Windows vs. Linux: Understanding the Difficulty Divide
Over the years, I’ve developed a generalized theory about the relative cost of getting things done in Windows versus that of Linux, and as something of a corollary, the reason a lot of people say Linux is too hard, or “not ready for the desktop.”
The essence of this theory can be illustrated by this graph:
Of course, this graph has no actual numbers to back it up. It is just a visualization to help explain a concept that I’ve seen illustrated many times over. The X-axis represents the complexity of the task at hand. It could be setting up networking, viewing an image, making a movie, building and running a website, automating some complex database migration; really any task that might be done with a computer, large or small. The Y-axis then represents the relative cost of completing that task. I mean “cost” here very generally. The cost could be your own personal time, the cost of a license for a piece of software, the cost of training, or the cost of hiring a developer to write a program to do what you need.
Naturally, the cost of completing a task goes up for both Windows and Linux as the complexity increases. Notice though the different rates of change. The Linux curve is nearly linear, and even begins to flatten as the complexity goes up. This implies that as the complexity of the task rises, the corresponding increase in cost is proportionally similar and that as one learns some of those skills are readily applied to the more complex tasks. The cost is commensurate with the complexity and knowledge builds on itself, making the harder tasks more accessible. I like to call it “the fair cost of enabling technology.”
For Windows, the curve starts out very flat. Moderately complex tasks don’t cost much more to complete than trivially complex tasks. This brings us to the Difficulty Divide. That’s the space bounded by the curves where Windows wins. It is easier to complete tasks of that difficulty class in Windows than it is in Linux. It is my belief that most of the people who give up on Linux are the ones who aren’t able to get past the Difficulty Divide. They may not have the time or the interest to get to the next level. The reason doesn’t really matter, the fact is, they don’t make it.
Notice too though that the curve for Windows approaches vertical very quickly. As one’s needs and knowledge increases, the cost to get to the next level with Windows goes up more and more quickly. Soon you find yourself searching far and wide for software because tools to complete your task are not readily available. Often times those tools don’t exist or are are very costly. Even if you have the know-how to create a solution, the tools necessary to do that are often also quite costly. The relative opacity and monolithic nature of Windows comes into play here too. Comparatively sparse logging, cryptic errors, and complex hidden interactions can lead even a seasoned system administrator like myself to wasting time guessing at the root cause of a problem. Often times even once the root problem is found, there is a high likelihood that no single tool will do what you need and making the various pieces work together is in and of itself yet another challenge. These factors all add to the cost of completing the task at hand.
It is at this level of complexity that Linux wins. Thanks to the free availability of powerful tools and the open sharing of information amongst the Linux using community, the cost of completing tasks rises much more slowly. It is surprising how quickly one’s needs and skills can rise to the level where problems are easier to solve in Linux. For what I call “The Typical Technologist”, it can take only a few months to get there with no previous knowledge of Linux. I’ve seen it happen. For people who aren’t so into tech, it may take longer, but odds are they will get there. For the truly “hardcore” it may be a matter of days or weeks.
Recently though I’ve had to modify my theory on the difficulty divide, and I’ll give you my take on the current state of affairs next week. In the meantime though, what do you think? Is the difficulty divide real? Does my explanation here accurately characterize it?
WorksWithU on Identi.ca
WorksWithU on Twitter
WorksWithU Newsletter
WorksWithU's RSS Feed
Well, I basically agree with your opinion. However I think there are some things missed by your “vision”:
- the reason for the difficulty divide is not presented. This divide appears because of the Windows presence out there. People learn Windows at first. This induces an association like Computer = Windows in their mind. So, changing their way of thinking induces the divide.
- if you put someone who never ever used a computer or heard about Linux or Windows it will be equally easy/hard for him/her to learn to work with it. Maybe, there would be a very thin difficulty divide.
- all you wrote there is/was true until Vista. If we compare Vista with previous Windows versions, you’ll get a graphic like the one above - the Linux line being replaced with Vista, the other one with previous Windows versions - this, of course applies only to compare the difficulty level for simple things, because the price for complex tasks will even increase more, resulting a line like the representation of “tangent” function.
- If you compare Vista with Linux - what I think you will do next week - there will be an … hmm … strange / interesting chart
Good article, I’ll quote it on my blog.
Nice article. Looking forward t the next installment. I have mentioned this in the PCLinuxOS forums, hope you dont mind.
