OStatic

by Doctor Nick on Jun. 09, 2010

Apple is the standard secondary OS because of:

1. Marketing and a company with a market cap bigger than Microsoft's

2. Consumer-friendly design

by ravensong on Jun. 09, 2010

There are several versions of Linux that are very user friendly. Ubuntu is a great starting point, even better is Linux Mint, and Easy Peasy offers an excellent netbook OS with ALL 3rd party codecs pre-installed for ease of use.

Consumer friendly?; all the software on these os's are free, Free, FREE!

by ravensong on Jun. 09, 2010

There are several versions of Linux that are very user friendly. Ubuntu is a great starting point, even better is Linux Mint, and Easy Peasy offers an excellent netbook OS with ALL 3rd party codecs pre-installed for ease of use.

Consumer friendly?; all the software on these os's are free, Free, FREE!

by an anonymous user on Jun. 09, 2010

As long as Linux remains so difficult to use, it will never be accepted by mainstream America. I tried Linux on an old computer and couldn't get online no matter what I did. My wireless adapter wasn't compat with Linux. I looked for the answer online and found stuff that only a major geek would understand. I joined message boards and asked question only to get answers that were much like the geek-speak I read earlier. When asking for it to be broken down into something an average computer-literate person could understand, I was written off and got no further help. Linux got filed away.

That computer was old and due to be replaced anyway, so when I did so, I got a better computer, a couple steps up from the previous one, one that I figured would be compat, but it doesn't work with Linux, either. Linux can't see the wireless adapter on this one, either. As long as this kind of thing goes on, Linux will always be geek-ware.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 09, 2010

for the guy with the wireless adapters:

in ubuntu such stubborn wireless adapters could be simply solved by connecting the computer to the internet using ethernet and doing an update (it should then pop up asking you to install the propietary wireless drivers)...if it doesn't then manually do it through System>Administration>Hardware Drivers... so yea, im pretty sure that's how it works (at least for every laptop computer i ever bought).

by an anonymous user on Jun. 10, 2010

There are 3 things that keep me from permanently switching to Linux or a BSD system or running them as a secondary on my machines. The main issue is hardware compatibility. I just bought a multifunction printer and tried to find one that looked like it had Linux support. When I got it home, I found it didn't really. I have a lot of specialty hardware and I tried to buy Linux compatible parts when I purchased them, but a lot of it doesn't work the way it should (support is not as good as in Windows, features may be missing) or simply doesn't work. The second issue is updating the system. I don't have a good fast reliable Internet connection. I use a lot of sneakernet. I want to be able to download an entire upgrade and upgrade one or more computers off-line. Most of the package managers and system update tools appear to assume you have unlimited connection to the Internet. What do you do if you don't? How do you keep your system up-to-date? If someone knows a good package management/os update system that works well with sneakernet, I would love to hear about it. Third reason is binary compatiblity. On Windows, I have programs from when DOS was popular that I still use and that still work. I have programs written for Win 3.1 working along side Win32 programs. They all seem to run fine. When I asked around on various Linux distribution forums, they told me I should be rebuilding my system every couple of years or so. I want to keep using programs that I've built on older versions of the operating system. I don't want to have to throw them away and attempt to rebuild from source or download a bunch of programs all over again every time there's a major system update. Would be interested to hear some serious solutions to some of these issues.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 10, 2010

Slackware Linux is a good choice for a 'sneakernet' user w.r.t pulling down updates. Combined with slackbuilds.org (for 3rd party apps - use rsync to pull down all their buildscripts) you'll be set.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 10, 2010

Funny you should mention slackbuilds and Slackware, because I've been looking at several package management systems (including the FreeBSD ports system) and the slackbuilds along with spkg (which I have working on Linux, FreeBSD and Windows (cygwin and mingw)) are the only tools I've been comfortable with so far. While they work great on Slackware Linux, they're not so easy to integrate on Windows or FreeBSD because those systems want you to use the Windows registry or the FreeBSD ports system and package manager to install and remove applications. Having some of your applications installed with one package manager and some with another doesn't work well for tracking what's on your system. Of all the different package management systems I've read about or tried so far, I definitely like the Slackware system the best, especially for use with sneakernet and would recommend the spkg program for tracking and removing applications.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 11, 2010

