You can say those people who have not used Linux are talking to Linux, but I have used Red Hat Linux, and I feel that it is a big gap whether gnome is still KDE, and Windows. Fundamentally, Linux's essence is Daemon for the server. LINUX is still an alternative to the desktop system of a normal user (also the largest customer community). So far, Linux desktop system, still and Windows 95 in a grade (although gnome may be more beautiful). It is still a system based on Command Line. If anyone else is installed, it is not a command such as rpm -ivh or tar -zxvf ./configuare ./install, then it must not really use Linux. Linux is not almost automatically booted at DOS startup. Everyone doesn't have to worry, Linux is now in the desktop system and the Windows is still too early. Windows has started working on the graphical user interface since 1985 and borrows some Apple designs, so they are not available in humanity, ease of use. The Linux 1.0 kernel is less than ten years, and KDE / GNOME does not have many history. What's more, many masters favorite editors are VI / EMACE, scanner NMAP, compilation tool GCC, debug tool GDB ... Which one is not running under console? The graphical interface is still a "optional" component on the Linux system. Moreover, because Linux inner rivers, KDE and GNOME are completely independent of three projects, let them need to work together, and this "running" will slow down their development. Although there is RED HAT / MANDRAKE and other companies working hard to develop humanized interfaces, which company's research and development strength can be compared with M $? And if you don't rely on these "release version" Linux work, how many people will try Linux? Do not imagine a small civil servant, in order to facilitate the completion of text processing, listen to music, play games, etc., and go to CVS every day Update the kernel, desktop system, download patch ... seems to be a bit of crazy meaning. Can't say forever, but in a short period of time, Linux is still a technique of technology. For ordinary users with the largest number of people, the largest profit, the most influential range, Windows is still the choice. PS. It seems that some BSD systems can also use KDE. Also unix, how KDE and Apple Aqua are so far? Where is the problem?
Add. Just mentioned that Linux's essence lies in Daemon / Console. Therefore, Linux's largest market is the server market and embedded market. This also corresponds to the earnings department of M $ mentioned in the article. The profit department of M $ is a Windows client and Office series. These two aspects are the weakest links in Linux. The product that can be competed with Office is Starsuite, and this is a cross-platform, it belongs to Sun Java, not Linux. We can see: M share of all losses, there are a lot of worklines, even leading competitors. In the profit department, the least profit is the Windows Server department. The Server / Embeded OS is the land of Linux. No one is ten all things, no one is no one. One day to the evening, I discussed this M $ or Linux, which is completely a waste of life. Just 20 minutes, the real Linuxer may update n rpm, Bill Gates may earn $ NM. I only have our own life. (2002.11.19)
Linux VS Windows: The answer is not to be determined in the discussion, but the competition between real technicians. The future of Linux is not the case of several ordinary users who will "contempt" to use M $ products, you are not qualified. If you love Server, Embeded, GPL, Free, then you join Linux; if you love efficient work, comfortable life, convenient use and relaxing, then Windows is still a good choice.
My speech is here. Regardless of the egg flowers, please send it to: g11@etang.com.
