Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

TigTex · 2008-07-03 00:35:20

I was talking to one friend... He said: "I don't have time to that" ... He doesn't know what he is loosing ehehe

chaosgeisterchen · 2008-07-03 12:39:38

11010010110 wrote:

The similarity of excuses against 'go linux' and 'go vegetarian' is amazing

Could you possibly elaborate on this?

Allan · 2008-07-03 12:54:01

chaosgeisterchen wrote:

11010010110 wrote:
The similarity of excuses against 'go linux' and 'go vegetarian' is amazing
Could you possibly elaborate on this?

Compare "I like Internet Explorer" with "I like streaky bacon". Both seem good, but use/eat them all the time and your computer/heart will stop working.

chaosgeisterchen · 2008-07-04 01:54:19

Allan wrote:

chaosgeisterchen wrote:
11010010110 wrote:
The similarity of excuses against 'go linux' and 'go vegetarian' is amazing
Could you possibly elaborate on this?
Compare "I like Internet Explorer" with "I like streaky bacon". Both seem good, but use/eat them all the time and your computer/heart will stop working.

From a nutritional standpoint I cannot fully share an argument like this. See - I do get what you mean, but the comparison won't work unless any type of meat is strictly negative for your health, as Internet Explorer has no real way to be expressed as a fully functional and well-working browser, adapting to the standards of state-of-the-art webdesign.

TjPhysicist · 2008-07-25 12:29:08

A lot of the reasons here are sort of a circle. Something like "there is more software and games for windows" is the biggest reason a LOT of people i know do not switch for good. I study in university of waterloo, its basically nerd town here, so most of us (unless you are in pure arts and hang out with no one but pure artsies) know about linux. Plus most people i know see me use my comp and i tell them about my problems with windows during casual conversation etc. Most people i know here have thus been exposed to linux and understand the good points of it, and frankly understand that it is a superiour system, and plus we are students, and thus not so keen on spending money if we can get the job done for free even if some extra effort is required. Money is hard to come by as a student.

The thing is AS students a lot of us like games. most games don't work on linux, and 60% of the ones that do take time to get it to work under wine. The thing is if we all started using linux game companies would be forced to make games for linux. Its happening with mac already. A lot of ppl are being attracted toward mac nowadays, what with m$'s newest most amazing blunder "Vista". I am yet to meet someone who says vista is better. And since m$ has a habit off phasing out previous OSes with the advent of new ones, ppl switch away from m$. With this, i see a huge burst in software compatibility with mac. A lot more hardware comes with "MAC supported" on it etc. If the same can happen with linux, i think it will be nice.

But then again one of the reasons linux has basically no viruses may be the fact that its not that common an OS, and that most hackers etc, do use linux as their OS of choice. So would making linux more popular also create an influx of security breaches and viruses, or is it really harder to create such things in linux, im not sure...

-Tj

TjPhysicist · 2008-07-25 12:42:56

kensai wrote:

moljac024 wrote:
Well, MS Office is still better than OpenOffice, regardless of the file format...
Opinion, not fact. IMHO Openoffice is way better, I use it for everything even for University.

Funny thing...I am a university student, i was in Physics, took lot of CS, switched to Philosophy. So i take notes on my computer, write up code, essays, papers the whole deal. I havent opened an office program in 3 years (with the exception of: printing out .doc's that I need to, some profs still use .doc etc). And the only reason its not been more than 3 years is cuz i did not know about Latex b4 that.

xd-0 wrote:

Window is so easy, everything just works. And wtf wine?!?!? Can't they do better, I want to play my games. I'll think I try Vista...
He doesn't like wine because he wants to play diablo2 in fullscreen and likes to tab out of it, and this doesn't seem to work because of diablos2 stupid resolution.
Considering that wine does a great job trying to support windows-games and programs, i would like to see a similar program in Windows.

I have been playing diablo II on wine since 0.6. Admitedly 0.6 required all sorts of wierd tweaks i dont even remember. But Diablo II works fine with anything above 0.9 for sure. I never even installed diablo, just grabbed the program folder from friend it worked. I alt-tabbed a lot, cuz I like using hero editor, and looking stuff up.

slackhack wrote:

..
4. that's just for hippies and communists

THATS RIGHT, and I AM PROUDLY BOTH.
-Tj

Last edited by TjPhysicist (2008-07-25 12:56:42)

11010010110 · 2008-07-26 11:34:51

chaosgeisterchen wrote:

11010010110 wrote:
The similarity of excuses against 'go linux' and 'go vegetarian' is amazing
Could you possibly elaborate on this?

