Again, it's a simple answer
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| helios May 05, 2008 7:43 AM EDT |
The title of this piece is both deceptive and incorrect. The consumer Is ready for the Linux Desktop. Trust me on this one. Again, we have the Linux Dilemma facing us. When people get an unannounced Linux distro on their machines, their reaction is negative. If they have heard about "this Linux thing" first, their reaction is, "so THIS is Linux! Most are much more receptive to something when they've seen or heard it "legitimized" on the airwaves. I've seen it over and over. It comes back to marketing the product. Since we've already discovered the majority of Linux users (present company loudly excluded) are digital welfare recipients, they aren't going to pony up the needed money. Besides, regardless of who mans the effort, I will get blamed for stealing it. As discussed, the Corporates are not going to do it until it benefits them. (see article on one universal distro), so that leaves us drowning in our own inertia. What can be done here...? h |
| techiem2 May 05, 2008 8:33 AM EDT |
Quoting:"Is Linux ready for the desktop? Yes. It works for most means, but I don't think users want a brand new way of interacting with their computers," said Sng in an interview with ZDNet Asia. And once again, we come back to the "they don't want it because it's different" argument. Anyone remember going from DOS to Win31? Win31 to Win95? Win98 to Vista? Windows to OSX? |
| dumper4311 May 05, 2008 8:52 AM EDT |
I think you've hit on something important here - depressing, but important. I know you meant your comment as related to supporting Linux advocacy, but the digital welfare recipients analogy is very accurate from another perspective. Users get MS "for free" with their new computer - MS has spent decades creating their own techno-welfare system, and it serves them well. Why has this been so successful? You mentioned it yourself, inertia is a universal malady. So very few people want to buy something new and different, when they're already getting something that works (kind of) for "free" with their new computer. We really do need to accept that there will always be a (rather large) percentage of the market that feels this way, and will never move - regardless of issues like code freedom or data ownership. But there is a percentage of the population that will move, and will pay for it (just look at the Mac userbase). What made them move? This is a corporate model that is using an open codebase profitably, and attracting new users (especially since the Vista fiasco). We need to ask ourselves as a "community" what these converting users want, why they're looking at the Mac as a viable alternative, and how this corporation is filling its user's perceived needs. Part of the answer is certainly marketing, but that's not the whole ball of wax. Education, capability, support, and a list of other motivators all play a part in this game of "what the consumer is ready for". Some of these factors linux has in abundance, some still need a lot of work. Oh, and as long as we're looking for somebody to blame, I can't think of anyone better suited for the job. :) Keep wrestling with this problem, helios. Whether we always agree on the issues or not, I think your doing good work, which is the only kind of advocacy that's of any real value. |
| azerthoth May 05, 2008 8:52 AM EDT |
I dont remember where I read it, probably here or a link from here, but to paraphrase: "You cant expect to hand someone the keys to a car and expect them to be able to drive when all they have ever known is a bicycle." That phrase sums up switching from any OS to any OS to me. As techiem2 pointed out, even moving in between versions of the same OS can be fraught with difficulties. Fear of the unknown and complacency in being happy in comfort zones holds people back in more than just their choice of OS. While I cant speak for other countries, I have traveled the US a lot in the last few years, and folks, complacency is at pandemic proportions here. It's why people like helios stand out in a crowd. |
| rijelkentaurus May 05, 2008 2:22 PM EDT |
Quoting: complacency is at pandemic proportions here. That's how we managed to reelect W. |
| jdixon May 05, 2008 2:39 PM EDT |
> That's how we managed to reelect W. The selection of someone who reasonably well passes for a wooden post by the opposing party had something to do with that too. Fortunately (or not so, depending on your political leanings), that tide has turned and McCain has about as much chance of getting elected as I do. |
| dumper4311 May 05, 2008 2:56 PM EDT |
Come on you guys, get a room. :) Aside from demonstrating your personal political prejudices, do you have anything useful to add to the topic of the thread? That I'd be interested in. |
| jdixon May 05, 2008 3:12 PM EDT |
> Aside from demonstrating your personal political prejudices, do you have anything useful to add to the topic of the thread? Well, I think that the success of the Eee has fairly conclusively demonstrated that Linux is ready for the desktop, and that consumers are ready for a properly marketed version of Linux. Aside from that, what political prejudices did you think I was demonstrating? (Mail would be fine if you don't want to clog up the forum). |
| tracyanne May 05, 2008 3:15 PM EDT |
