written by two people in such a small space of time on any other platform because no other platform has as sophisticated development frameworks as Mac OS X. Whilst GIMP advocates claim the GIMP is reaching feature parity with Photoshop, it could equally be claimed that Pixelmator has got close to fetaure parity with the GIMP in a dramatically shorter time frame.

    But look at the differences in approaches to UI. It is night and day. That's not to say Pixelmator is perfect, far from it.

    So there's your evidence - and I have bothered to reply.
     
  9. Sehnsucht macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    #9
    I have Fedora KDE, Red Hat and Ubuntu installed on my Mac along with OS X. It's all been very interesting and I like seeing what all is out there, but I can definitely see why Linux, even the Mac-ed up, "lite" versions like Eeebuntu will probably never catch on. It's just finicky and has a mind of its own. Couple that with the fact that Linux does not have the killer apps and killer support that Mac OS X does. The applications I use on Linux are: Firefox, Thunderbird, Blender, and GIMP, nothing that I can't also do on OS X. (Also, I was never able to locate an audio driver for Fedora, grrrr.) :rolleyes:

    Oh and did I mention that a large majority of the Linux community is a clusterf**k of sarcastic-as-hell douchebags. The most arrogant Apple fanboy on MacRumors is several orders of magnitude beneath even the tamest Linux fanboy on the International Scale of Douchiness. Ugh! :mad: I've lost count of the number of times I've been flamed to death on Linux forums once the trolls figure out I have Linux installed on a Mac, as if I'm defiling their precious open-source OS by installing it on an evil Apple computer. So f**k them. </rant>

    So there you have Sehnsucht's $0.02. :D
     
  10. dontwalkhand macrumors 601

    dontwalkhand

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #10
    Isn't that how they are trained to write their articles? I thought they are supposed to write things at a 6th grade, or below level.
     
  11. r.j.s Moderator emeritus

    r.j.s

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Location:
    Texas
    #11
    8th grade, but this article treats the non-Linux user like they are somehow retarded.
     
  12. three macrumors 6502a

    three

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Location:
    Washington State
    #12
    I have used many Linux distributions, and I like them but there is just one reason why I don't use it anymore. Getting Windows and Mac applications to work can sometimes be a pain. I know there are open source alternatives but those might not have the same features.
     
  13. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #13
    Installed directly, or via VMware/Parallels? If directly, would you share how you did it.

    I use Ubuntu via VMware and it seems okay. I've installed it, a prior version, on my PC. Found liked it via WMware.

    This is what is frustrating, or maybe exasperating is a better term, to me about the Linux community.

    Back in the 70's and 80's there was a sense of exploration of different systems. Everyone seemed okay with different systems and it was fun to try them out and choose what you liked.

    Today there seems to be too much fanboyism for the big three OS'es. It's to the point you can't ask a simple question without getting flamed most of the time. Guess the trolls have been part of the cause for this.

    Completely agree.

    Unfortunately this point of view only serves to promote the fanboyism of the various OS'es rather than the sharing of ideas to make them all better.

    The link above with the "Linux Sucks" video is good. The Linux community has it's issues and must work through them just like the Windows and Mac communities. Personally, i like using the tool that lets me get the job done the most effective way.
     
  14. Sehnsucht macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    #14
    Partitioned using Disk Utility, then installed to each respective partition by booting from a Live CD and using each distro's "Install to Hard Drive" utility. I restart the computer and hold down Option to select which partition to boot from. :cool:

    I blame PC gaming in part. Before modern, graphics-intensive PC gaming took off, the Windows fanboys only had the "Mine's cheaper" card to deal. Now they've got the "I can play games" card too, making PC games the Windows "killer app." :rolleyes: Plus, back in the 80's and early 90's, there was a glorious clusterf**k of platforms available. There was, in addition to Mac OS X and Windows...Amiga OS, RISC OS, Linux, NeXTSTEP, BeOS, SunOS, IRIX, etc., etc., etc...now all but a few of those have disappeared. We now have a deplorable "two-party system" that go out of their way to rip each other's heads off. :rolleyes:
     
  15. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #15
    So you didn't read the article, did you?
     
  16. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #16
    Thanks.

    I assume that you used the GUID partition map.

    Which format option did you use for each Linux partition?

    Did you install Windows in one of those partitions as well?
     
  17. CarlisleUnited macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2007
    Location:
    Nederland
    #17
    Apologies hadn't slept all night so wasn't really thinking straight, what i tried to say was that I had always used Windows as my main OS and just couldn't get used to running Linux because I missed programs I used on Windows. Since then I bought a MacBook and after having used OS X I now see that there are plenty of alternatives for Windows programs and I am now using Linux as my main OS on my desktop as a result of that.
     