Regards
Dave Le Huray
Guernsey
Very interesting theory and one I suspect is true. It would be interesting to see some real numbers inserted into your graph to see how they stack up. I agree with Csabi about computer=windows or windows=computer. Many people don’t even realize what OS they are using or even what an OS is many times.
My first experience with Linux on the desktop was a very frustrating one at first. I was looking it at with Windows eyes, but when I finally decided to just “forget” what I knew and start from scratch. It was amazing to me just how intuitive and easy Linux on the desktop was, especially when I went to Ubuntu.
I am looking to start putting your theory into use. I am currently looking into open source options for the accounting world. From what I have seen so far it may be hard to talk people out of Windows at first, but with the flexibility that some of the solutions I have seen offer (and the cost.)It may be hard for people to pass up.
[...] of old machines in an effort to “get in touch with my Inner Geek.” Well, I read an interesting post today on an Ubuntu Linux blog I subscribe to called Works with U that gave a thought-provoking [...]
Great article! After thinking about my conversion to Linux from XP, I recognize the descriptive value of the graph. However, it captures my conversion experience at only ONE point in time… when I first installed Ubuntu 6.04. Now that I have some experience, I feel my graph line shifted some, and I find it easier to work, troubleshoot, etc., in Linux than XP. That is, today I am almost as comfortable in Ubuntu than I was in XP, i.e. my normal Linux “complexities” are fewer and less weighty, than when I began, and so my graph line have shifted for the better. The “difficulty divide” area for me has flattened and shrunk considerably, and will continue to do so, until the next Ubuntu upgrade is released. This also explains why more accurate quantifying would be most difficult.. the parameter conditions constantly vary and are subjective in nature.
So, yes, the “difficulty divide” does exist as a constantly changing (hopefully lessening) value for each individual. I impatiently wait for the day the Linux/Windows lines reverse and NEVER intersect on your graph!
Looking forward to your Part II next week!
There’s an old saying: Unix makes the easy things hard and the hard things possible.
As a former IT professional in a IBM/Windows shop, I have found that Linux is both easier, and more reasonable to work with. I have dabbled in Vista (eccchhhh!), and am increasingly finding XP very difficult to support. Currently I am a very happy Kubuntu user. Windows has too much malware, adware, and garbage to be practicable for business. I am glad to be retired…
[...] The essence of this theory can be illustrated by a graph that I call The Difficulty Divide. You can see the graph and my theory on Works With U, a site covering Ubuntu Linux. Over the years, Ive developed a generalized theory about the [...]
[...] The essence of this theory can be illustrated by a graph that I call The Difficulty Divide. You can see the graph and my theory on Works With U, a site covering Ubuntu [...]
Or to put it another way, when I explain why Linux is perceived as being more difficult that Windows, I say, “Stealth bombers are more difficult to operate than tricycles _because_ _they_ _can_ _fly_.”
…but then, I’m not as popular for putting it so bluntly…
*returns to the shadows*
I’ve used windows from the eighties and gladly gave it up when they made me authenticate everything I wanted to do. I tried several distro’s of Linux and happily settled on Ubuntu three or so years ago. Easy to setup and use would be an understatement. Fortunately having come from the DOS and BASIC world I also enjoy tinkering while in the terminal program. It does all I would hope for and for FREE!!! Openoffice is marvelous. MPLAYER plays all my stuff. Listen to Songbird in the background while working.
I do miss flight simulator but it’s not the end of the world.
What virus checker?
Happy camper……..
A colleague today likened basic desktop tasks to automobiles. When someone questions him as to WHY they should know certain computer tasks, he tells them they have to know when (how) to change oil in their cars, don’t they?
I use linux almost exclusively. I find it very interesting from a corporate desktop standpoint. We have deployed a number of linux desktops as loaners when a Windows box goes south (way too frequently). The overwhelming response is `what’s the big deal?’ and they go on their way. We just show them Evolution and Firefox and that’s it until their Windows box gets repaired.
If you knew the population of which I speak, you’d be astounded. For these folks to say it’s no big deal is a great tribute to Ubuntu. Let’s just say they’re not the brightest people ever to sit at a computer.
-lefty
ThermionicEmissions
Hi Ray. Try flightgear! As to the adoption of Linux, the computers that can be purchased with Linux pre-installed, the better. Linux installs are childs play compared to installing Windows and finding and installing drivers for your hardware, then installing all of your software.
TTYL
There’s something to it, but it misses another factor I think.
