Fedora

[bluedevils]

I ran away from redhat when the free dist went to fedora. I wasn't a fan of rpm.

I like ubuntu/kubuntu, but upgrading from dapper to edgy to feisty should be easier than it is now.

I'm comfortable with command line, so gentoo is my preferred linux OS if you have the horsepower. It compiles everything to your specific setup.

OSX is just the most "fire and forget" OS and it still has some of the power of unix commandline and unix applications.

[Rhisiart]

Thank you all for your responses and information.

I can see the advantage in having an operating system like OSX, that suits the vast majority of users who really don't need to look under the hood, but have the option to do so if so inclined. OSX's stability is a valuable asset.

However, when it comes to value for money, I wonder whether the availability of much higher quaility open source apps may tempt more users away from Apple towards Linux inspired operating systems?

[PGTips]

Originally Posted by rhisiart

However, when it comes to value for money, I wonder whether the availability of much higher quaility open source apps may tempt more users away from Apple towards Linux inspired operating systems?

Hehe, no.

I don't do much media, but there is nothing on Linux that comes close to the iLife suite. Nothing on Linux comes close to the iLife suite.

Professional applications like Photoshop and MS Office are unavailable on Linux. Gimp and OpenOffice do work to some extent, but there are times when you need the real thing.

Linux is nice. I use it on my desktop at work and I actually find the GNOME UI a lot better than Aqua, but I'm not kidding myself. Linux has a long way to go before being a serious contender to Mac OS X in the home space.

[Decade]

The "quality" argument has been used by every technology system in a state of decline.

Sure, Photoshop has wild features, but most people don't need that power. In the past, you would get Photoshop anyway, because you needed some of the features. But, it's fantastically expensive, and its anti-piracy techniques are increasingly intrusive. Now, there's a credible alternative for light uses, and only people whose work needs Photoshop should get it.

Too many analysts mistake familiarity for superiority. You may find iLife to be essential, others may find it too limiting, but probably the vast majority of users will find what comes with Ubuntu to be good enough. The vast majority of users are astonishingly poor judges of propriety. iLife is really nice to use, but you wouldn't know you could record movies or make electronic music so easily if Steve Jobs hadn't revealed it to you.

Linux isn't really that easy to use, but I think it's good enough for the vast majority of users. People keep saying it's not ready for the desktop, but I say it's more ready for the desktop than the Windows versions that dominated the desktop for most of the past 20 years. That's good enough for mass deployment.

[PGTips]

Way to miss the point.

Originally Posted by Decade

Sure, Photoshop has wild features, but most people don't need that power. In the past, you would get Photoshop anyway, because you needed some of the features. But, it's fantastically expensive, and its anti-piracy techniques are increasingly intrusive. Now, there's a credible alternative for light uses, and only people whose work needs Photoshop should get it.

Most major criticism of the Gimp lies in its strange interface, not its lack of features. Professionals who rely on Photoshop for work apparently have a hard time adjusting to the Gimp. There have always been credible alternatives for light uses. Pity they don't require Linux and are handily available on both Windows and Mac OS X. On the other hand, when you do need to get down and dirty with the heavy lifting, at least Photoshop is an option. No, Wine is never a serious option.

Too many analysts mistake familiarity for superiority. You may find iLife to be essential, others may find it too limiting, but probably the vast majority of users will find what comes with Ubuntu to be good enough. The vast majority of users are astonishingly poor judges of propriety. iLife is really nice to use, but you wouldn't know you could record movies or make electronic music so easily if Steve Jobs hadn't revealed it to you.

If package X contains the same features as package Y, but is much easier to use since it adheres to the UI paradigms that users are familiar with, who in their right mind will say Y is superior? iLife is good, because it makes things so easy to do. Nothing on Linux comes close without having to fiddle about.

Linux isn't really that easy to use, but I think it's good enough for the vast majority of users. People keep saying it's not ready for the desktop, but I say it's more ready for the desktop than the Windows versions that dominated the desktop for most of the past 20 years. That's good enough for mass deployment.

The average user is a poor judge of propriety, but technical users are? How easy is it to install software on Linux that isn't already present in the Apt/Yum repository? I love Linux as much as the next geek. But after 7 years of usage, I'm still not convinced that it is ready for the average user.

[Decade]

Originally Posted by PGTips

Way to miss the point.

Yeah, too bad I'm not really trying to convince you. Just saying what I think is true.

Originally Posted by PGTips

Most major criticism of the Gimp lies in its strange interface, not its lack of features. Professionals who rely on Photoshop for work apparently have a hard time adjusting to the Gimp. There have always been credible alternatives for light uses. On the other hand, when you do need to get down and dirty with the heavy lifting, at least Photoshop is an option. No, Wine is never a serious option.

Way to miss my point. Every light use program that I've tried other than GIMP has been missing Curves adjustment. You're mistaking the familiar interface of Photoshop for superiority, and besides most of the criticism I hear about the GIMP is its lack of CMYK support. I'm personally annoyed at the lack of unlimited undo and Photoshop's pretty nice blemish removal tools. Other than that, it's largely featureful like Photoshop, 5-10 years behind (and falling behind because of the GEGL project). Running Linux is about running natively with Linux, so WINE is not a serious option.

Originally Posted by PGTips

If package X contains the same features as package Y, but is much easier to use since it adheres to the UI paradigms that users are familiar with, who in their right mind will say Y is superior?

I don't say anything is superior. That sort of argument is used by a system that's losing a fight against a rising newcomer. But at $650 per seat, plus proprietary OS licensing fees, you'd better have a good reason (like you're getting paid for it) to use Photoshop. They're certainly making it clear that they don't want Photoshop pirated.

Originally Posted by PGTips

The average user is a poor judge of propriety, but technical users are? How easy is it to install software on Linux that isn't already present in the Apt/Yum repository? I love Linux as much as the next geek. But after 7 years of usage, I'm still not convinced that it is ready for the average user.

I thought so, too, until I saw Ubuntu. It's astonishingly easy to use. The dependence on repositories is part of my earlier point that I explained poorly, that Linux promotes a different way of looking at software. The way the average user should get more software is to add more compatible repositories.

Last year, an average user I know discussed getting a new computer. I told him to get a Mac because the OS is so much nicer than Windows. He was scared off by the price, so he got an HP monster desktop replacement. It was less than a year later, when he saw my father using a Mac, and he found out about GarageBand, that he was convinced to get a MacBook.

Several years ago, another average user I know sold her import business and started another one. Her old business was using Macs, which they discarded when they went out of business, but she decided to get what's cheap, Dell, instead. Now, she's constantly stymied by its astounding anti-virus program behaviors, while my father tells her how much better it would be if she got Macs, instead.

So, no, average users are not good judges of propriety.