On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:15, Tom <email address hidden> wrote:
> If people really want the opposite of what is on offer then we should
> listen, smile smugly and walk away.  As keeps being pointed out many people new
> into the linux-world just want a free version of Windows complete with all it's
> vulnerable broken systems and "blame the user" mentality.  Just smile and walk
> away.  Usually these people change their attitude once they begin to realise the
> gems on offer.  I did.

In my personal case even before I learned to love some of the gems
offered by Linux and Ubuntu in particular, I enjoyed the missing flaws
I experienced on Windows where - after more than 15 years - I lost
confidence to the OS, the Company and the technologies used.


On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 14:39, lelamal <email address hidden> wrote:
> I just meant that freedom of choice, in my view, is fundamental to Linux, and
> that without choice there's no freedom. Which is a scenario we're all familiar
> with, and is called Windows.

Having the choice is important at least because apart from personal
favors one thing cannot do best in any circumstances. For example:
With a fully featured desktop there is less performance and more
memory used. Bad for weak workstations. While I am sure that there can
be optimization done (I find Gnome getting faster with each new
version), you can't get a truck and a roadster all-in-one.


> All in all, unfortunately, I don't think this bug will ever get fixed. It's
> true, in my view, that most people feel more comfortable in the restricted
> space where the monopoly of the year decides to confine them, rather than
> wandering in the vast open space of freedom where choices are too abundant not
> to feel overwhelmed.

1. Most people don't have a plain idea of what they are in. They
suffer and find it normal.
2. Having the choice means you either have to
    a) invest more time at the beginning to find out what fits better
for your requirements or
    b) ask a friend what you should use.
If you are not willing to invest more time at the beginning (which of
course could probably save you tons of time later) and you don't have
friends who have walked that path before (moving to Linux), it is
logical to stay with what you know. - But: Staying with what you know
is not what I experienced with people coming from XP to Windows 7 and
Office 97-2003 to Office 2007/2010. Apart from other tools they use,
the core things they usually deal with have changed radically. I can
see people having less problems getting familiar with Ubuntu and Open
Office than getting familiar with Windows 7 and MS Office >=2007.

That said, Ubuntu and other distributions still also have a long way
to go: Yesterday I lost a complete workday by getting Ubuntu 10.04 to
work with my docking station - to make it use just (and only) the
external monitor. This is something that already worked better with
9.04 and it should work automatically (plenty of people complaining
about this issue on various forums, some either downgraded back to
9.10). It is hard to convince people of using Ubuntu instead of
Windows when such basics don't work out of the box.

But finally: I lost complete workdays on Windows also a few times when
something got fu**ed up. I still prefer Ubuntu, but I am a technical
guy and can help myself, get into the communities and find solutions.
Other users don't have that option (although I don't know anyone using
Windows who has not his personal support guy if he is not a techie
himself).

-- 
Martin Wildam
http://www.google.com/profiles/mwildam