I am vegan myself and I call you to go vegan or vegetarian. Think of some reaons and excuses to give me why not.

Zeist · 2008-07-26 12:26:37

11010010110 wrote:

I am vegan myself and I call you to go vegan or vegetarian. Think of some reaons and excuses to give me why not.

Tofu is evil

http://xs329.xs.to/xs329/08306/eviltofu956.png

(Come on, it's at least a little funny)

Last edited by Zeist (2008-07-26 12:27:01)

Barrucadu · 2008-07-26 12:29:44

11010010110 wrote:

I am vegan myself and I call you to go vegan or vegetarian. Think of some reaons and excuses to give me why not.

We like the taste of meat, milk, cheese and suchlike too much. That's a good reason.

robmaloy · 2008-07-26 13:31:00

"i need photoshop" and all the crap they do can easily be done in gimp

(+ they have illegal ps copies)

faelar · 2008-07-29 14:28:18

I can't agree on photoshop.
What I see is I can do the same things with both gimp and photoshop, but it's much more longer to do what I want with gimp than with adobe's software. People who do crapy cuts from pixelised jpeg and paste them on photoshop use it as an excuse not to switch to linux. But for people who "really" use it, going to gimp isn't a nice solution. Since wine emulation, as good as it is, doesn't perform enough to handle PS correctly, the only solution seems to be windows.
Gimp can't open .psd if they're in CMYK mode, I know that most of my old files are in RGB, but what about someone working in printing ?

Else, most of the time the excuse is just that people are too lasy to change there OS, even if it's to go from vista to win xp !

greenfish · 2009-09-22 11:41:49

A lot of pros and cons in this thread, which is a good thing. Someone posted a comic strip that explained the current linux kernel in a nut shell, it goes something like this user1 "it took awhile but they finally patched 1024 bits in the fs" user2: great, but can we watch flash in full scren now?"

To me that says it all, it's 2009 and the most fundamental thing we have is still not working as it should. I can't belive a simple plugnplay still isn't working 100% in linux. Now I realise this is a different distro compared to other desktop oriented ones. If something breaks on my system I normally don't complain since it's all from the bleeding edge of upstream.

But seriously if my mouse just stops working or watching flash in full screen is almost a nightmare it makes me wonder what exactly are the kernel devs doing. I honestly don't care about bfs/lvm/raid or increased block size of bla bla bla bla bla.

If linux wants to go somewhere it needs to understand it's the user who just surfs/emails/facebook who will pay for the system in the end, not us nerds. That's why windows/macos is dominating the market, they just work without a hassle (you know what I mean).

The linux kernel is in the end server oriented and not a hybrid like the NT kernel or darwin but i'd be damned if they can't make it work 100% as a desktop system. As of right now I can't even get diablo 2 up and running without my ati complaining I don't have DRI, the game is almost 10 years old...

In my opinion the linux kernel is the best os in the world for my taste, especially love the archlinux distro, but we shouldn't have to spend countless of hours just to get a simple plugn play unit to function properly or basic 3D compositing. There simply isn't an excuse for a mouse/keyboard not to work today in 2009.

Like I said, it's the "normal" guy who only wants to surf/facebook/youtube who ultimately sells an operating system in the end, never a geek.

And to the guy who planned on going back to BSD if linux gets mainstreamed, have fun that's all im gonna say and i'll enjoy my flash in fullscreen and watching bluray in fullhd

I salute ubuntu/suse/redhat for their attempts to market the linux system as a fully functional desktop system, and I salute the archlinux devs/community for the best distro of choice for me

Edit: pardon the typos (i'm still at working driving)

sand_man · 2009-09-22 11:53:47

greenfish wrote:

A lot of pros and cons in this thread, which is a good thing. Someone posted a comic strip that explained the current linux kernel in a nut shell, it goes something like this user1 "it took awhile but they finally patched 1024 bits in the fs" user2: great, but can we watch flash in full scren now?"

You are referring to xkcd

bharani · 2009-09-22 12:21:55

/This is not a lame excuse. But a real reason.Though may look strange.

I use Linux for about 2 years and from then on i asked each one of friends who have a system to use Linux.
We are doing masters in computer applications and learning is not a problem.But i can convert only 2 of my friends to use linux.
The reason Internet connection.

