I am a geek and have been programming scripts and C with Linux since Slackware 3.2 and Caldera 2.3, and I don't ever remember using some grief stricken abortion of a GUI such as KDE or GNOME to do it with. Linux is not and never will be a Desktop - because it's a kernel. For all you "In the Know" out there - stop calling Linux names like Ubuntu and so on and stop calling KDE and GNOME - Linux. KDE is KDE and not Linux and such is so with GNOME. Quit outright lying to the general public.

And speaking for myself -- (I'll speak for myself now) I don't speak crap and for those of you who think you're in the know - you're only thinking that you are in the know...but, my words are really good because they bring out the best in idiots who think they are in the know. Out of 6.6 billion people on the earth -- you're the worm in the know. What a line of crap in itself people like you throw around...and if you don't seem to understand simple and plain English - you're definitely not in any know - and your smart remarks to this will be a testament that I am in fact - correct! To this day Linux is just a OS somewhat like MS DOS program created from the UNIX world with Windows ME GUI laying on top of it - just like Windows 3.1...so many years ago. I say Windows ME because it was just a little better than Windows 3.1.

KDE and GNOME are just becoming stable enough to call usable...for the average user. I'd say Linux Mint is the best I've seen so far for Linux and Steve Jobs has gotten it right for the general audience with OSX and it just seems those who call themselves Linux developers but develop KDE and GNOME and not much if any of Linux at all - should learn and show their intelligence and not their mouths of words. Money talks and bull____ walks. Mac is outgrowing Linux and as long as all these "In the Know Linux Geeks" stay really smart as they've been doing - there eventually won't be any use for Linux...Steve Jobs will see to that - with the help of Linux "In the Know" geeks.

In Denmark where I live allmost all pc's are sold with MS Windows preinstalled. I guess this goes for most other "free" countries, too! For the average user who don't want to know about anything but games and/or office applications installing an OS is allready done and out off the question.

I'm an it/sysadmin in a highschool. Except for myself we only use MS Windows XP for desktop and laptops (I also use Ubuntu 9.04 on the job and at home). I am seeing a lot more than user applications on XP boxes and everybody who think (actually: "imagine", "fantacies") that drivers are not a problem in the "holly" MicroSoft world and that Windows work right "out of the box" are so wrong. From my everyday experience, objective reality is that there is a mass-hypnosis going on in the world, making otherwise clever people blind to the technical and userrelated downsides of MS Windows and equally blind to the qualities of (at least) the Ubuntu distro (which is the only Linux I am familiar with).

In school and on the job people (actually MicroSoft) have it/sysadmins to help cover-up all the lacks and the bad functioning in Windows - like finding and installing the right device drivers - as we set up and configure the systems before the user ever touch them.

At home people buy a desktop or a laptop where some other "sysadmins" (working for Lenovo, HP, Dell or whoever) have allready found, installed and configured the right device drivers for that particularly hardware.

Imagine for a while the amount of money and time consumption that goes into this work worldwide - in schools, jobs governmental institutions etc. And by far the most of it is dedicated MS Windows. This could be "the story of the lackings of MS Windows as a Desktop". Instead it has become the story of the lackings of Linux and other OS's!

If that same amount of pre-configuration would be equally applied to desktops and laptops and equally accessible to the average pc-user Linux and other OS's would have a reasonable chance as a general Desktop OS.

The fact that Linux runs on desktop computers does not make it a desktop OS. Linux is a forked OS - one branch for servers and another for embedded systems. The scheduler for a server can be very rough on a desktop user (choppy video playback, resource hijacking by the 'cron' daemon, etc.). There was some discussion in the past couple of years about creating a scheduler that would be more benign in its handling of a user's priorities. The last I heard was that the changes are a niche patch on the kernel.

Next, the chaos in the user interfaces is hobbling the penguin. I'm not talking so much about KDE vs. Gnome. I'm talking about people who are used to the Windows UI (Save/Cancel, like KDE) and then slam into Gnome's Cancel/Save approach. That can put a person off Linux in a hurry (e.g. a FireFox user). Where is the system option that tells ALL GUI programs the user's preference (KDE, Gnome, or per software family) ?

There is still a lot of software to be written for Linux. Support tools like a GUI version of "ln -s" (symbolic link) and desktop parameter import/export (needed for keeping several systems in synch.) have yet to be written. One particularly annoying lack is a tool for cataloging tarballs so that they show up in one's DEB/RPM database. Just a dummy entry would be enough so that I don't have to keep a manual list of my installs. And other readers probably have similar peeves.

