Paul Ferris: The GNU/Linux desktop-adoption drive of 2005
by Paul Ferris That's great it starts with an earthquake, birds and snakes an aeroplanes, Linus T is not afraid ... -- with tribute mostly to R.E.M. It's the End of The World (as we know it) A lot of people over the years, myself included, have speculated that GNU/Linux would make a gradual push onto the desktop, having a higher presence by now but the adoption would have been gradual. Quite frankly I've been amazed at how slow this adoption has occurred. I've also been shocked at just how much tolerance the average Windows user has for viruses, trojan horses and spy-ware. Huge amounts -- far more than I would have ever predicted. Yet here we are, at the end of 2004, darn near 10 years since the public began to adopt the Internet, and the pain level is higher than ever. So predictions are dangerous to make in the desktop-Linux-adoption game, but I think the public is reaching a pivotal pain point. Evidence can be seen multiple places for this (I've provided a few links at the end of this article for reference). All you have to do for confirmation is ask any friend, relative or acquaintance who has any decent connection to the Internet about their latest Windows virus and spy-ware escapades. Let me know if you run into someone who has not been affected or infected. So I can warn them... The pain point is here, in other words. It's all over. All that stands between today and a mass GNU/Linux migration is a vector of some kind that will allow people to easily try out Linux without the hint of destroying their precious Windows box in the process. Now, in the past, that was extremely difficult. One of the problems with Linux was that (a long time ago) it was hard to install. Then it was supposedly hard to use. Today, it's easier and faster to install Linux than Windows in my humble opinion. Yes -- I've done both recently and I'm talking an average install on average hardware. Ease of use has increased up as well. The main issue for today and the foreseeable future comes from the fact that when someone buys a piece of PC hardware it typically comes with installation or recovery media for Windows. Your average Joe simply doesn't tend to comprehend the things that a typical Linux geek understands. Boot-able Linux CDs that don't destroy hard drive data and things like multiple partitions to run multiple OSes are foreign ideas that are frankly, way out there. People tend to buy a PC, in other words, and use it out of the box with whatever it came with. It's an appliance, in other words. They're not used to ripping into the guts of their refrigerator, for example, and pulling out the control software so it'll run cooler. So my prediction is that Linux desktop migration is going to hit the people with broadband connections first. For one, if someone has the cash for a decent broadband connection they probably also have some cash to spend on other luxury items. This whole infection insanity is likely driving them to the brink of change. Rounding out the decision matrix is the simple thought that using high speed Internet ought to be an experience of clicking on web sites that don't have something to do with spy-ware and virus cleanup. Actual usage of the product, as opposed to defense against it, in other words, may drive some people to switch to a GNU/Linux experience. The only item left, in other words, will be where to buy a decent pre-configured Linux box. While it's been possible to purchase cheap Linux boxes over the web for quite some time, the type of customer I'm envisioning is more impulse-oriented. I suspect that a vendor will have to rise to this challenge that's got an indifference to the Windows tax. This vendor should also have an extremely large piece of retail space. They should have a distribution channel that can handle a large demand for hardware. They have to be able to spin on a dime, and offer this kind of solution right now. There are already a couple of vendors that fit this bill. One of them is Walmart, and the other is Target. If I had to put my money down right now on a vendor that stands the most chance of doing this, I'd lay it on the Walmart folks. For what it's worth, they're already shipping Linux boxes via the web right now. You can get A PC, sans monitor, for all of $200 bucks U.S., or a laptop for less than $500.00. All they really need to do is place the PC they're selling on-line today on display in their electronics area, with a great big sign that says something to the effect of: This is a practical solution that nets several bonuses. For one, the user that has the PC can try Linux for under $300.00 U.S. This is relatively inexpensive for people who are already paying something between $15 to $50 bucks for a broadband connection of some kind. Factor in the cost of virus and spy-ware updates, the time it takes to constantly clean a Windows based PC, and it will probably offer some healthy ROI right away. They can surf the web without concern on the Linux box and relegate the Windows box to migration. Even better, just a game machine of some kind. It avoids the whole "how can I run my Windows applications on Linux" issue. It avoids all of the usual geek speak about partitioning, installation and live distributions. When it's all said and done, quite a few people will have discovered that a lot of stuff is in a Linux distribution -- boring things like Word processing software, web browsers, email clients and the usual office schlock -- enough to get their day to day stuff done. There will be a huge contingent of people, in my humble opinion, that discover that