Re: UNIX & Windows...???? (fwd)

[V S Ashoka <vsashok@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Karthik K H <karthik_kh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote --
> Hi all,
>     I have been wondering for a long time as to why 
> L(U)nix is not very popular as compared to MS-Windows.
>   I think I have found the answer. When I was trying
>  to install Linux on my brand new machine , I had to have nearly six books on my side as well as info on 
> Clock timings of some mysterious chips. Coupled with this one has the problem of the X Window system not supporting some graphics adapter or the other.
	Just to add to your `case study', I installed Linux first time
right without any book ( I am not a `guru', I know a few commands of Unix
- - operative word is still `few'). I can't program in C or C++, I can't
write a shell script. I know very little of h/w. But, I could get Linux
running in 20 minuites flat, with help from PC Quest! I realised that
SiS6215 was too new for a linux driver to be written by some volunteer
programmers around the world, but nearly hundred other cards were listed
in XFree86 file! I just had to know the sync of the monitor, which is
clearly written in the manual of the monitor (you bought the monitor! too
bad you didn't ask for the book of the monitor). I swapped the card to
Cirrus Logic (at no extra cost!) and X is running complete! I further
installed Linux on three other machines. I still don't own a book on
Linux/Unix. I get very few problems but can solve most of them with a
little logical thinking. Without blaming M$, I have definitely witnessed
quite a few Windows installation running into as serious trouble during
installation (My erstwhile institute has about 40 PC's with Win95. at
least 30 of them were installed - by the supplier- in my presence. I have
sufficient statistics to prove that ethernet cards, printer ports and SVGA
cards were changed because they refused to work. Just because the supplier
did all the dirty work installation doesn't become easy. Further, ask any
Linuxer - all problems are generally during installation - once installed,
the machine is almost failure free (you never get `general failure' or
`unknown error' messages as your work goes down the drain!). No, We are
not blaming you for stirring our passions. I have been giving enough
thought about why people still swear by Windows, considering most of them
were exposed to it only for the past two years (Win 95 was released in
1996!) - Just to add to your statistics - I have installed DOS 6.2,
WIN3.1, OS/2 and Win 95 and Linux- all on the same machine! - I would
claim OS/2 is a better OS than Win 95, sturdier and reliable, but equally
resource hungry (unlinke Linux). The reasons I can see for the
popularity of windows is (i) poeple are directly introduced to Win95
(ii) these introductions are again done by newbies (iii) Linux is
introduced to newbies by Linux gurus, where in the gurus tend to give them
more info (trying to be helpful) but put them off in the process (iv)
Finally, all the dirty work of installation is done by the supplier of the
computer - Of course, since you pay for your Win95, you can demand a
better service (Be warned that this service is only upto installation!).
I guess that means that Linux community has work chalked out for them. The
ILUG-Hyd group has already chalked out a serious - intro to Linux -
Program in schools and colleges, though I guess it is still in the
planning stage.

I guess I should stop my `delirium' here.
Ashok


- --------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information on Linux in India visit http://www.linux-india.org/
Linux India is NOT a forum for Microsoft/India/Pakistan/US/UK bashing.
Flame baits will not be tolerated.  If you can appreciate satire read
http://www.templetons.com/brad/emily.html

------------------------------