As I write this post my Linux box (SUSE 10 Book, dual P3-800, 512MB) is suffering frequent thrash attacks. I suspect something is broken in my virtual storage manager due to the HDD LED being lit up 100% (NO flickering for many seconds). This happens without HDD use - just switching from one window to another. But when I look for a profiling tool to scan my system with my usual junk loaded I don't find anything. I've heard about the wrapper tool for a single application but that would not give me a system-wide assessment. My previous system tended to choke on the combination of two swap partitions. This time around I have only one with 5GB (five gigs.) of space. The odd thing is that it consistently stops at about 1.1GB (1100MB) used space per kSysguard and kSysmon.

There is a distro change coming but it is waiting on some parts. My system was set up to confirm certain trends in the SUSE products (9.1 Pro Boxed, 10 Book, and Open 10.3) especially in YAST features. I'm not looking forward to pulling my files from my 9.1 and 10 boxes because direct copies and tarballing both choked when I went from the 9.1 box to the 10 box. Naturally I turned the file migration into a learning experience. NOGOs - serial to serial, parallel to parallel, USB bridge, network. What worked was an external drive - USB was a little glitchy and eSATA was fast and smooth.

Bottom Line:
Windows is not the enemy - it's a ruptured duck with several structural flaws that hide behind overly simple hardware configurations (one or two HDDs, one or two laser drives). Linux's worst enemy is itself a la Pogo ("We have met the enemy and he is us."). And Linux looks like tarnished silver when compared to the gold standard - OSX. I may in time follow those who switched from Linux to OSX.

I switched from Vista to linux mint7. It's user friendly for the most part looks as good as windows. The only problem is GAMES I play games and can't get the main one to work even with searching how others have. I am on the road alot and my local tv station has a player that I can watch tv shows and the news with won't work only supports M$, and mac. But had many more problems with M$. I agree with others that I don't care if the masses use linux keep working on making linux more stable and better and don't worry about marketing it's free you don't market free.

If it gets to the point of taking over market share I guarantee someone will figure out how to make it not free. I have learned that even though alot of thing I do I never have to touch the terminal but have been learning it because it is much faster. Ahhh but learning is bad right?

So all those that keep working to improve linux just keep going don't look back and don't worry about market share. Linux is growing Dell does offer ubuntu. And with netbooks that will grow. And support has anyone ever called M$? I can just post a problem in the forum and someone will run to help and even in my language. Nuff said

Linux has been ready for the desktop ever since it was first programmed. It is very under-rated, and needs to be bigger than Microsoft, in my opinion.

linux is very stable, free (as in freedom) and you can have a distribution without even paying any money. these qualities are not enough to define a desktop os. you need to have a unified, consistent, wysiwyg, intuitive interface design. Anybody, a noob or even the most advanced user, should be able to do daily desktop deeds without even consulting anybody. when you look at a desktop os, all the single apps packages anything that runs or shows up on the desktop needs to have the same design elements as their gui. it needs to look as a whole otherwise it will contradict in itself. even though the desktop is stable enough for daily usage, this kind of contradiction leads to the belief that the desktop is not professionally handled therefore lacking stability. the icon design is one other very important aspect that linux fails as a desktop os. the icons need to be designed with the gui elements. you can go to any hardware shop buy a computer case all the oem parts put them together get a monitor and you have a pc well this is something everyone can do. but if you as anyone who does not know anything about pcs and wants to buy a desktop pc they will most likely try to buy a branded desktop pc like hp or sony vaio or ibm.. yes this is also because they give support and guarantee but it is also the way they look as a whole gives confidence. as the little detailes are thought through even though you may not be designer and dont realize the details and for reasons you dont know you trust that item. the same with linux. people have problems trusting linux. yes you can change all the icons the way window manager looks and yes you can change your desktop image and so on, but the first impression really count.. why do people fell in love with mac os. simply because it looks unified and good. the system font everything is important. it is very obvious when you look at ubuntu and see that is the probably the most used and known linux distribution. it tries to achieve this unified design. solid look.. as it tries harder it is more trusted as a desktop os.. linux needs to create a cooler better image to be successfull.. it is not only the functionality people look for it is also the looks.. the functionality of linux is not even full there are still times when people are left to use command line need to hand edit some configuration files. what noob feels safe if they have to change some system files themselves by following a tutorial. yes they learn but people have more important stuff to do then learning how the operating system internals work. people who use windows dont know how it works the same with mac os but still they can work with it change basic settings on it do what they want to do not what the os forces them to do.. moreover as apple and microsoft are two big companies they can work with hardware vendors for their operating systems.. also they can work with software companies for their os.. so their operating systems get more integrated with the new products. even if the big companies like autodesk have products for linux they dont look as solid as they would in windows or mac (not working solid, but looking solid). also for example autodesks maya software runs natively on linux but they are still supporting red hat 4 fedora core 6. even though red hat is one of the biggest companies in linux world they cannot make their latest os supported. not talking about latest fedora but latest red hat 5.3.. all these and many more little little details around us keeps us looking at linux as a credible usable desktop os. thats why if the image, outlooks, design looks perfect then the way people look will start to change and that will change everything else..