One implication of your model would be that for people who never use their computer for especially complex tasks (which is lots of people), Windows will begin and remain cheaper (in effort etc.) than Linux. But I don’t think that’s so. Even if one’s computer needs are fairly straightforward, I think one finds that Linux becomes cheaper over time relative to Windows–and that’s becoming truer all the time.
I tend to find that when first setting up a Linux box, there will be a few hiccups which one can avoid with Windows by buying preinstalled (not fair, but there you go). If coming from Windows it may take a little while to figure out which applications are good for what I want. There may be subtle differences in behaviour. There may be occasional reasons to want to have some idea how the filesystem is set up.
However, over time Linux is easier to maintain. On my Mandriva box, if there are updates a little icon appears on the taskbar and a popup tells me there are updates. Click on either and it will ask for my password, show me a list of things that will be updated if I say yes, and on clicking OK off it goes. Bang, up to date, latest packages and security. No doubt it’s somewhat like that for many distros these days. Meanwhile I don’t need to worry about viruses, fragmentation, spyware, phoning home, whether it will allow me to shift to a new computer or upgrade my old one without kicking up a fuss, blah de blah de blah. Once it’s set up it basically continues to work and to do things the way I want them done.
So even for relatively simple computing needs, you can substitute time with a given system for complexity in that graph and it will still be true. I would add that time was the initial hump for Linux was very large and/or lasted some time, but it is now quite small and for some cases disappearing, and lasts only a short time.
The graph certainly has its merits, and it is an interesting viewpoint. However it is too simple a representation versus the complex reality:
1. My kids learned to use Linux and Windows equally. They don’t find one harder then the other, even while they are still young and don’t do difficult stuff yet. That shows the importance of experience. If there is no prior experience to take into account Linux is never more difficult then Windows, but it certainly is easier for more complex tasks.
2. I’ve been using Linux now for about 5 years. In those years, Linux became easier with each half yearly release. That lowers the Linux graph each time. If that continues at this rate, in a couple of years there will be no difficulty divide anymore (or it will be inverse). Maybe that time is here already, if I read the reports on the ease of use of the eeePC and such.
3. The graph depends a lot on the distribution used. For Mandriva for instance, that graph will be way lower then a lot of other distributions (including the overpopular Ubuntu). Not to start a distro war, but it is just my experience that shows that the Mandriva Control Center is a big help in that area and that is still missing in for instance Ubuntu.
4. The graph changes for a given person over time. When a person with a Windows background starts to learn linux, this graph as shown is pretty much correct I guess (need to learn to forget drive letter and to work with paths starting from root and such), but as that person start to get to know linux better, the linux graph gets lower. When the person has equal experience with linux as with Windows, I don’t think there is any difficulty divide left (or it is reverse). That is something that you should maybe clarify about your graph. Is the X-axis task complexity or user knowledgability of linux?
Nice discussion topic!
KR,
Wim
It seems to me, it’s the full gui interface that keeps people out of their terminal that builds confusion. Right from the start windows has been a full gui, so even some of the more technical users, eg: a teenager fiddling around, don’t understand any basics. Linux on the other hand, is beginning to develop a full gui, but not at the expense of the power. I think as linux becomes more friendly you will find a different kind of shift in the graph, at first, linux may follow windows in ease, file management, basic image manipulation etcetera is easy just like windows. But from there I think there may be a sharp, nearly vertical jump, when you have to learn some commands, some inner workings. Taking that first step is hard, I think all of my convert friends would agree. The biggest reason I am now confident I can do nearly anything in linux is I know how and where to find help/answers.
@ ray :
‘I do miss flight simulator but it’s not the end of the world’.
no problem.haveyour cake&eat it too!
X-Plane is the most thorough, flexible, and realistic flight simulator available for personal computers, and is available for Mac, Windows, and Linux …
http://www.x-plane.com/
Great article. This is exactly how I visualize PHP vs. Java.
Generally very good. However, this graph seems designed for generic types of applications: viz., word processing, designing webb applications, setting up databses, etc.
When you consider some of the less-common uses of computers, your graph blows up. Consider, for instance, softsynths. Windows currently has thousands more softsynths than linux. Let’s say you want to simulate a full orchestra using Fourier additive synthesis in a real-time softsynth. On Windows, you’d lash together (say) a dozen fast multicore machines running Synful Orchestra (a softsynth that uses real-time Fourier synthesis to create spookily realistic rendeitions of a large orchestra, including the all-important transitions between notes) under Windows XP. In fact, Hollywood composers typically do this. They run clusters of Win XP machines cranking along with Windows softsynths.