I have installed hundreds of linux systems and within the last few years I have had less problems with drivers. Windows comes prepackaged with a cd that has all the Windows Drivers on it. The genleman is correct that you may need to use a wired lan and update some drivers before you go wireless. However I have had many Windows systems that I have to download the drivers and use usb just to get the wired drivers working. Linux Mint is probably easy enough for a 10 year old to install without any help. I gave a cd to my son about two years ago, he had got a virus with Windows and had never seen Linux. Just gave him the cd and told him I would help him later. About an hour later he told me he had it done and all I had to do was show him how to recover his Windows Files. Linux is EASY EASY EASY easier than Windows. I have installed over a thousand windows systems including 2003 servers, 2008 servers, storage servers, and well yes er NT I am old. Todays Linux's are by far the easiest and fastest Operating Systems to install. That does not mean you might not have issues that need to be resolved but you can almost always find an answer somewhere. ( and needing help with basic setup if rare) And Linux Servers --- Well with Ubuntu its almost as easy as checking LAMP when you install the OS. Windows = 2 hours of install = 1/2 day of updates. Linux =

by Martin Spasovski on Jun. 12, 2010

I have a MacBook and I have only Linux installed on it. Yep, I don't need other OS's so why bother having them.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 14, 2010

I think the issue with finding drivers for hardware really depends on what hardware you're using. I can think of very few pieces of hardware that don't come with Windows drivers of some kind. However, I have lots of hardware that I simply can't get working on Linux or FreeBSD. Of course, some versions of Linux have better support for setting up hardware than others. If you have a computer where all your hardware is supported out of the box by software like Linux Mint or Ubuntu, then it's no problem to install. However, not every version of Linux or every BSD system out there has good support for installing hardware. I spent over a day just trying to get my monitoring working with the latest version of X Windows. An average user isn't going to want to do that. There's also a lot of hardware you still can't find drivers for no matter what. If the manufacturer doesn't release a Linux version of the drivers and not enough people use the hardware to warrant an Open Source project to create drivers, there just isn't support. You may be able to find a piece of hardware in any particular category that will do the job that does have Linux support. However, how many people are going to give away their current peripherals and other equipment (especially if they've invested a lot in them) just to buy something that specifically works with a particular operating system?

by an anonymous user on Jun. 15, 2010

I'm not sure what kind of hardware you're working with, but it must be pretty obscure. I have an occasional driver issue on both Linux and Windows, but I find Linux to have more support for hardware out of the box. That is unless it's some brand new, barely has Windows support, piece of hardware. Yet that's more of a vendor issue than a Linux one. When I build a Windows system I often have to go online to find the drivers. Not as much in 7 as XP. Just be happy they all have the support they do now. Life wasn't always so easy on either OS.

But on to the point of the article.... Linux doesn't need to be number 1, 2, or 3 on the desktop. That's not what it's ever been about. Linux is an OS made by/for the people with a belief in the sharing of software. Anyone have a legally free copy of Windows you can share with me because you like me? You are given the opportunity to make contributions/changes to Linux and make it yours. Not like these "Windows 7 was my idea, but I didn't get any royalties for the idea and they won't give it to you even though I want them too.... So I guess I've basically been exploited." commercials.

One more thing... Security isn't about market share. There are millions and millions of Linux machines, that's enough market share to warrant attention. Linux could have just as many Viruses and other security issues as Windows if all you had to do was open an email or click "OK" you're going to install malicious code button. But by default Linux requires escalated privileges to make changes to or in this case infect the system. You could have the same thing in Windows but you have to configure the system. Of course there is the little alert these days in Windows, but most people just turn it off making their system even more insecure.

Alright, I'm officially off the soap box.

by Kyle on Jun. 15, 2010

Why isn't Linux the dominant second OS?

1- Marketing. Where I live, I have yet to hear an advert promoting Linux, be it TV, radio or even in print. Plenty for MS and Mac though.

2- FUD. There are hundreds of websites where MS has been caught out spreading FUD about Linux. This extends to MS vendors. (see "h t t p : / / w w w . k m f m s . c o m" for reference - remove spaces from URL).

3- Change. People hate change or are resistant to it.

4- Suspicion. Stems from FUD. If it's free, there must be a reason. Or, if it's free, it must be illegal, as in the case where a teacher held a student in detention for showing off Linux at school and handing out disks. Fortunately, this was resolved, but only after acute embarrassment all round.

And the market share for Linux is quite impressive despite the above.

The only thing I miss in Windows is the defrag tool and pinball. It was so much fun watching my computer actually do something useful besides crash and die.

