Advanced

Comment of the Day - November 2, 2005 Why People Switch to LXer

Posted by tadelste on · 5 comments
LXer -Article; By AndyCooll 		Mail this story
Print this story

AndyCooll writes about his experience trying Firefox and OpenOffice.org. He writes: "I saw that the quality of these products were excellent. And I was hooked. It was only a small step then to trying Linux."

From the article: Why People Switch to Linux

I've been a Linux user only for the last six months. Although I wasn't particularly rebelling against Microsoft my journey towards Linux began with objecting to forking out a small fortune for software and Microsoft Office in particular. I also wasn't happy with IE.

One day I decided to try Firefox, and then from there OpenOffice.org. I saw that the quality of these products were excellent. And I was hooked. It was only a small step then to trying Linux. On installation I quickly saw the benefits, everything you could ever wish for at your fingertips. Wonderful. And it was so flexible, choices everywhere!

I'm not a geek, I know very few command lines at the moment but I love fiddling. I've always liked the idea of having a box that fits my personal needs and Linux provides it. I've tried Fedora Core (which is ok) but I've found I prefer Ubuntu. It is just the right level for a noob like me. I also love the philosophy of Debian and have a test box with this on. Unfortunately I have just a few too many problems with it to use it as my main box, but it's great to use as a learning box.

Its all still a bit of a steep learning curve and since I'm not a computer expert often I get stuck, however I'm loving the challenge.
I can't properly play the one game on it I love (Football Manager, the match engine is still grindingly slow with Wine and Cedega), and I'd like to see an improved multimedia application that's as friendly as Realplayer/Windows Media Player (i.e I'd like to see AmaroK with movie capability).

However even with my limited knowledge I've already converted the wife's pc over to Linux too.



And of course once you make the move you don't want to go back, and now I'm even starting to become strict with myself in terms of licencing. Open source? GNU/GPL? Debian principles?
I still have my Windows pc and what I put on that must as far as possible meet with the philosophy I use for my Linux pc's.

I'm looking forward to a Linux future! :-)

  Nav
» Read more about: Story Type: LXer Features, News Story; Groups: Debian, Fedora, GNU, Microsoft, Ubuntu

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (5)

mvermeer ·
This comment illustrates that Karl Marx, and dialectic materialism, were right about one thing: peoples' material circumstances help define -- and change -- their political thinking.

Same happened with me. Originally I tried Linux out of technical interest, but it has really affected my political thinking. Radicalized. I'm still no marxist, but Linux is like a peephole exposing everything (well, not everything, but lots) that's wrong with society.
number6x ·
Wouldn't open source, its embrace of consensus building, distributed development, and advancement through competitition be more Democratic than Marxist?

Marx put all of the peoples eggs in one basket, kind of like a monopoly does.

I never associated Linux and open source with Marxism, to me they seem almost diametrically opposed.
dinotrac ·
6x -

Marxism is not, in theory, incompatible with Democracy. In theory, by preventing capital concentration, it protects the rights of everyman.

It need not equal authoritarian repression, but it turns out to work that way as the side effect of transferring so much economic power away from individuals to the state (the people if you really believe that govt=the people).

Something about absolute power and all that.

number6x ·
dino,

I was thinking more about Marxist political philosophy, and the placement of the 'party' above all government branches. In an ideal world this could work, but in an ideal world this change would not be needed because the world would already be ideal.

In the real world, concentration of capitol, or concentration of political power, usually results in corruption. Swapping one with the other does not result in a better system.

tadelste Story submitter ·
I like the part about the bourgeoisie was going to sell us the rope used to hang it.

I've seen it said many ways like: The capitalist is selling himself the rope to hang him

I always thought that was the outside the essence of the idea which seemed like a refocus on money as the medium exchange and not a commodity to create land barons. I guess some land barons are necessary.



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:
|||||
10
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