Ken is correct "the consumer" is ready for Linux, the problem is it's being presented to "the cosumer" in the wrong way. The EeePC got it right. Dell don't get it, they still see it in terms of Windows, gOS missed the point. My old ladies love their Linux, because it works, because they can do EVERYTHING they need to do, and they don't have to search the web to find things that will enable them, they are enabled. |
| dumper4311 May 05, 2008 3:26 PM EDT |
@jdixon:
Yep, the Eee has demonstrated success in it's niche. The trick is leveraging that success to a wider audience (potentially different demographics and needs). So is there anything we can learn by comparing the success of the Eee market to that of the Mac market? What value is there in contrasting these two markets? How can we use such analysis to advance Linux use to a wider audience? As for your political bent, your second paragraph seemed pretty clear to me. Mind you, I don't care if you vote for the first telepathic ficus (assuming it's on the ticket), I would simply rather hear your thoughts on the matter at hand, and won't waste any more of anyones time on the subject. |
| dumper4311 May 05, 2008 3:31 PM EDT |
@tracyanne:
Your old ladies (I feel like I should apologize for saying that) are another niche that has been served well by Linux. Finding commonalities between all these happy user groups would allow us to present to and educate "the consumer" (whomever that may be) in a much more effective way. We still have the problem of inertia, but observations like those about your senior users :) make it easier to overcome such ingrained habits. |
| Scott_Ruecker May 05, 2008 4:04 PM EDT |
Look at what Helios is doing, what tracyanne talks about with her ladies, and what many others do too. I've said it before.. You're on the beach and the tide is coming in; you look out as far as you can see into the ocean and you see a little bulge in the water. You know that bulge, the one that minutes later turns into a thick, tall, big-ass wave that seems to literally take a bite out of the beach when it finally hits the shoreline. We're that bulge in the water. |
| rijelkentaurus May 05, 2008 4:57 PM EDT |
Quoting: We're that bulge in the water. That sounds so dirty. But you are correct. My fiance is now running PCLOS without a hitch, she even managed to do her taxes online with FF, wasn't too sure about that one working. 10% of the people out there "need" the proprietary apps to keep rolling, but 90% don't and would be better served with a FOSS solution. Even the 10% really just need the proprietary stuff to keep the status quo, they could change if they had to (for the most part). I have a meeting with a client that wants to move to a Linux solution in some form, even if it means turning their servers into VMs running on Linux. This would make the second Linux client in the legal profession that I have. They are Windows workstations, but I will take the infiltration however I can manage it. |
| tuxchick May 05, 2008 5:10 PM EDT |
You kids don't know nuthin'. That's the lyrics to the all-time great guitar riff: ~/o BULGE in the WA terrrrr and fire in the sky |
| azerthoth May 05, 2008 5:12 PM EDT |
/me holds nose and runs from the room *the strength of the pun is in the oy! of the beholder* |
| jdixon May 05, 2008 5:24 PM EDT |
> ...your second paragraph seemed pretty clear to me. OK. I didn't intend to demonstrate a bias at all, merely give my opinion of one candidate's chances of getting elected. I think whichever Democrat gets the nomination will win the general election in a landslide. I intended no opinion as to whether that was a good thing or not. I apologize for not doing a better job of communicating. And I agree that it was off-topic, but rijelkentaurus started it. :) > So is there anything we can learn by comparing the success of the Eee market to that of the Mac market? Not really. Except that both serve market segments under-served by the current market leader. That's an attack point, but aiming at it doesn't guarantee success. > How can we use such analysis to advance Linux use to a wider audience? The Mac is a high profit margin niche market. It's aim at a group of users who want to be or don't ming being out of the mainstream and are willing to pay for what they consider ease of use and a factor of "coolness". There's a deliberate degree of elitism involved in the Mac's marketing. The Eee is a low profit margin mass market device. It is also intended to be easy to use, but deliberately narrows the scope of what the device is intended to be used for to make it easier to support. The preloaded functionality is the only thing Asus intends to support, and that's designed to be easy enough to use to minimize customer support issues. Asus is hoping that means they can still make money on each unit sold. A company could mimic the Mac's plan by marketing upscale, stylish Linux boxes, but without the Mac's history of coolness, it would take a large marketing campaign to reach the intended audience. Anyone can mimic the Eee's approach, but without an under-served niche market similar to that of a low power, low weight laptop, success is less likely. And neither gets us to broad market acceptance. The desktop market covers a huge range of hardware and software needs. As the success of the Mac and the Eee show, even Microsoft has trouble covering all of it. We can continue the current trends of one customer at a time conversions and niche market products, which is working fairly well. Alternatively, we can go for a mass market campaign. A mass market campaign requires a realistic marketing description of what Linux is and what it can and cannot do for users. The machines have to cover the entire price range from low end to top end and have to be readily available both online and in brick and mortar stores (otherwise it's not really a "mass market"). It also requires a large enough profit margin to cover the costs of the campaign. I don't know if that's doable or not. There's no real conflict between the two, of course. Both are possible at the same time. |