Sigh....

A result of having more problems with Windows than with Linux, I learned more about IT using Windows than ever I did using Linux. So in my opinion, Windows is perfect as a learning platform, but for serious work, Linux is better.

Linux is so simple, powerful, elegant, trustworthy, dependable, classy. If I didn't know any better, I'd marry Linux as the perfect mate for me. But my wife would disapprove. :-)

My distros of choice are Ubuntu and Mint. Previously, I used Fedoram, but I have a preference for the DEB reps than the RPM reps.

BTW, I have never had issues with drivers for Linux.

by Mitchel on Jun. 15, 2010

Linux will never be a standard secondary OS on my machine because it's the primary one. With a boot up time of less than 30 seconds that allows me to easily get on the internet, work with e-mail, run compatible software like open office, and has tons of open source software that does most everything I want why would I bother using Windows or Macintosh?

My secondary OS will always be Windows and until Macintosh makes their software open to non Apple hardware they will never make it to my machine which is fine since they are just a pretty face on top of the Darwin Kernel anyway.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 15, 2010

I am using Puppy Linux right now as a USB boot. I use it all the time for surfing, especially when it comes to playing FB games. FB and Flash have gotten so slow in Windows, it makes me cry waiting a long time for them to load or not lock up. With Puppy Linux, they load fast and never lock up. So much faster using a Linux based system. And the fact that you can boot off a CD, then install on a USB stick so you can safe your setttings, and never have to give up your old OS. One reason it is so fast, it loads the whole program in memory and thus is always at hand and very fast.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 15, 2010

For me, It's the primary OS specifically "Linux Mint" which finishes the OS where Ubuntu left off. My secondary OS is Windows XP, which sits virtualized with VirtualBox and dormant because I never need to use it anymore!

by an anonymous user on Jun. 15, 2010

To all the people claiming hardware support is their reason for not using linux... Don't blame Linux. Call up the manufactures of the device. Ask them what their problem is. Ask them why there is no device driver for linux on the disk.

Most devices are not supported in windows. Devices work in windows because the manufacturer makes the driver for it. Windows native driver support SUCKS.

Linux hardware support is by far better than microsofts crapware.

Like I said, Don't blame linux, blame the rotten hardware vendor that sells devices without drivers!

by an anonymous user on Jun. 15, 2010

It's about control.

If you control one part, you can favor another, which in turn makes that first part most favored.

If one master these tactics, it's easy to make one's own software to work better than even a better done application would do.

Linux derails this.

There's no negotiating with Linux, because users can get it their way -- without paying.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 15, 2010

Answer to the original question (Why Isn't Linux the Standard Secondary OS?)

You don't need a Linux VM on your Mac because almost every Linux app is already ported to OSX.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 15, 2010

2nd choice???? 3rd choice????

Actualy is my 1st choice, and i'm not in IT world, in fact i'm a mechanical engineer and use it at work 100% of the time.

Take a look at some of uses i give it... http://linuxmadeasy.blogspot.com

by apexwm on Jun. 15, 2010

It's all marketing and general awareness, that Linux doesn't have. Microsoft doesn't want people to know about Linux. However more and more are becoming aware of Linux and know what it is. And personally I migrated to Linux and will never go back to Windows.

by an anonymous user on Jun. 15, 2010

There are a lot of reasons but no one in the comments seem to grasp them. I have used Linux compared to Mac and Windows over the years. Here are a few reasons I don't use it anymore.

1. Application support is poorer than a third world country.

2. The userbase is completely hooked on the idea that everything has to be free, so there is no way to make money.

3. Deployment is very difficult in large amounts. Where I work I can grab Windows Updates onto a server and deploy them to the machines that need them, in Linux each computer needs to be hooked to the Internet to get the updates. Some computers don't ever see the Internet.

4. There are way too many distros. I had a problem with Ubuntu and someone told me to go try another distro that solved my one issue but that other distro caused me about 99 other problems. I just want an issue fixed on one OS, not have to hunt down another OS. Most Windows issues get ironed out in time.

5. features in Linux are completely missing that people use and need on a daily basis. You can't give someone a hotdog when they are hungry for steak and are used to steak and can get steak very easily.

by crb3 on Jun. 15, 2010

>The second issue is updating the system. I don't have a good fast reliable Internet connection. I use a lot of sneakernet. I want to be able to download an entire upgrade and upgrade one or more computers off-line. Most of the package managers and system update tools appear to assume you have unlimited connection to the Internet. What do you do if you don't? How do you keep your system up-to-date? If someone knows a good package management/os update system that works well with sneakernet, I would love to hear about it.