But on linux, you would… Well, you’d… Um, you’d… Do nothing. Because in linux there is no equivalent to Synful Orchestra. Nothing even close.
So in this particular case, the cost of running the equivalent linux app is infinite. There is no equivalent linux app.
Or take the example of a dentist whose practice grows large enough that he wants to automate his office. In that case he’d buy Dentix, a niche Windows XP app designed specifically for automating an entire dentist’s office, with integrated billing & patient databse, etc. etc.
On linux, you’d… Well, okay, you’d do nothing. Because once again there is no equivalent of Dentix in linux. So once again the cost of running an equivalent app in linux is infinite because there is no such thing.
As long as stick to common applications like photo retouching, your graph is valid. It’s when you get into real-world niche applications (of which the world is full, alas) that it falls apart.
I suppose it depends. I’m not about to argue on the music thing, and no doubt there are going to be niche software situations that are like that (although there may also be some that go the other way; there’s been a lot of Unix software over the years and Linux is often just a recompile away so a big proportion of it has been ported).
But other cases are less clear. How much does Dentix cost? How closely is it gonna match his personal workflow? How much ongoing inconvenience will any mismatch in this one-size-fits-all solution cause? How locked in will the data be–>how high and dry will he be if the company dies? How expensive would it be, contrariwise, to pay someone to lash together a MySQL database or two, some Free accounting and POS software and whatnot in a way that actually does match what his specific office does, that leaves his data sitting in standard SQL formats, and that is capable of being changed if his situation changes?
People dont realize that linux costs time. Yes, time. A lot of simple tasks can be done in Windows much faster. I remember have to go through all docs, pages, sites, forums just to figure out how to put Shortcut/Launcher on a Gnome desktop for All Users. In windows you just right click on start menu and ‘explore all users’, from there navigate to All Users’s Desktop. You can do it in less than a minute in Windows. On linux, phewww. Please put ‘time’ as a cost next time.
And yes, windows has ‘Unbreakable X’ long long long time ago.
I feel I agree with the visualization, but I guess the discussion is oversimplified.
First, there are at least 2 kinds of cost: the cost of research (mainly RTFM and Google) and the cost of actions (mainly clicks, strokes, and waiting). The graph must be for the first kind of cost only, since I do not see any difficulty divide for Linux for the second one.
Second, the graph depends on the original knowledge. As shown, it should be for 0 knowledge, since both curves have positive slope near zero complexity. As Jnemeth notes, with some knowledge the graph looks differently and the difficulty divide may disappear completely and pretty soon.
What I find amazing is how hard it is to get that knowledge. Some distros have better docs than the others, but none have a book that can be read from the beginning to end and make all easy tasks easy.
I guess Linux will never spread wide until it is created.
Labels should probably lose the “increasing” prefix
To Ronald:
“People dont realize that linux costs time.”
Let’s see:
Installing Linux on a new machine: pop-in a DVD, 20 minutes of installation, 2 hours configuration to personalize to my like. Overall it takes less then 3 hours.
Installing Windows on a new machine: Install Windows, restart 5 times for each time another set of updates to be installed, go searching for MS Office CD, Install MS Office, go browsing for Flash, install Flash, go browsing for Acrobat Reader, install Acrobat Reader, etc., etc. Before you are all set and done: 3 days of time lost. Most of that time in searching for CD’s or downloading applications and installing them all one by one, most of the time needing to f***ing restart the PC!
And you say that Linux is time consuming because you don’t know how to create a shortcut for all users in one go? Come on…
“Ronal Says:
May 28th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
People dont realize that linux costs time. Yes, time. A lot of simple tasks can be done in Windows much faster. I remember have to go through all docs, pages, sites, forums just to figure out how to put Shortcut/Launcher on a Gnome desktop for All Users.”
I would agree with that.. 6 years ago!! Linux development is an exponential thing over time, so 6 years is like… ages ago! I just cannot imagine that even the worlds most Computer Illiterate person would have any trouble at all with today’s Ubuntu, Mandriva, or OpenSUSE Desktop setup. Installing Linux is nowadays a much, much simpler and quicker evolution than XP, and Vista. The desktop experience in those Distro’s is also much easier and far more user friendly than that of XP and Vista these days as well. It certainly is an easy thing to say otherwise however, for those who have not used Linux at all or within the present time, and thus have no knowledge or experience whatever of that which they criticize.
No the difficulty divide doesn’t exist. First timers who have never used a computer before have just as hard a time learning Windows as first timers learning Linux. The difficulty Windows user have with Linux is that it’s different.