they can get real work done with their Linux box. These people will wonder (hopefully loudly) where this operating system came from, why the mainstream press didn't suggest it sooner, and why Free Software as a whole has been so misrepresented so often. This opportunity isn't going to come from Dell, HP, or even IBM (heck IBM wants out of the home PC business). These vendors, while having sparse Linux offerings here and there for home PC buyers, don't have the ability to easily offer a storefront to customers on the scale that's going to be needed. They also have to worry about the political $hit-$torm that's going to arise out of offering wide-scale Linux adoption to a Microsoft-installed customer base. So, Target, Walmart, are you listening? A golden opportunity has arisen. You have the chance to sell a few hundred thousand PCs without a huge amount of marketing. Word of mouth will be enough. Setup the kiosks and let the product do the rest. I've taken the liberty of writing them directly and asking them, and I urge you dear readers to do the same. Some of you can attempt to talk them out of it as well, but I'm confident that the cash opportunity will win in the end. Bonus points for this vendor are there for the taking. Whoever does this will probably sell a few more printers too (hint: they should be conveniently labeled "Linux Friendly"), printer supplies, monitors and so on. People don't just have a bunch of Windows-infected PCs lying around, they also have a bunch of Windows-"Friendly" junk as well. Make no mistake, someone's going to see the cash and the opportunity. The frustration level is reaching a peak. It's only a matter of a few weeks now. We're fast approaching the GNU/Linux desktop-adoption drive of 2005... Paul Fericyde Ferris is a husband, father, Linux geek, and more. FeriCyde Chat is an LXer.com feature. References: Pivotal Pain Points: Chris Spencers' "An Open Letter to a Digital World". Kim Lux's letter to the Ottawa Business Journal. Simon Moores: A bad case of worms... More predictions... Cyberinsecurity: The Cost Of Monopoly How The Dominance Of Microsofts Products Poses a Risk to Security. This Christmas, give the gift that doesn't keep on taking ... (a shameless plug for one of my rants) Write Target: Target corporate contact information. Write Walmart: Walmart store feedback form. Walmart already offers cheap Linux-based computers via its web site: A sub-$500.00 laptop. A sub-$200.00 PC. Prior Marketing Practices of Microsoft Discouraging Vendors from Selling non-Microsoft products: It's common knowledge that Microsoft has in the past written contracts that violated anti-trust law. Basically, by the time the United States Department of Justice gets around to halting these practices, the damage is done. It takes years to bring a company with the resources of Microsoft to trial. When caught, Microsoft simply enacts new contracts that appear on the surface to address the problem, all the while maintaining the same pressure to exclusively sell Microsoft products, as far as the hardware vendor is concerned. There are rumors that things are better now and they might be somewhat, as it's possible to order hardware today that has Linux pre-installed from vendors like Dell and IBM. The basic fact, however, is that the vast majority of current off the shelf software for desktop computers is being written for Microsoft Windows. This is due in large part because of the enormous inequity (read lack of competition) in the marketplace. It wouldn't make sense, for example, to write software for an operating system that was essentially banned from the marketplace via pressure from Microsoft. It still doesn't make sense ... at the moment. See: CNN: Text of federal complaint against Microsoft. (May 1998) |
|
|
Comments (6)
>>The people who run desktop pcs are more likely to curse them than love them, see them as merely the means to an end, and expect them to do just about anything they've ever seen anybody do with any computer anywhere at any time.
> We don't live in the world most people do.
Actually, I've had to live with a steenking windows laptop now for over 3 years. It sucks like rotten eggs, but I'm extremely familiar (work has required it). I relegate windows to a layer of an operating system, in this case a base for Cygwin to run.
> Most important reality first: The desktop is MUCH HARDER to conquer > than the server room. We geeky types tend to reverse the degree of > difficulty because we know that servers are the real studmuffins of the > network,
Yeah, yeah. I know what you mean here o Trac'd one -- but who said _anything_ about domination of the desktop? Not I -- this is about warfare -- try this simple experiment. Ask your windows friends with broadband connected computers if they've had a virus/spyware/security incident in the past year. See if you can find one who hasn't. I've been doing an ad-hoc poll, very unscientific. I haven't scored yet. Without exception, everyone has had something nasty.
Even dial-up people are being infected -- and it's not getting better, it's getting unmanageable. That's my main point here -- not to replace their desktop -- simply get them using Linux so they can somehow safely surf the web and check their email.
> The people who run desktop pcs are more likely to curse them than love > them, see them as merely the means to an end, and expect them to do > just about anything they've ever seen anybody do with any computer > anywhere at any time.
And yet, somehow, they're not able to do these things a good portion of the time because they're busy cleaning spyware and viruses off the things...