For Debian-based systems (Debian, Ubuntu, MEPIS...) there's aptcache, if your various computers are networked together -- one machine downloads all the updates from the Net, and the others download from the first machine... Or just scp the update *.deb files from /var/cache/apt/archives on the updated machine to the same subdir on the others for synaptic to find. I did that for the machines on our LAN when we were on dialup; I suppose you can hand-carry them in a USB flash drive instead of scp (copy across an ssh link).

If they aren't networked, there's aptoncd -- one machine downloads all the updates from the Net, then burns them to a CD that synaptic can use ("add CDROM"), a CD you then sneakernet around to all the others.

If you need to download an entire ISO for a full update, you can and should use wget, rather than your browser, to fetch it in (thus freeing up your browser, plus wget is more persistent about getting the whole file despite glitches), with the -c option to "continue" fetching (rather than starting all over), so you can spread that fetch over a number of nights, running it overnight when the people are asleep and ^C-stopping it when they wake up. In our dialup days, I used cron to run a small script that set up that command. Maybe it took a week to fetch in a 700M iso, but it got here.

by DataShed on Jun. 15, 2010

I don't under stand why people like the macintosh. Slackware Linux is the most user friendly OS I've ever used and xmonad makes it even better!

by an anonymous user on Jun. 15, 2010

> 1. Application support is poorer than a third world country.

Far from the truth given the fact some applications are actually cross-platform from the browser (Firefox) to office suite (Open Office)

> 2. The userbase is completely hooked on the idea that everything has to be free, so there is no way to make money.

What about enterprises who paid for support?

> 3. Deployment is very difficult in large amounts. Where I work I can grab Windows Updates onto a server and deploy them to the machines that need them, in Linux each computer needs to be hooked to the Internet to get the updates. Some computers don't ever see the Internet.

Funny the mention of Windows Updates that also require Internet so i don't see why it is so different. You seems to conveniently forget that you need to reauthenticate Windows should you replace motherboard.

4. There are way too many distros. I had a problem with Ubuntu and someone told me to go try another distro that solved my one issue but that other distro caused me about 99 other problems. I just want an issue fixed on one OS, not have to hunt down another OS. Most Windows issues get ironed out in time.

Diversity is the strength not weakness. Majority of those distros are based from the same source i.e. Fedora, Debian, OpenSuse, Mandriva, Gentoo and Slackware. Windows issues does not get ironed out because users are stuck with long time problem. The real issue is the choice of wrong OS. You keep forgetting you have to hunt through internet to solve driver issue from vendors.

> 5. features in Linux are completely missing that people use and need on a daily basis. You can't give someone a hotdog when they are hungry for steak and are used to steak and can get steak very easily.

What features? should it be about browser, media and office suite, a desktop Linux distribution come bundled. Neither Windows nor Mac OSX come bundled with some feature .

by FreeBooteR on Jun. 15, 2010

GNU/Linux is my primary operating system. Since it is the only operating system i use.

Archlinux ftw!

by veatnik on Jun. 15, 2010

This is in response to the comment about multifunction printers. Support for printers and multifunction printers in Linux is what I would rate as pretty good from the following manufacturers. (HP, Brother, Epson, and Lexmark)

HP is the front runner with HPLIP package being available in many of the distributions. I recently purchased a newer HP multifunction. The HPLIP in my Ubuntu and Debian distributions did not support the latest printers (including mine) so I had to download and install the latest version following the link at the HP website. It was easy to install following the provided instructions and I had the scanner and printer tested and working over the network connection in less than 15 minutes.

I have a brother MFC-4690CW a great multifunction that scans and prints up to 11"x17". Support was not in my distributions (I do not know if this has changed.) I downloaded the drivers from the Brother website and followed the instructions. I had printing and scanning working over the network in about 15-20 minutes. The instructions are almost as good as the HP instructions.

I considered buying an Epson multifunction and found that recently they began supplying support for Linux. I had to search a little to find the name of the driver package - sorry but I do not remember the name. The installation instructions looked clear but I have not had the opportunity to try them out. The support for the newer product line looked to be complete. Some older products and stand alone scanners are not supported. (But may be supported with 'cups' drivers already in linux (for printers) or in 'sane' (for some epson scanners) (Cups and Sane are linux projects/applications/drivers to support printing and scanning respectively.)