  18. tubbymac macrumors 65816

    tubbymac

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2008
    #18
    The reason I keep quitting Linux on the desktop is that when I buy a new machine, whether it's a PC or an Apple, it's pretty much a given that the hardware on the machine comes with the necessary drivers to run properly, as long as Windows or OSX came with it. You can turn the machine on and it's good to go, except for any trialware/bloatware.

    With Linux it's still a cross your fingers type of deal. You hope that most of your hardware will work. Sometimes it does and other times you waste a lot of time searching forums on how to get something working. Linux is great if you like to tinker around, but not many people want to spend so much time fixing their computer. Some of us just want to use our computer.
     
  19. spork183 macrumors 6502a

    spork183

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    #19
    Booted into Ubuntu this morning. liked what I saw. Attempted to install to external usb. Mistake. now my HD refuses to boot. I'll have to reformat and clone back (tg for backups). Point is, I don't mind learning a new interface, but when it screws with my machine...

    Maybe since I have to wipe the drive anyway, I'll partition the internal for ubuntu, but I'm pretty annoyed at the moment, and not convinced it will be stable.

    I did a load of searching and discovered many of the "flame" type posts when people ask uninformed questions. Enough so I didn't post, just read until I figured it out...:mad:
     
  20. bashveank macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    #20
    Agreed, the reason I "quit" Linux after a couple years of use and switched to the Mac was the Linux community. The most vocal members of the Linux community are, sadly snobby elitists.
     
  21. Sehnsucht macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    #21
    ext3.

    Nope. :D At one point, I considered it but changed my mind in a hurry when I found out that installing Vista 64 on any Mac that isn't a Mac Pro is a good way to blow your CPU. :eek: Plus, Vista is just a huge bull in a very tiny china shop...I might get Windows 7, MAYBE. :D
     
  22. tubbymac macrumors 65816

    tubbymac

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2008
    #22
    That's not much different from the most vocal Apple fanboys, though.
     
  23. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #23
    Cool. Thanks.

    From what I am hearing, Windows 7 will be good and is much better than Vista -- which IMHO wouldn't take much. Windows XP is still good for basic things.
     
  24. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #24
    There aren't that many non-basic things for which it is not good. :p

    I hereby submit my two reasons people leave Linux.

    1) It doesn't meet their needs.

    2) Certain elements of the Linux community (who desire a greater desktop presence of Linux) insist that Linux's failure to achieve such results wholly from ignorance on the part of end users and in no way from any limitation of Linux or Linux distributions.

    This being typed from Jaunty Jackalope, while my XP/SP3 box updates iTunes. ;) (And actually, I also used Tiger today, as I had left my iMac ripping Twilight into an MP4 last night when I left to go out, and I just got back, and copied it over to the EeeBox, which has no DVD player, and onto the iPhone).
     
  25. MagnusVonMagnum macrumors 601

    MagnusVonMagnum

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    #25
    Yes, the writer seems to be apologizing for these people being idiots in his eyes for quitting the premier wunderbar operating system of the past decade that no one seems to actually give a crap about. I've used Linux on and off for the past ten years. I've spent hundreds of hours learning every little nuance of the operating system so that I would NOT fall into his category number 2 complaint.

    I *DO* know how to fix most things in Linux including things that have since been fixed by GUI advances from the early years, etc. I'm afraid that's no excuse for an operating system STILL having huge limitations 12 years after I first tried it. 12 years is a LONG LONG time (we're talking WindowsME era through all of XP's LONG years of existence well into years of Vista here). The primary problem for Linux is quite simple. It's not that developers don't have the right idea. An open, free operating system is a GREAT idea in general. The problem is the organizational aspects (basically aside from a little bit of general kernel consensus from Linus Torvalds, there is NONE; people just make whatever new 'standards' that they want which no one then uses or which is fought over with a half dozen competing 'standards', none of which will talk to the other or play nice with the other and then people wonder why after 12 years, so little has been really accomplished. Linux is STILL not as usable as Windows98 in terms of ease-of-use, IMO. It's surely nowhere NEAR XP levels (although Linux elitists will beat you over the head that it is all day long and how great Ubuntu is, etc., which an average PC user can tell you is total bunk, especially when compared to moving to OS X, which is much much EASIER to use than XP even).

    Linux NEEDS BADLY someone to take the reigns and force a basic level unified interface and way of doing things. Having 6 package managers and having to maintain software repositories for every major flavor of Linux (that doesn't force you to compile your own...something which elitists will argue is the BEST way for everyone anyway..hahaha; it's BSD's standard method of doing things, after all) is just plain ridiculous in 2009. How could they EVER hope to get mainstream commercial software support for Linux when they want commercial developers to jump through hoops and support a half dozen distributions and maybe throw in source code support for the rest while they're at it??? IT'S UTTERLY LAUGHABLE. I believe only Linus Torvalds could possibly hope to unify Linux and he seems quite satisfied to leave it as the gigantic hodge podge that it still is today. Thus, it's unlikely that even ten years from now that anything will change in that regard unless everyone suddenly all agrees to only use one major distribution. Even then, you'd still have Kubuntu versus Ubuntu in-fighting even within their own camp. It's ridiculous.