> There are SO many desktop programs! > WIth OpenOffice 2.0 around the corner, desktop productivity is about to > be covered very nicely. But if aunt Ida can't run her geneology program > (with all of her collected data) it won't matter!
Odd, that seems to be the big hold-up now. Last year it was word processing... But my point about surfing and email still stands.
> Even if aunt Ida could make the switch, if she doesn't somebody like you > or me, she ain't likely to do it.
This isn't true today. I'd agree with you two years ago -- maybe. But I just gave a neighbor a stock Red-Hat install (replaced Millenium Edition). He had zero questions about how to run it. Surfed the web and checked his email. I went over to make sure he was using it. I know he is because not only was FireFox up and focused on a web page, but the entire desktop was customized.
What's he do for a living -- he repairs farm equipment. Granted, the guys not a total moron, but he's a self-admitted non-tech kinda guy. One of my user group members converted his mom over a couple of years ago -- no problems. The desktop thing isn't as far fetched as you think, IMHO.
> When something goes wrong, she probably knows at least two or three > people who give her the impression that they can help her out with her > "computer" problems.
What's gonna go wrong! Listen, those guys are going to be busy trying to fix their _own_ windows boxes -- they're not going to have the time to help her.
> That, by the way, is where we come in.
Speak for yourself. I'm planning on renting umbrellas on the beach! This computer crap is for the birds!!
> As more and more people use desktop linux, there are more and more > desktop linux users (Duh!). That means more places to turn when the > ?%#! box acts flaky (and it will).
You pessimistic hackers are all alike! I'm not even going to mention how you crouch in the dust of your basements, nothing but the glow of the TV set and the smell of rotting tomatoes to guide your way... No sirree, not at all!
> It's happening as we speak. Is it happening quickly? No. But it's happening.
Actually, I've had to live with a steenking windows laptop now for over 3 years. It sucks like rotten eggs, but I'm extremely familiar (work has required it). I relegate windows to a layer of an operating system, in this case a base for Cygwin to run.
> Most important reality first: The desktop is MUCH HARDER to conquer > than the server room. We geeky types tend to reverse the degree of > difficulty because we know that servers are the real studmuffins of the > network,
Yeah, yeah. I know what you mean here o Trac'd one -- but who said _anything_ about domination of the desktop? Not I -- this is about warfare -- try this simple experiment. Ask your windows friends with broadband connected computers if they've had a virus/spyware/security incident in the past year. See if you can find one who hasn't. I've been doing an ad-hoc poll, very unscientific. I haven't scored yet. Without exception, everyone has had something nasty.
Even dial-up people are being infected -- and it's not getting better, it's getting unmanageable. That's my main point here -- not to replace their desktop -- simply get them using Linux so they can somehow safely surf the web and check their email.
> The people who run desktop pcs are more likely to curse them than love > them, see them as merely the means to an end, and expect them to do > just about anything they've ever seen anybody do with any computer > anywhere at any time.
And yet, somehow, they're not able to do these things a good portion of the time because they're busy cleaning spyware and viruses off the things...
> There are SO many desktop programs! > WIth OpenOffice 2.0 around the corner, desktop productivity is about to > be covered very nicely. But if aunt Ida can't run her geneology program > (with all of her collected data) it won't matter!
Odd, that seems to be the big hold-up now. Last year it was word processing... But my point about surfing and email still stands.
> Even if aunt Ida could make the switch, if she doesn't somebody like you > or me, she ain't likely to do it.
This isn't true today. I'd agree with you two years ago -- maybe. But I just gave a neighbor a stock Red-Hat install (replaced Millenium Edition). He had zero questions about how to run it. Surfed the web and checked his email. I went over to make sure he was using it. I know he is because not only was FireFox up and focused on a web page, but the entire desktop was customized.
What's he do for a living -- he repairs farm equipment. Granted, the guys not a total moron, but he's a self-admitted non-tech kinda guy. One of my user group members converted his mom over a couple of years ago -- no problems. The desktop thing isn't as far fetched as you think, IMHO.
> When something goes wrong, she probably knows at least two or three > people who give her the impression that they can help her out with her > "computer" problems.
What's gonna go wrong! Listen, those guys are going to be busy trying to fix their _own_ windows boxes -- they're not going to have the time to help her.
> That, by the way, is where we come in.
Speak for yourself. I'm planning on renting umbrellas on the beach! This computer crap is for the birds!!
> As more and more people use desktop linux, there are more and more > desktop linux users (Duh!). That means more places to turn when the > ?%#! box acts flaky (and it will).
You pessimistic hackers are all alike! I'm not even going to mention how you crouch in the dust of your basements, nothing but the glow of the TV set and the smell of rotting tomatoes to guide your way... No sirree, not at all!