Lexmark has announced supporting Linux recently. I have not looked to see what is available yet. I am not overly fond of lexmark but if you have one of their printers or decide to buy one to use with Linux, this is good. Just check it out to be sure that the support is working well before making a new purchase.

All in all the printer and multifunction printer support under Linux is really very reasonable if you just take a few minutes to check for support for your target purchase before putting your money down. I do recommend that you avoid the very cheapest printers for best results. Sometime the corners that they cut to provide a really low price point turns the printer into a Windows only printer. considering that I have been buying very full feature products for $100-$200 and that they all have worked fine indicates that really cheap products to avoid are really really cheap. (Buy something with an ethernet port or wireless already built in and you will likely be avoiding the windows only versions.)

Hope this is helpful for some of you.

by veatnik on Jun. 15, 2010

Sorry I did not really stay on the topic for the article with my last post. I too use Linux as a primary OS and runs OSX as a secondary OS and Windows 2000 or XP under Suns (Oracles) VirtualBox application. I am looking at setting up OSX to run virtualized as well as the latest version of VirtualBox now supports OSX as a target.

It is a great age we are living in. No reasons are left to use only one OS.

by Daemon_ZOGG on Jun. 15, 2010

"..sidekick to the more prevalent operating systems"?!

"If you're going to jump into, say, an online banking app, why not do it in Linux.."?!

"..for it to really succeed, it has to be the sole OS on everyone's desktop."

Sam, your obviously a primary M$ and/or Apple user. I use Linux everyday as a primary OS on my network.. Debian, Fedora, and Ubuntu Linux. I can do everything a M$/Apple user can do and some things they cannot.

Linux is about the freedom to choose what YOU want on your machine, from the beginning. Not what some big tech company presents to you as your default environment.

If your going to state the obvious and say that Linux is more secure for things like online banking, then your admitting that you use an unsecure, inferior OS for everything else. Time to "trade up" to Linux, Sam. Learn it! Use it! ;)

by BK on Jun. 15, 2010

Lol - some of you complaining about hardware on GNU/Linux - If you're not using something obscure you're just lying.

by Portablenuke on Jun. 28, 2010

You don't use X11 often enough to need a Unix-like VM. Apple's X11 implementation is kind of a pain, and it behaves much better on its native platforms.

Check out Fedora or Arch. Red Hat has put a lot of time into Fedora to make it easy to use, and Arch is light, configurable, rolling release schedule (no six month reinstall cycle; everything is always up-to-date!), and vanilla packages (other distros will apply distro specific patches).

by OdderOtter on Jun. 29, 2010

In all the months that I have been using Linux, I have seen my expectations crash.

Faster boot? Depends on the boot load. Generally about the same.

No virus? I have had virus like behavior that was purged by a reinstall. Could be that I just loaded the wrong apps though. But Wine and such might be a backdoor path.

No reinstalls? More like many. Upgrades, change because Ubuntu is not wifi friendly, change because of my printer is not compatible, change because of wacky behavior, change far more often than windows.

Cannon printers are cheep, all over, and you will have to buy a $40 app to run them. There is no real hope to run an iP1500 on your machine, and there is less hope of keeping it running without extensive time between reinstalls.

Works every time? Freezes up on my ACER 1414 laptop far too often.

Open Office a good substitute for windows? Recheck your document every time to make sure that your changes are still there, that it has not altered text size and font on you in random paragraphs.

Its free? well that is why I am stuck here.

For any other promises, I now have my doubts.

I just got a mint 9 distro disk. I ordered the CD version, I got a DVD. One of my machines will not boot off the DVD, the other it goes to a screen with 5 dots and hangs. I wrote them, and got my comment kicked off, I guess they only want to hear the good news.

by hmj3000 on Jul. 06, 2010

Linux is well experienced OS. I have been using it for almost 6 years. Of course a have to make Dual Booting with Windows: unfortunately many software and hardware manufacturers still resist to make their product support Linux: they only think about profit selling their sollutions. But comparing Linux from 1991 with Linux today you can do many things in Linux. It is getting more more friendly to end-user. Now this is the main challenge: not only be a server OS.

by Kiran on Sep. 14, 2011

Researchers have found a weakness in the AES algorithm. They managed to come up with a clever new attack that can recover the secret key four times easier than anticipated by experts