don't recommend windows?

[homer15]

ok, my cousin has been building computers for family members as of late (family being 95% of my business, by the way, but i don't really care about that). he's pretty good at recommending parts that'll fit the users needs (good gaming cards, fast processors, etc). only one thing bugs me... actually, it bugs the sh*t out of me. he never installs windows on the machines. he always instead, goes with some distro of linux. i don't know if he does this to save money (using free distros) or what. he says he doesn't because he doesn't trust microsoft. while i don't trust microsoft that much either, it's a fact that their products are pretty much a standard.
so, now there is a whole side of my family using linux, and none of them have any idea what's going on. they all ended up calling me for help. i'm no linux wizard, but i was able to help them with basic tasks. they were all dissapointed with linux, mostly because it wouldn't run their software. i recommend to all of them when they call that they get a windows os instead (which most of them are happy to hear). since they are family, and i feel bad that they've been getting the run around like that, i buy the os, sell it to them for half price, and then charge my normal family fee to set it up on their machines.
my family, though i love them to death, is not full of the brightest and most computer literate people. linux to people like me, is nothing to be scared of, but these people are scared of computers anyway!
my question to you guys is:
would you ever recommend linux over windows to the average (of sub-average) user?

[DFastLane]

No, not with the Linux distributions that exist now and the lack of applications. It's not mainstream enough for the "average" user yet. Windows still has much better ID ten T error safeguards too...

[Cricket]

Recommend Linux to people who are already scared of computers? No way...Windows is bad enough, but Linux is definately NOT for the casual computer user.

Cricket

[Computer Hobbyist]

I note that the family is mostly upset because Linux doesn't run their applications. Well that is about the only problem with Linux. It will not go away until there are enough folks using Linux to force the mainline application manufacturers to distribute Linux versions. In the meantime there are Linux applications that perform just about all of the same functions.

If the average person is schooled sufficiently they can accomplish just about everything using Linux they can with Windows. Homer, I don't fault your cousin for installing Linux and saving each of your family members a couple of hundred bucks. I fault him for not taking the time to explain how Linux and the applications found in the average distribution work. A few hours spent watching and instructing a user is always a good idea.

As to your main question, I would recommend Linux for an average user. For example, a kid going to college might need a couple of hundred bucks for books. Linux might be just the ticket. Of course he couldn't play the same games, but that is why he owns an xbox, isn't it? A senior citizen who knows nothing about computers might never know that he isn't using Windows if you don't tell him.

My point is that Linux running KDE or Gnome is no more difficult for the average user than Windows.

CH

[Statica]

Computers as you see right now for the average desktop user is largely a product of conditioning. If you were to take a similar group of people and throw them in front of a computer circa 1990s they would say the same thing about computers as they know crib about Linux - "a computer, its just so complicated .. Joe came up here and said that we all needed computers to do our accounting .. but then I got so messed up when i saw the any key, but I called Homer, and he told us that our pens would still work".
Its just a function of comfort, the same with Windows 95 over Windows 3.1 - the interface is just too complicated .. heck Windows 95 (and even later) had the archaic Win 3.1 shell bundled in, and you'd be surprised to hear the statistics of people in my department that I spied using the old interface, because it just is more comfortable.

I dont know what your relative uses to install Linux, but he is infact doing them a great service, one that they should perhaps get into the habit of rather than enter into that vortex of shelling out $$ to buy operating system and software then shelling out $$ to buy hardware to keep up with the increasing bloat for relatively the same tasks and kernel strengths. (just look at the kernel strengths between Win2k and WinXP . then shouldnt that pretty interface have been free?? Dont even get me started on Win98 vs Win98SE or even WinME)

I know you are trying to help them out, and there always needs to be that one "dude" in every family who has to shoulder that burden - but perhaps you should also try to look at accomodating them with their software issues through what they have. Going out and throwing money isnt necessarily the best way to do something. So if they call you with questions about why they couldnt install Microsoft Money, you just ask them if Joe installed GnuCash .. or to download it (with the new packet managers its a cinch to install, I have my 12 yr old cousin laughing at windows now) .. why? cos its free and it does everything that most accounting packages do .. and if they ask you which version of Microsoft Office they should by, tell them to hold back and signing that credit card receipt and have them check out OpenOffice.

In the long run, you will be less bothered with service calls because the OS is both stable and modular. As CH pointed out - I dont know what version of Linux you've used last but once the boot process is complete, there is no visual difference between the Win GUI and a Linux GUI.