> It's happening as we speak. Is it happening quickly? No. But it's happening.
I recently became curious about what my favorite ranting friend (Ferris) had been doing, and then stumbled here after entering his name in a search engine. I never knew of this site before, but I have mostly been absent of the community since the sinking of that titanic known as LinuxToday. Then I spotted Dean and thought: wow... what is going on over here? I do not know Dean as well, but this is much more a matter of coincidence than of my will. Has a new base been found for the rebel forces?
What follows is some analysis about history, Linux, the community, and most importantly, my friend Paul. There are lessons to be learned, so read attentively. The core message is too complex to be stated simply and without some background information. It is meant to be useful for everyone, despite its heavy concentration upon Paul.
About Warfare, Illusions, Desires, and Service
Paul, your father's religious influence upon you has left you with some gifts which you can never fully repay. It is the same for me, despite my father's ironic flaws. Your sometimes apparent obsessions with the concept of truth, and your desire for justice are exceedingly uncommon. These principals are so diminished in society in fact, that I correctly used "apparent obsessions" to describe them -- for it is exactly how many less fortunate souls would mistakenly describe your morality. These are the people who have chanted "zealot" at you. Your unwillingness to compromise your principals despite strong temptations is why I admire you. Years ago, we spoke at length about a possible compromise during a time of difficult choices. I argued that compromise in the short term is sometimes acceptable if it might serve the greater good -- leading eventually to the lesser of two evils. As an old martial arts saying portrayed: it is the trees which bend from the weight of snow that survive the winter to return in spring stronger. Those trees maintain hope of growing higher. Their flexibility allows them to endure and continue. Which of us was right? I don't know. Perhaps you too will never confidently know all the "what if" answers. Regardless of your strategies; I do know that as long as you follow the guidance of your conscience, then you will receive my respect for it, and possibly the respect of many others. So, my only disappointment concerned the opportunities lost. Like so many qualities, idealism can cut both ways. It is your strength that resonates influence throughout the community; but this same zeal is prone to being misunderstood by those outside the community like a prophet speaking in tongues. I understand, and you understand -- but the problem is partly that you have failed to understand how little the outsiders understand. While I have never taken sides in such a discussion before, I make my first exception now. Paul, my friend, you are absolutely in error in disputing Dean. What he stated echoed with fidelity my overall experience with "users". We're far from alone too. While in many areas your knowledge vastly overshadows mine, there is one area which you cannot compete. As a field technician, I was constantly giving aid to average people: technically ignorant people. You're not even using their language. You can't preach security improvements to people for which security is only "something banks need to stop 'hackers' ", and who only feel a need for the security of having a corporation providing "support" -- which mostly is actually supportive marketing designed to distract them from the fine print. How can you market a virtue, when the audience does not comprehend why it should be a desired quality? You, like most people, have a tendency to project some of your qualities upon others -- for instance, the distrustful attitudes of thieves who cannot perceive what they do not have in other people: consciences. I'm sorry to say that the idealism and intellectual drive that you see in other people is often the illusion of your own projected qualities. You have overestimated them even more than you underestimated Dean in this instance. We're better than the vast majority; but you can still follow your dream of aiding them to elevate themselves with an effective strategy. To inspire them as you and other leaders have done for us, you must learn their language, educate them, and only then can you hope to spread the word. They will not allow you to help them up if they never realize they are on the ground. My advise is your (our) only chance. From what I know of humanity, my hopefulness is low however.
What follows is some analysis about history, Linux, the community, and most importantly, my friend Paul. There are lessons to be learned, so read attentively. The core message is too complex to be stated simply and without some background information. It is meant to be useful for everyone, despite its heavy concentration upon Paul.