The vast majority of my friends use the computer to use a browser. Some manage their music players, even less manage digital photos. They don't have problems and if they do, they take it into the shop. As much FUD as there is about Linux, there is a lot about MS too. I think most folks are okay with 98, XP & Vista and don't want to bother to change.

Still I think some business would change if they could get some CAD, MRP programs to work on Linux. Still we have to support our users who mostly use Windows.

I too will have to agree with just about everything that is a sensible gripe that has been posted. Basically - Linux did not start out for the purpose of being a Desktop...that was only an after thought.

Linux originally started out as a hobbiest project to create a really cool OS that zillions of persons could hang their name on for being a part of...just to get to show off their talents...while being helpful...and that's the greatest point that drove Linux to become what it has become.

Linux has been a mismash of freaking logic worms being fed by the Geeks and Hackers that love to mess with electronics, programming/logic and what better things in life can a person do when you've been given a lifetime challenge of a project -- but, do Linux?

For some people it's been exciting times to create and build. For others -- it's been a really good OS that gets the job done -- and it's FREE (mostly). For others being tired of Microsoft and wanting to belong - well, join a LUG. The list of reasons why Linux has survived is long -- and that's what drives mankind to do better. When all you have to do on this earth is rape, pillage, plunder or if you are not the banker doing this -- then you must work your fingers to the bone -- or you can do Linux for any of the reasons why mankind is even on this rock in space -- not knowing where he came from and not knowing where he's going...well, some LSD users think they know...and zealots...but, otherwise -- be kind and be Linux minded.

Life is so short - you need something to keep your mind off leaving...because you feel like you just got here.

Linux has been solid and stable for techs, developers, admins, etc for years. My employer is running dozens of Linux servers for web, email, database, voip and more. I started as a Linux user just over 2 years ago and have tried Linux/Unix samplings from RedHat, Debian, Suse, Solaris, IBM, HP-UX, and lots of obscure versions. All of them are amazing at RL3 and become worrisome at RL5. However, my current system - Ubuntu 9.04 has been very impressive and has only improved since I upgraded in April. My video (nVidia btw) runs properly, apps include OpenOffice 3, Picassa, Evolution (connecting to Exchange 2k3) Firefox 3, Rhythmbox, Totem (with mplayer for backup not needed recently), Scribus for desktop publishing, GIMP which rocks every bit as hard as Photoshop, and my graphics are souped up with Compiz that puts M$ best efforts to shame.
All of this and more is updated with an easy to manage interface that keeps my system stable and secure. My P4 3gHz and 1 gig of RAM couldn't possibly deliver the performance that I'm enjoying from a M$ distro.
My thoughts on all of this is to stay at it. Computers are still part of a rough and tumble industry and the sound philosophy of the Linux and Open Source community is a vital part of stabilizing what would otherwise become an evermore vicious corporate work effort.

I won't even vote on it. I'd like to choose 'all of above and more...'.
Linux is good, but only for those having enough knowledge.
Windows, so easy to use.
btw, I really hate all GUI in Linux. They are so unstable, slow and ugly.

I think most computer users are lazy. They barley get by with Windows. They don't know how to fix it, install it or keep it secure. If it (Windows) didn't come pre-installed on their PC they would use whatever else was on it... as long as everything from software install to hardware install came with an auto-run wizard. So... that's it!!! Linux needs an auto-run wizard for everything then the standard lazy computer user could "just get by" then all the commercial software companies would port their "commercial" grade apps to Linux and the hardware makers would write drivers for it and all the spammers, and malicious code writers would change their focus to Linux and before you know it we would be in the same boat as Windows.

I like Linux the way it is and is going. Ubuntu is not the only or best option but that's the current bandwagon/flagship so no wonder people aren't that excited. PCLOS and MEPIS are much better but don't have the commercial backing so don't get the airtime Ubuntu gets.

In my opinion, Linux fails because it still lacks drivers for many common gadgets. Average users aren't interested in (or able to) spend hours trying to get a printer to work, or configuring X when the binary driver locks up the system.

Also, why doesn't distros like Ubuntu, which is otherwise so amazingly great, offer an easy way of downloading the scary "closed" codecs for music, video and webapps?

All of this is a huge turnoff to potential switchers. And I understand them completely. Even though I'm a Linux professional, I still cringe every time my box doesn't recognize a printer, when I get the white screen of death due to incompatible video drivers or when trying to play an MP3 from a stock distro.

Fix these issues, and we might have more success.

Imho.

The great majority of people just want their OS to work most of the time. It's a bit like putting a frog in boiling water. Do it slowly and the frog does not notice. MS slowly crept up on us all. We did not know any better so we just accepted the software that was served up. AND when W95 was hyped up to a RELIGIOUS event - well it was all over. We were so grateful to be able to use a mouse and seemly multi-task that we ignored all the 'issues' below the surface.