Its like the old addage of teaching a person to fish rather than giving the fish, isnt it? They dont need toknow kernel hacking and driver writing, given that the computer's devices will behave to specs in either environment, then what is the difference? And if you think Windows is better idiot-proofed then there is a price that has been paid that you havent realized it, or havent ever been in that unfortunate situation to realize it. The price is that Windows is unpredictable .. it makes no discrimination between the level of intelligence of a user to spew out sudden performance outages or total crashes. At least on a NIX, I know that if I follow everything right, the chances of sh*t happening are along the same probabilities of me getting hit by a car while I cross the street at an intersection while the pedestrian walk sign is on... (addendum: that last analogy might not be very clear for you big city folks .. but I live in a very small city )

[Doobie]

I wouldn’t recommend Linux over windows to anyone who hasn’t mastered windows, face it, someone who doesn’t know how to use windows won’t know how to use Linux and probably never will.

I have to disagree with you saying that Linux running KDE or GNOME not being anymore difficult then windows…. Yeah right, it took me about 3 weeks to get my sound on Linux, what takes me less then a minute on windows. Not to mention setting up my home network with Linux…

I would like to see the average user do that on linux...

[Statica]

Doobie: the question is about a person getting a computer with Linux preloaded and hardware running to spec? So you couldnt get sound configured, that is an issue with your installation and your hardware support, if you want to compare apples to apples then compare homer's relatives getting a computer without the sound working in either operating system.

And regarding networking, you couldnt get Linux networked?!? and you found it more complicated than networking Windows?!?

[Computer Hobbyist]

Doobie: Statica is right, the issue has to do with a user using Linux after it has been installed by somebody who knows how to install it. I wouldn't ask my bookkeeper to troubleshoot her Windows system any more than I would ask her to troubleshoot a Linux system. That is what techs are for. As to networking -- I have had far fewer problems networking Mandrake 8.1 than Windows. If you don't think there are problems with Windows XP and networking lurk over at the networking forum for a couple of days.

CH

[DFastLane]

I don't think ease of use is as much an issue as not being mainstream. Example: Cousin is elected treasurer of an organization she's involved with. Right now the books are being kept on Quicken. Cousin can run down to Wally World, pick it up cheap and continue on with things like they are - simple.

Sure, you can make Linux do the things you can do in Windows, but it's not as convenient and easy yet. Maybe soon, but not yet. And not all people want to be computer saavy. They just want to run that neat program their neighbor, coworker, or friend has. It's still a Windows world out there - best to equip them with what they're likely to encounter....

[pam123]

No I wouldn't.
Tell your cousin that he matches the OS to the user not to his opinions.
I don't know if he means well and is just pig-headed or if he has an over-sized ego but he's wrong.
Homer's relatives are not interested in furthering the revolution they just want their ordinary programs to work and that is their right.
As for not teaching them how to manage linux; you weren't asked to. No one likes being patronized and that's what it would be. No matter how well meant it's insulting.

[Computer Hobbyist]

I have said it before, Quicken is the last remaining important application standing between Microsoft and real desktop competition. A Linux version of Quicken would be the greatest killer app since Lotus123. Especially if it was followed with a Linux version of TurboTax. Too bad because Quicken comes in a OSX version and I know at least 20 programers who could port that version to Linux in a couple of days with long coffee breaks.

That said GNUcash, which probably would be installed with the OS distribution, can easily handle Quicken files and performs all of Quicken's functions. So can one or two other Linux apps.

Pam, strong words. Can you tell us why the cousin is wrong.

CH

[pam123]

I realized I'd been curt so I added some explanation.
But for anyone who's ever gritted his teeth when lectured by someone who " knows better than you do and so I'm not going to give you what you want" and by the way " this is for your own good" can guess what the reaction to " I'll teach you about Linux" will be.
Your uncle who wants to use his new camera or your other cousin who wants to play DOOM III have every right to be pissed at the guy who does this to them.

[Computer Hobbyist]

OK, give the relatives the choice. Homer's cousin has built a nice little internet cruiser for $400 for their Uncle. Ask Uncle if he wants to pay $200 more so he can have Windows XP. Don't forget to tell him that if he needs to install software for his camera in the future you would be happy to install free software. As to the game player, give him the same option. Remind him that he can almost buy a new Xbox or playstation with the $200 and have a better choice of games.

Don't assume that spending $200 extra on a Windows system is in the best interests of either the Uncle or the cousin. As to teaching a novice how to operate a computer, I think that is the duty of anybody who sells one. A friend of mine, Dave, recently built a WindowXP machine for another friend of mine, Bob. Dave spent a couple of hours showing Bob the ropes. I don't think that is being condescending. I think that is being kind and courteous. That is also the thing that seperates builders like Dave, and Homer from Dell and Gateway.

As I said before, my big complaint with Homer's cousin is that he just dumped the computers off at the relatives homes and said "see you thanksgiving."

CH

[pam123]

Originally posted by Computer Hobbyist OK, give the relatives the choice. CH

I think we are in agreement and not just about the guy breezing out the door.
I think it's pretty plain that Homer's relatives would have paid for windows.
Linux didn't do what they wanted.
Would I ever offer a relative Linux?
Yes, and I'd make sure it was a case of informed consent.