You all make take Internet for granted but in third world country like India Internet is a luxury. Many on my class cannot afford to have a internet connection.

Its true that in Linux package manager allows you install any application with a single click but what is the use of package manager if there in no connection.

Forums are great.But you have to go to an Internet cafe to post it and again go to see what is the reply.

Ubuntu comes with a lot of applications for desktop use . But the thought that they cannot install anything without a connection prevents anyone from using it though. I once made a aptconcd for a friend who wants to install vlc.

But most of my friends have Linux installed on their computer(mostly mint after my suggestion) but they use it only to check whether their pendrive have virus on it.Other than that they rarely use it to

And the 2 friends whom i have converted to linux have Internet connection.

May be strange but a valid reason.

tlvb · 2009-09-22 12:24:52

greenfish wrote:

To me that says it all, it's 2009 and the most fundamental thing we have is still not working as it should. I can't belive a simple plugnplay still isn't working 100% in linux. Now I realise this is a different distro compared to other desktop oriented ones. If something breaks on my system I normally don't complain since it's all from the bleeding edge of upstream.
But seriously if my mouse just stops working or watching flash in full screen is almost a nightmare it makes me wonder what exactly are the kernel devs doing. I honestly don't care about bfs/lvm/raid or increased block size of bla bla bla bla bla.

If I download a youtube film with youtube-dl, and then play it with mplayer, I have no problems what so ever with lag, resizing, mouse, focus grabbing and what have you. So a linux system as such is clearly very much capable of playing flash movies. Now on the other hand, when using the flash plugin created by Adobe performance can be quite horrible. So go bug the devs to improve it. The Adobe devs. The example here was with movies only, but the same points apply for flash applications too.
Also, I do not get what missing plugnplay functionality you are referring to.

Edit: I notice I've managed to post something totally off topic, my apologies for that. - It's just that this flash thing gets me every time.
On topic then: I don't think I've heard any inherently lame excuses for not switching to linux, mostly it has been lack of interest. I am quite interested in computers myself, but I see that not everybody can share the interest. They simply prefer an evil they know instead of something unknown.

Last edited by tlvb (2009-09-22 12:37:16)

ammon · 2009-09-22 13:43:51

Lamest you say? Ok, I'll try.

No refresh (Desktop - right click)

No bullshit, that happened.

No msn live messeneger.

I need to much partitions to run linux...

I am not programer.

And so on... Most of excuses are lame.

Lexion · 2009-09-22 13:56:46

"Linux is just one big driver, you have to write most of the OS yourself." - n00b
"That was like 5-10 years ago." - me
"That's because you've been writing your OS for 5-10 years." - n00b

I hope the n00b doesn't read this, cause he knows where I live and which computer is mine.

greenfish · 2009-09-22 15:18:30

tlvb wrote:

greenfish wrote:
To me that says it all, it's 2009 and the most fundamental thing we have is still not working as it should. I can't belive a simple plugnplay still isn't working 100% in linux. Now I realise this is a different distro compared to other desktop oriented ones. If something breaks on my system I normally don't complain since it's all from the bleeding edge of upstream.
But seriously if my mouse just stops working or watching flash in full screen is almost a nightmare it makes me wonder what exactly are the kernel devs doing. I honestly don't care about bfs/lvm/raid or increased block size of bla bla bla bla bla.
If I download a youtube film with youtube-dl, and then play it with mplayer, I have no problems what so ever with lag, resizing, mouse, focus grabbing and what have you. So a linux system as such is clearly very much capable of playing flash movies. Now on the other hand, when using the flash plugin created by Adobe performance can be quite horrible. So go bug the devs to improve it. The Adobe devs. The example here was with movies only, but the same points apply for flash applications too.
Also, I do not get what missing plugnplay functionality you are referring to.
Edit: I notice I've managed to post something totally off topic, my apologies for that. - It's just that this flash thing gets me every time.
On topic then: I don't think I've heard any inherently lame excuses for not switching to linux, mostly it has been lack of interest. I am quite interested in computers myself, but I see that not everybody can share the interest. They simply prefer an evil they know instead of something unknown.

Hi tlvb, i'm gonna split up your sentences into tiny quotes, easier to reply.

If I download a youtube film with youtube-dl, and then play it with mplayer, I have no problems what so ever with lag, resizing, mouse, focus grabbing and what have you. So a linux system as such is clearly very much capable of playing flash movies. Now on the other hand, when using the flash plugin created by Adobe performance can be quite horrible. So go bug the devs to improve it. The Adobe devs. The example here was with movies only, but the same points apply for flash applications too.