    It's not bad that there is a lot of choices. It's bad that those choices don't really get along with each other. Even if you install libraries for everything (you almost have to or you limit what software you can run), you'll still find that unless you find a theme that exists on both KDE and Gnome (heaven forbid something designed for older libraries or more minor less used interfaces) you won't get the same themed windows across programs. It'll literally look like you're trying to run Mac and Windows at the same time or something equivalent. That's not unified. While it may be good for the programmers, it's not good for the users. It's the user who should be able to choose what his desktop looks like, not the programmers. But this cannot happen if you have a half dozen standards floating around that can't even communicate with each other. If they had an underlying universal theme manager that worked with all window managers then it wouldn't matter, but you CANNOT seriously expect different camps who essentially don't like each other (or they'd be working together one ONE interface from the start) to agree on ANYTHING, even if it's for the betterment of their entire operating system.

    It might just take someone huge like Adobe to say we're releasing Photoshop ONLY for KDE libraries and ONLY via Debian packages and have other commercial software makers follow suit to create a pseudo-standard within the Linux community. Basically, the commercial side would have to force the issue and get the users to follow suit out of pure frustration. Sometimes, too many choices hamper the growth of a system. And just imagine how far along Linux COULD be if all that wasted duplicate efforts to remake the wheel over and over again had been used to further the entire operating system instead. Linux COULD have been the premier operating system out there five years ago even, but at this rate it never will be. I figure in 5 years it'll reach Win98 status and in 10 XP SP1. Maybe in 20 years it'll be equivalent to OS X 10.2?? But by then where will OS X be?

    Finally, you have a very real elitist element of snobby anti-establishment types developing software for Linux and they have this idea that basically equates to "We don't need no stinking commercial software!" and they actually try very very hard to PREVENT such software from ever appearing for Linux. They do this by not allowing their open tools to be used by commercial developers unless those developers release their software under their license, which basically amounts to free open source software, which is completely and totally anti-commercial by its very nature. If you give the source code away, no one will buy it. In fact, the entitlement factor in the Linux Community soars into the stratospheric levels. Why pay for anything? Everything should be free! Yes, except people have to eat and pay their bills and while you may think you deserve to make a living sweeping floors or changing gumballs in a vending machine, you don't seem to think people toiling for hudreds and even tens of thousands of hours on a program deserve even $5 of your money.

    I say these things and I love open software. I think things like Photoshop are ridiculously overpriced for the average user who doesn't make a living from it and the cut-down versions absolutely SUCK. But just TRY the Gimp after you've used Photoshop and see how well free software replaces it. The Gimp hasn't change that much in 10 years. Neither has Photoshop in its core areas, really, IMO. But that's neither here nor there because Photoshop got it right 10 years ago. Real time transforms (opposed to Gimp's wire-mesh checkerboard) are worth some real $$$ alone. I've tried to do my pinball playfield editing with the Gimp or my pinball recreation games. It's frustrating as all heck. If you're off by one degree, it'll look like crap, but how can you tell when you cannot see what you're doing? Maybe they've fixed this in the past couple of years, maybe not. I refuse to even try it anymore. The last version I used slowed things down on my old PC and added relatively few usable new features...this after several years of development. No real time transforms. No deal. But many of the open software people will tell you that is IS as good as Photoshop. Yeah, maybe for adjusting the contrast settings.... Then they'll tell you that Photoshop is "specialized" and most people do not need it. Right, I guess I'm not most people and therefore I cannot use Linux. Both Windows and the Mac have "specialized" software (i.e. commercial software). And if you think the Mac has very few games compared to Windows, see what Linux has available outside of Wine (which sorta works for some things but not very well, IMO). It's a desert.


    Why don't people use Linux?

    #1> Lack of commercial software
    #2> It's not anywhere near as intuitive as XP or OS X
    #3> It lacks a unified standard which prevents #1 and #2 from ever happening.

    It's that simple. And until Linux people get their heads out of the sand and recognize that's Linux's real problem, it'll never be that mainstream success SOME want it to be. Others LIKE it being an "elitist" OS and don't WANT mainstream success. The trouble is even if I liked it being "elitist" (hey who doesn't like to feel special?) I still need to use real software sooner later and so I end up booting into XP or going over to my Mac.
     

Share This Page