Any Windows XP user should be able to pick up the basics of using Gnome or KDE within 5 minutes of use. The difficulty arises when they want a Windows specific application rather than an application suitable to the task. Because they’re on Linux they can’t have it. So in their mind the task can’t be completed.
That’s a very different scenario to “the task can’t be completed as easily because the tools don’t exist or aren’t as well developed”.
aikiwolfie, I agree with you on that but that in itself is part of the problem the vast majority of people are pretty much taught that Windows is it. That being the case it takes some adjustment to get used to not going to a website to download most software but instead using a package manager. I know from experience that is a hurdle but man if we can get them enlightened on how Linux is actually simpler for most basic task they will never go back!
Wim Says :
And you say that Linux is time consuming because you don’t know how to create a shortcut for all users in one go? Come on…
In Linux, Without reading docs, googling and asking around on forums, how would you know ? I was using Ubuntu 6.04, btw. In windows you can do it out of intuition. The most time consuming is not doing the task itself, but figuring out how to do it.
Okay here we go, some of my rant, a perspective from a common people who’ve been struggling to make a switch :
1. Dependency hell. Package manager will solve this most of the time. But i’m working on a remote place with no internet connection. So when i download them manually from another place i have to make sure to get all the dependencies.
2. For some printer, the driver for CUPS is simply non existent or the one you find may not work correctly, Or not at FULL capability, e.g. maximum dpi or borderless printing.
3. Games. Yes, there’s wine. But may not always work.
4. Hardware drivers/modules. Later, kernel updates will solve this. But until that happens, you have to compile the module source yourself. This may not go smoothly because the kernel (and it’s header) is constanly changing. Some structs in the header may be changed or even deprecated and you have to change your module source by hand to get them to compile.
I for one like to see the end of windows, they’re restrictive licensings are ridiculous. But i still want to play my games, print my works flawlessly. Linux has great potentials.
Linux does have great potential. Windows games actually run faster in Linux with Cedega. All the problems you listed there Ronal have also been felt by Windows Vista users. many of whom rolled back to Windows XP.
@ronal these things are taking care of themselves. As companies like Dell, HP, and Acer sell units with Linux preinstalled. They will demand drivers for Linux. As the hardware vendors come on board things get better and become more seamless.
I remember when almost all drivers were community supported projects. We prayed for the day someone like Dell would come on board. Well 2 years ago, Dell started to slowly sell linux in the consumer market. Now, more and more models. More demand by OEMs for linux drivers.
There are tools that will packaged up all the debs on a system and create a repo on CD. For instance. I keep a copy of Feisty in a VM. When my friend wants some new program. I update my vm, install the software they want and crank out a new CD with all the dependancies on it.
I’ve been switching back and forth between Windows and Ubuntu for the past year or so. Yes, coming from the Windows world there was a learning curve for me in adjusting to Linux, but once I got the hang of it I feel much more at home on Linux.
But I’m also one of those guys who prefers to drive a car with a manual vs. automatic transmission. So for my own computing needs, Linux and the huge wealth of open source applications is terrific.
The reason I go back to Windows every so often is that the office applications on Linux (Open Office, Symphony, etc.) just don’t compare to MSFT Office. In particular, I’m a heavy user of powerpoint for my work, and the subtle incompatibilities between OO Impress vs. MSFT powerpoint are frustrating. Plus the UI is bad as well. The ideal situation would be MSFT Office running on Linux, but that won’t happen anytime soon.
If I could find a really good presentation application that was 100% compatible with powerpoint, then that would do it for me, and I think a lot of other “knowledge” workers as well. Other minor issues are calendar sharing (our email server is hosted exchange), and Evolution is still buggy. I really like Claws (more than Thunderbird), but the shared calendaring is still problematic for me (i.e. for scheduling meetings with others using Outlook/Exchange). However I have work-arounds, so can live with it. It’s really the ppt compatibility that it comes down to.
Any suggestions are appreciated. I have not tried the latest version of CrossOver (refined Wine), so plan to give that a shot this weekend.
Steve
Steve, I know exactly where you come from. I was having a conversation with someone last night actually how if it wasn’t just for a thing or or there that I would never use Windows at all.
As far as Office goes that’s one reason that I am really less dependent on Windows now I have Office 2003 working with WINE. I don’t think 2007 works well yet, but after the upgrade to Hardy everything I have checked out worked well except access. So if you haven’t tried MS Office with Wine in the last few months you might want to give it a try before you purchase CrossOver.