About Warfare, Illusions, Desires, and Service
Paul, your father's religious influence upon you has left you with some gifts which you can never fully repay. It is the same for me, despite my father's ironic flaws. Your sometimes apparent obsessions with the concept of truth, and your desire for justice are exceedingly uncommon. These principals are so diminished in society in fact, that I correctly used "apparent obsessions" to describe them -- for it is exactly how many less fortunate souls would mistakenly describe your morality. These are the people who have chanted "zealot" at you. Your unwillingness to compromise your principals despite strong temptations is why I admire you. Years ago, we spoke at length about a possible compromise during a time of difficult choices. I argued that compromise in the short term is sometimes acceptable if it might serve the greater good -- leading eventually to the lesser of two evils. As an old martial arts saying portrayed: it is the trees which bend from the weight of snow that survive the winter to return in spring stronger. Those trees maintain hope of growing higher. Their flexibility allows them to endure and continue. Which of us was right? I don't know. Perhaps you too will never confidently know all the "what if" answers. Regardless of your strategies; I do know that as long as you follow the guidance of your conscience, then you will receive my respect for it, and possibly the respect of many others. So, my only disappointment concerned the opportunities lost. Like so many qualities, idealism can cut both ways. It is your strength that resonates influence throughout the community; but this same zeal is prone to being misunderstood by those outside the community like a prophet speaking in tongues. I understand, and you understand -- but the problem is partly that you have failed to understand how little the outsiders understand. While I have never taken sides in such a discussion before, I make my first exception now. Paul, my friend, you are absolutely in error in disputing Dean. What he stated echoed with fidelity my overall experience with "users". We're far from alone too. While in many areas your knowledge vastly overshadows mine, there is one area which you cannot compete. As a field technician, I was constantly giving aid to average people: technically ignorant people. You're not even using their language. You can't preach security improvements to people for which security is only "something banks need to stop 'hackers' ", and who only feel a need for the security of having a corporation providing "support" -- which mostly is actually supportive marketing designed to distract them from the fine print. How can you market a virtue, when the audience does not comprehend why it should be a desired quality? You, like most people, have a tendency to project some of your qualities upon others -- for instance, the distrustful attitudes of thieves who cannot perceive what they do not have in other people: consciences. I'm sorry to say that the idealism and intellectual drive that you see in other people is often the illusion of your own projected qualities. You have overestimated them even more than you underestimated Dean in this instance. We're better than the vast majority; but you can still follow your dream of aiding them to elevate themselves with an effective strategy. To inspire them as you and other leaders have done for us, you must learn their language, educate them, and only then can you hope to spread the word. They will not allow you to help them up if they never realize they are on the ground. My advise is your (our) only chance. From what I know of humanity, my hopefulness is low however.
Thomas!
Great to see you here!
I hear you on the humanity thing -- but I too spend quite a bit of time with my friends and neighbors -- and I've never seen things quite as bad as they are now.
I'll answer all of these concerns, if you don't mind, in a new article...
;)
In any case, I note your opinion as valid, as usual.
But please don't side with DinoTrac -- it only stokes the fire...
--FeriCyde
Great to see you here!
I hear you on the humanity thing -- but I too spend quite a bit of time with my friends and neighbors -- and I've never seen things quite as bad as they are now.
I'll answer all of these concerns, if you don't mind, in a new article...
;)
In any case, I note your opinion as valid, as usual.
But please don't side with DinoTrac -- it only stokes the fire...
--FeriCyde
> But please don't side with DinoTrac --
> it only stokes the fire...
Yeah... we'll keep an eye on that guy.
Yeah... we'll keep an eye on that guy.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post

It's hard to argue with you as far as you go, but you miss a few important details. Not surprising -- you wear the same blinders I do: desktop linux has been our reality for years. In fact, we've recently acquired our first Windows machine in the last 5 years, and only because some mortgage loan software requires it.
We don't live in the world most people do.
It's why it's good for me to talk to my mother now and then.
Most important reality first: The desktop is MUCH HARDER to conquer than the server room. We geeky types tend to reverse the degree of difficulty because we know that servers are the real studmuffins of the network,
Truth is, servers have it easy. They have people to take care of them, people for whom computing is important stuff, not just the means to do other important stuff. They also tend to do a relatively small number of things, like handle e-mail or serve up web pages. They might serve up a bazillion pages, do dynamic rendering, log til your momma cries, etc, but they're probably not going to play halo or do any video editing or print up nice calendars with your kids' pictures on them.
The people who run desktop pcs are more likely to curse them than love them, see them as merely the means to an end, and expect them to do just about anything they've ever seen anybody do with any computer anywhere at any time.
There are SO many desktop programs! WIth OpenOffice 2.0 around the corner, desktop productivity is about to be covered very nicely. But if aunt Ida can't run her geneology program (with all of her collected data) it won't matter!
Even if aunt Ida could make the switch, if she doesn't somebody like you or me, she ain't likely to do it.
Why not, you say?
Because the freakin' computer is absolute mystery meat to her. She knows how to do what she knows how to do and that's absolutely fine.
Here's the kicker:
When something goes wrong, she probably knows at least two or three people who give her the impression that they can help her out with her "computer" problems.
That, by the way, is where we come in.
As more and more people use desktop linux, there are more and more desktop linux users (Duh!). That means more places to turn when the ?%#! box acts flaky (and it will).
It's happening as we speak. Is it happening quickly? No. But it's happening.
The desktop is hard, and hard things tend to take time.