You sort of proved my point on how exactly linux is viewed outside of it's own society. Why should anyone have to download a flash movie and then execute another application to watch the actual clip, when you can just click on the streaming like you're suppose to. A normal computer user doesn't care who's fault it is, if they can't watch flash/facebook what ever they will NOT support the system. Why should they "convert" to linux if they can just watch flash with a one click solution?

The regular user does NOT care who's fault it is to blame because they can't game/twitter/flash on their operating system, if it's not working it's windows/linux/macosx fault. I know that's not the way things works, but that's how the majority of "joes" view a computer.

It's exactly this kind of mentality that's still linux number one enemy if there's such a thing, once more the regular user who's suppose to use/support the actual operating system, is ONLY interested in something that's similar or better then their actual system (windows,mac etc), the flash thing as you put it, is a great reason why a lot of users refuses to change os.

These are not my own words, just stories i've picked up over the years from various people trying to switch operating system. I'm currently running windows 7 on my htpc and it's probably the best os microsoft have created (i've been around since 1989 of DOS), but is it better than my primary os (archlinux) for my own needs? No, I still prefer linux over windows/macosx, as a daily system.

My setup:

desktop/main system = archlinux
server = archlinux
htpc = windows 7

Also, I do not get what missing plugnplay functionality you are referring to.

Just these words: "CUPS, HAL, BREAKAGE, Hardware not supported"

@sand_man

Thank You

Over the years i've handed out free linux live cds, i've only managed to convert a few, the majority of users won't switch unless linux gives them:

100% gaming support
100% movie support
100% flash support

Keyword here is "linux" as i've said before they don't care whos fault it really is, adobe, nvidia, ati etc etc

Last edited by greenfish (2009-09-22 15:22:36)

YamiFrankc · 2009-09-22 15:49:34

"Its communist "
"It makes you look nerd"
"My parents could kill me if you uninstall my Windows"
"I need (photoshop/rpgmaker/ie/ms msn/etc)"

Anonymo · 2009-09-22 16:34:34

Sp4rkR4t wrote:

I tend to spend most of my time telling my friends not to bother switching as they couldn't handle the change to a well thought out OS. This has two effects, the actual intelligent ones resolve to try and learn about it instead of just asking me all the time for stupid little things and the less technically inclined stay the hell away so I can get some sleep.

That's what I say. I tell them "you wouldn't like it, you get too much control over your PC and the only advantage you would get is that you don't have to run an anti-virus because it's almost immune to virus and I could support your problems for a lower cost because I would be able to remotely access your computer and fix most problems this way. It's also more secure by default and has great documentation. But I wouldn't want to bother you with that, just use what you know already".

techprophet · 2009-09-22 17:18:14

But it's illegal!

....right....

linkmaster03 · 2009-09-23 00:35:32

"My parents won't let me."
"How do you know someone didn't just put a keylogger in the code since it's open?"

Isengrin · 2009-09-23 00:59:33

"Normal people just want to use the computer"
"I'm not a programmer"
"Que hueva" ← Mexican vulgar way of saying "what a bother"
"I don't want to have problems every five minutes" ←LOL
"Not until the warranty expires"
etc. xD

By the way, wasn't last message in this thread from 2008-07 until it was resurrected today? XD

Last edited by Isengrin (2009-09-23 01:00:48)

Trent · 2009-09-23 01:03:30

My favorite (from http://www.rinkworks.com/stupid/cs_os.shtml):

My Friend: "What's your operating system?"
Me: "Linux."
My Friend: "You better uninstall it!"
Me: "Why?"
My Friend: "The government uses Linux to look through your computer and see your every move. They use it as a security camera into your world."

Much more, and much funnier things also at that site.