I found an started using Ubuntu two months ago and an now an ace using it. I am a high school theatre teacher with no tech training to speak of. Linux is easy to use and eliminated hours of solving windows problems and slow performance…for free. It is the wave of the future. I have already converted two hardcore windows business users over! Thank to the the Linux community, especially Canonical!
It’s really great to hear more & more stories from users with no previous Linux experience. Linux truly does fit the future and I’m very excited to think it could be even better! As soon as Ubuntu really meets the market well- on a cute low cost portable (like the Asus Eee) look out there too. BTW-I also believe Open Office is better than MS office in document structuring, (no drawing needed)math functions, and performance. Open Office blows MS office out the water with long documents-its much faster! Also it’s emphasis is on document structure ( F11-Styles and formatting) takes you from long (duh?) format pecking around (like in Word) to really understanding how to quickly & efficiently edit your document. My student recently did his 50+ page senior paper on Open Office and stated it was alot easier than using Word.
Lance: It is great to see consumers benefiting from open choices. But a large number of consumers still don’t even know that Linux and OpenOffice exist. Check out this conversation I just had with my brother in law, who’s in the market for an entry-level laptop.
I’ve observed this “divide” in the wild many times, but it’s difficult to prove with numbers.
The practical objection to this is that most real users will not, do not want to, or sometimes can not progress along the complexity scale and realize any benefit from the flattened difficulty curve.
The answer when catering to such bare-minimal or bare-minimal-plus users so far has been the GNOME way: Dead simple and featureless. It has also been the Ubuntu and SuSE way: Set it up to work at the start, don’t let things change much and pray nothing breaks.
The correct approach is designing a system that is fundamentally robust and predictable, not one that papers over difficulty with automated gloss. If it’s difficult to do on Linux and easy on Windows then this is a bug! Don’t make a ’simpler’ tool that allows some percentage of people do it without knowing how difficult it is, make it less difficult.
I am a Free software advocate, a die hard Zealot, but honestly Linux as a platform leaves a lot to be desired. It is not well designed, it has a number of components (which are mostly not designed) glued together in a way which is not designed. That things work as well as they do is nothing short of a miracle. If large components were not firmly in place (libc, X, POSIX) then even less would get done.
Each of us focuses on his own little piece of the puzzle and can’t see how to integrate it all together. Those who focus on the whole pie only know how to write glue for the pieces. And nobody wants to listen when someone who has a vision for the platform tries to tell them what to do to get it all together.
Probably Haiku will do better as a Free desktop. If not then I’m waiting on HURD, which is as bad as Linux in some ways, worse in other ways, but at least has better fundamentals. Or maybe I’ll wait on the next big OS… I hear AtheOS is going places.
How about Mac OS X? I’d argue that it gives the best of both worlds: simple tasks are as simple if not simpler than with Windows, and harder tasks can be handled in the same way as with Linux, thanks to the Unix core of Mac OS X.
Nice article.
I love the idea of Linux and have disliked Windows from the day I started using it. My problem is, as an “ordinary user” I’m forced to use windows because I’ve never been able to successfully install a Linux product. Yes, it may run but there has always been a driver issue and a sound card or wireless card problem. I tried for the first time in about 1998, a number of times between and today with Ubuntu 9.04. I’m trying to avoid Windows 7 but when I look for a simple fix to my problem I get convoluted, conflicting instructions and pages of code. How can you expect to become “main stream” if this elegant OS is so damned difficult to install? I guess I’ll be migrating to W7 reluctantly and have to try Linux in 6 months to a year again. I’m looking for an OS, not a hobby.
@David:
Speaking as an expert in both Windows and Linux, in my experience it’s usually easier to get Linux installed than Windows, once you know how to do it effectively. Getting it done in Linux is a very different process than Windows though, and if you don’t know the process it will seem unsurtmountable.
This is doubly true if your hardware is not well supported or you are used to “installing” Windows via an OEM recovery disk, where all the hard work is already done for you.
That is one of the troubles with getting going with Linux. The first task you are often asked to do is pretty high up there on the difficulty scale. If you have a Linux-savvy friend who is willing to help, that’s a good way to get over this particular hump. If not, getting a machine pre-loaded from System76, ZaReason, or Dell can be a good option. Also see if you have a Linux user’s group in your town, more often than not someone in that group will be willing to lend a hand to an interested “switcher”.
Before you make the leap though make sure Linux will meet your needs well. There’s no better way to guarantee dissatisfaction with the change if you end up not being able to do things you want to do.