I remember the PC and XT and the Apple Lisa, 1983...

Most MS users most of the time have a good experience, so there is no driver for change and no easy path to get there. I know as I force-ably converted my Wife, #2 daughter and #2 son to Ubuntu. Wife uses Kubuntu 8.10 32 bit and others are using Karmic 9.10 32 bit on old Toshiba laptops.

The wife has stopped complaining and gets by perfectly ok, using Open Office, Thunderbird and Firefox. 17 year old daughter uses, Firefox, Digikam, Amarok, aMSN and its great - latest version is only ALPHA and its excellent, son is the same. He uses his for school work (its a single CPU Celeron, 1GB of ram and 160GB hard disk) - he has an XP PC for games.

Still a few issues with Pulseaudio, but its nearly there and Bluetooth works perfectly now.

Now when Ubuntu installs they skip all the 'cool stuff', because its not FOSS. They need to add a check box to the install - that allows the user to opt in for the non-free stuff, let see:

MPlayer and codecs
Acrobat
Flash Player
Java and plugins

A cool default desktop theme would be nice - humans come in many colours - not just brown!

A lot of the add ons have only recently worked 100% out of the box. I can now build an new complete laptop in a few hours and know it will work perfectly.

This is only a recent occurrence.

We are nearly there -really we are the next release of Ubuntu for instance is going to be great - I already use it all the time on my Dell E6500 laptop - 64bit.

We need to get the message out - Linux makes desktop computing fun.

I am a new Linux user and my take on it is as follows:
1- People definitely are willing to try something different than windows. Point in case the rising popularity of MAC

2- Linux is great for geeky oriented people. Make linux more "normal people friendly". Point in case the rising popularity of the Mint derivative of Ubuntu.

3- Forum help should be filtered for converters like myself. When I am looking how to play a Quicktime movie in ubuntu, I had to go through so many posts talking about ancient releases and stuff like codecs. There should be help out there for people coming from Windows (or even MAC) that understands their mentality instead of asking the new users to change theirs. Most windows converters just want their OS to wark and not really interested in how cool is the BASH shell in linux

So bottom line, MS managed to dominate the market with inferior OS so they must be doing something right !!

With me there's one reason I can't switch to linux: QuickBooks. At least 75% of the small business world uses QuickBooks and it won't run under Wine or Crossover. I don't want to dual boot. So, I can't recommend linux to any of my clients and I can't switch to linux until there is either a native version of QuickBooks (not likely) or it can run under Wine.

This poll is crap. The reasons are all listed above, the appropriate choices are missing. However, to reiterate but three:

1) Lack of OEM distribution.
Building the cost of the OS into that of the hardware and disguising that fact. The true TOC of Windows is thereby disguised and the 'average user' is unlikely to want to replace their OS even if they knew what this meant and what it entailed. Linux involves doing something, to actively remove on working thing and replace it with another.
2) User understanding. What is Linux, for that matter what is M$ Windows? For many the lines between the PC, the Operating System and applications is is at best blurred. What Operating System do you use? 'Er...Word?'
3) When you're not sure what you want freedom and choice are pretty irrelevent. I'd try this Linux but I don't know what I need? Do I need Ubuntu, Fedora, SUSE, Slackware, Mandriva or Damn Small? Do I want KDE, Gnome or XFCE? Will it support my hardware and can I use Word, Photoshop and Internet Explorer?

Linux is an OS for those who want more control and have an understanding of what they control. For everyone else the PC is a consumer device to surf, email, write/print or edit photos before upload to Facebook. Can Linux do that...? Well can it?

The real answer is the one that got MS & Apple to be standards where Linux is just an option. The real and accurate answer to this question is the one not listed in this poll : "Lack of OEM distribution". Letting people believe they had no choice but to use either one of the two giants is the real deal. And this is related to Marketing. Linux Lacks marketing. Marketing is not your enemy... I'm a pro @ communication and a power Linux user ... trust me ... with marketing you can sell anything to anyone. When it comes to Linux and that very struggle. The lack of marketing doesn't result in less sex appeal from Linux towards consumers but more sex appeal from companies using it ... Best selling Linux device in the last few years ... Eeepc ... Don't give people no choice but to use your OEM OS and they will buy it ... then make it an option and they would stop buying ... why Asus failed ? Because they advertised on the device and forgot the OS... Unlike apple ... And don't tell me Mac OS is better than windows ... you all know its just not the same ...

Microsoft is and has produced a usable product for years so their user base is deep and committed. On the other hand Linux is the usurper and is swimming upstream. As a daily and happy Linux user I don't have a problem with that and as a matter of fact I hope it never becomes #1. I like using an OS that is not trying to be everything to everyone.