Aprz · 2009-09-23 07:58:07

acal3000 wrote:

I admire Apple coz they reinnovate on things but they don't created computers. Computer exists even before Apple creation and is what some people don'u understand sometimes

I really dislike Apple. To me, when a person purchases a Mac, the are purchasing: cheap decorated hardware, a mostly free operating system (outdated though), and then a proprietary desktop environment that provides GUI replacements that does the job worse or (at best) equally to the free alternatives that it lies on top of (even though the alternatives are outdated). Every update Apple comes out with reminds me of small business owners too, everything is the next biggest thing, it's the cure to cancer, etc... From personal experience, small business owners tend to get overly excited about little things from what I have witnessed. For example, my dad bought a coffee machine for his print shop. He decided that this coffee was revolutionary to the printing industry, that he was going to remodel his entire shop, call the project or whatever "The Printer-Net Lounge", free wireless, that the printing industry is no longer about printing, but about customer service (I don't mean just service, but I just blanked out on the real word I wanted to say - suppose to mean like kindness towards guests, relaxation, and be a little luxurious... I blanked out on the word... wah! Somebody please remind me - no, it's not courteous... that's what I keep thinking), have a re-Grand Opening, get Kelley Clarkson to sing there (he really wanted to do that, lol... and it's a small small small shop... a one man shop). He did everything (except getting Kelley Clarkson to come) and business is just the same as ever. Heh, my dad is a Mac user too and he talks about it like he talks about that damn coffee machine. *puts GNU/Linux on it when he's not looking - I wish*

I've managed to get people to switch to some free open source alternative programs such as Open Office (though I dislike it, don't use it, don't have it, Vi is my bitch), but it's difficult for me to switch somebody to GNU/Linux. I've managed to get two friends to switch without any excuse. They did it cause people like to copy cool people (me) - kidding... they were just interested cause I was always doing amazing things with computers and I am not even a computer expert (I'm training to be an EMT... not a rocket scientist or anything like that). Some people have given me lame excuse like "Ah, don't have enough time for it", and it's up to them, it's a choice, it's not my missing to convert people even though it's nice to be like "Hey, you should see for yourself, it's so much nicer than Windows), but I don't prod further than that. The thing I hate is that people don't realize that the computer is one of the most important tools used today, and it's really a pointless tool if you don't spend the time to learn to operate it, and why use a tool in an inefficient manner (like using a screwdriver like a hammer - this is an analogy to Windows being on the computer - don't judge my bad analogies!) compared to using it efficiently (actually screwing in screws with the screwdriver... - GNU/Linux on the computer). I will admit that I am an open source enthusiast too, and while I don't think a lot of open source projects are up to par with proprietary ones, I discourage the use of all proprietary software or software that helps using proprietary software (like Wine or ReactOS - most pointless projects in my opinion - open source projects trying to spread the word of open source just to keep proprietary stuff alive and healthy). Seriously? Why have a completely free core operating system (really stuff that most people don't know much about too... like most people start to trip when they hear the word shell and that's not low level) and then have the software that is mainly used be proprietary... pointless! Well, I deviated from what I wanted to say... the reason I prefer users to use open source software rather than proprietary stuff (even though it's a choice, having a choice is good) is to give the suppor that open source software need to get up to par with proprietary software and definitely open source will progress further than proprietary. It's better not to keep people in the dark, try to keep people dumb, etc... Proprietary software is a pandemic to me (contra-progress, keep people dumb, in the dark, makes up poor, unnecessary), haha.

I'll say again that my number one excuse is "I don't have enough time". I usually do one last prod explaining what I just explained about how the computer is the most important tool today and it's pointless not to know how to operate it or use it in an inefficient manner. Time used to learn how to operate a computer, how it works, and so on is time used wisely.

Last edited by Aprz (2009-09-23 08:11:22)

Arch Linux

#101 2008-07-03 00:35:20

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#102 2008-07-03 12:39:38

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#103 2008-07-03 12:54:01

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#104 2008-07-04 01:54:19

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#105 2008-07-25 12:29:08

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#106 2008-07-25 12:42:56

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#107 2008-07-26 11:34:51

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#108 2008-07-26 12:26:37

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#109 2008-07-26 12:29:44

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#110 2008-07-26 13:31:00

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#111 2008-07-29 14:28:18

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#112 2009-09-22 11:41:49

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#113 2009-09-22 11:53:47

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#114 2009-09-22 12:21:55

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#115 2009-09-22 12:24:52

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#116 2009-09-22 13:43:51

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#117 2009-09-22 13:56:46

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#118 2009-09-22 15:18:30

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#119 2009-09-22 15:49:34

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#120 2009-09-22 16:34:34

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#121 2009-09-22 17:18:14

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#122 2009-09-23 00:35:32

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#123 2009-09-23 00:59:33

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#124 2009-09-23 01:03:30

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

#125 2009-09-23 07:58:07

Re: Lame excuses you've heard not to switch to Linux

Board footer