| rijelkentaurus May 05, 2008 5:44 PM EDT |
Quoting: And I agree that it was off-topic, but rijelkentaurus started it. :) :) Thanks, I so seldom get the credit I deserve. And I just saw this: Quoting: The selection of someone who reasonably well passes for a wooden post by the opposing party had something to do with that too. Very funny...but of course a wooden post at least used to have some life, and it never felt entitled to anything..... For the record, I have no clue who I will be voting for...unless Ron Paul runs as an independent, and I might still write his name in. I am in NC, and there's no way that a black man or a woman can come close to carrying this state in the presidential election. We're a lock for McPain. |
| Sander_Marechal May 05, 2008 10:03 PM EDT |
I think it's entirely possible to cover the Mac and Eee market segments with one new device. I think there's significant overlap between the two. Everyone here has probably seen the large success of Macs lately. They're selling like hot cakes and they ain't selling to geeks. They're selling to normal people who are tired of the complexities of Windows (keeping a Windows machine running is very complex) and who simply want something that works. Macs work because they have been well integrated, something made possible by the limited amount of hardware options. Eee's also just work. But they work because the Eee isn't marketed as a full-function computer but as a limited-function internet device. And people like that. It does 95% of what they need to do without any hand-holding from a local linux geek. I think that the Everex/gOS was on the right way: Make something that does the 95% well. Where Everex failed was that they didn't market it right. They built something that looks like a normal PC so people expect to do anything with it that a normal PC can. Result: Large amount of returns among non-geeks (see Wall Mart). Combine the above, add a twist of Vokda and shake... Create a limited function internet device that has about the same functionality as the gOS or the Eee PC. Put it in a slick form factor that does not look like a PC. Take a page out of apple's book: integrate everything with the monitor. Take a standard 19" widescreen monitor and integrate the components of your average mini-ITX pc or 13" laptop in the back. Now the hardware doesn't look like a PC but like a slick integrated applicance. Next, take a Linux distribution and modify the UI. Take a page out of Asus' book. Asus did a brilliant job modifying Xandros for the Eee because it looks nothing like a computer interface. It looks like the interface of a smartphone. They did away with the desktop. Most brilliant maneuver ever. So, take that idea and create a UI that looks more like a smartphone or DVR. No need to pull a gOS here and use all online apps. The regular Linux apps (OOo, FF, TB, etc) work just fine. Now you have a slick looking appliance that doesn't look or act like a computer but still does 95% of what people do with a computer. Oh, give it a slick name too. Market this specifically at the non-geeks. At the people who worry about Vista. At the people who are tired of (or don't know how to) maintaining a PC. Things like: "You don't need a computer to surf the web or read your e-mail. The FooBarBox does everything you want, and more..." "Your computer crashed again? Tired of viruses? Computer viruses don't work if you have no computer. Try the FooBarBox." You get the idea. It's like Metisse's "This is not a 3D desktop" mantra: "This is not a computer". People associate "computer" or "PC" with a Windows computer. Just look at any software that runs on a Mac. On the box it says "For Mac or PC". As if the Mac is not a PC. The concept of a "Linux computer" is alien to them. If you sell them something that you say is a computer but it doesn't work exactly like Windows or does what they are used to doing then you're in trouble. Again, See Wall Mart. So, don't sell them a computer! Sell them a device. An appliance. Oh, and don't mention Linux. You could even pull an Apple here and make money off the additional hardware (did you know Apple charges $100-$250 for one extra GB of RAM?). It's not a computer so you don't have to work with 100% of the existing computer hardware out there. Sell your own peripherals. You control the hardware so you can pick stuff that's 100% Linux-compatible. Sell branded keyboards, mice, external storage, external DVD burners, USB gear, etcetera. It's nice for the customers that most of the PC hardware out there works with the FooBarBox. But the FooBarBox is not a computer. Only FooBar gear is guaranteed to work 100% with the FooBarBox. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!