[LawyerRon]

OK folks, I'm with Pam on this one; the builder displays a degree of arrogance in installing Linux instead of Windows. At a minimum, he should inquire as to the uses required as well as the software desired. There’s pros and cons with each choice and it seems to me the builder is on a mission to substitute his judgment over the end user’s. In my view, it’s a disservice to decide for the customer what he or she should be running as an OS without further inquiry. Linux is just fine and dandy but for Grandma and Grandpa that like to stroll down to Wal-Mart for software, it’s a recipe for confusion.

[Strider]

I'll add my .02 cents

I think Homer's cousin is doing the opposite on what his intentions are, instead of proven how "EVIL" Microsoft is, he's causing people to say, "Gee, I wish I had windows on m computer in the first place"

I really never had Linux, but I wouldn't recommend it for the newbie or average user (unless there was a real need for it). Windows XP is a very stable system and very easy to use.

[glc]

The only "steering" I do to customers is encourage them to get Windows 2000. I still will not embrace XP for several reasons and if I'm going to be supporting them, I prefer to work with something I like and know what I am doing with. If they want XP, I'll do it but suggest Pro over Home. If they want 98SE, I'll do it. If they want ME, I decline the sale (seriously). Haven't had a customer *dislike* 2000 yet. I'm not in a position yet to recommend or support Linux, but that's coming.

[Byte 2.0]

Here is my current take on it.

My Second PC, I can have it up and running faster on Linux then I can with with win98SE.

Linux detects all My hardware and correctly sets it up with out me having to do anything but feed it some IP address.

A few nights ago I had my first sucessful Linux install, Mandrake 9.0. I have messed around with several verisons of Linux since Red hat 5.0. I have wanted a working Linux box for about 2 years, after I saw first hand what Linux is able to do.

When I started the other day with Mandrake 9, I made up my Mind, if I could not install it, I was going to hire someone else to set it up for me. First Attempt, i was 100 percent sucessful and On the internet.

I am now taking it to the next level. I formatted the drivers. I am reinstalling windows, then installing Linux making a dual boot machine.

I consider myself a very good with windows, but I am mostly lost in linux, due to the many years of being trained by force of habit with a windows environment.

But here is how I learned to use windows, I got a fully 100 percent correctly set up machine, then I broke it many times. Each time I learned what I did wrong. It was a painful learning curve.
Now that is how I plan to use linux, Had i failed with this install, i was going to pay someone to set it up correctly, then try not to break it as much as i did windows.

Well now I see I have a leg up on my windows learning curve, One, I am not afraid of PC's anymore. Two I was able to set it up, yes it has my video, sounds and Nic working correctly. Three I can break it with out the worry of having to pay someone to set it back up


Lookout Newbie Linux user coming

[homer15]

ok, my cousin is putting the newest version of red hat on them (not sure off the top of my head what version it is).
yea, he's getting everything to work, then he's dumping it on my family, setting it up in there house himself, and then leaving.
i'm actually not too thrilled with his proficiency in linux, having asked him a few questions and getting no answers, then asking him basic questions and still having trouble getting straight answers.
yes, i think he should give them an option. as a matter of fact, that's what i do. when they call, after a while, i ask if they want me to throw windows on it real quick, or do they want to keep linux. windows wins no questions asked.
my relatives are all coming off of windows 95 and windows 98 machines. they're already "trained" in how to use the windows setup.
i know my cousin better than any of you, and i know he's not doing them a great service at all by putting linux on their machines. i don't think he's giving them any break in pay. he's just pocketing the money i guess.
whenever i build a computer, i ask them what they want on it? what they want to do with it? what do you need to do with it? and i try and taylor it to fit their needs. i give the option of linux. some say they only want windows, which is understandable. it's a standard os that everyone knows how to use. some of them want linux. ok, i set it up, show them the basics, and let them explore. some of them want both, so i dual boot it. i give the option. my cousin is a punk.

[Redo40]

Originally posted by homer15 whenever i build a computer, i ask them what they want on it? what they want to do with it? what do you need to do with it? and i try and taylor it to fit their needs. i give the option of linux. some say they only want windows, which is understandable. it's a standard os that everyone knows how to use. some of them want linux. ok, i set it up, show them the basics, and let them explore. some of them want both, so i dual boot it. i give the option.

I think that is the key to good service, giving the customer what he really needs and can handle regardless of our personal opinion of it. Would I recommend Linux? Yes, but not to everybody. It might have helped if Homer's cousin had at least recommended some good "beginner" books or lesson's to get them started.

[pam123]

Homer has it right and his cousin has it wrong.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Originally posted by pam123 Homer has it right and his cousin has it wrong.

Agreed.

CH

[Confused]

My .02 cents. Homer you are a good relative and true gentleman. If that was me, I would tell them to call the guy they bought it from.
Chas

[Iman74]

If you are selling it half the price; aren't you selling it at a loss? I know they are family but they shouldn't be putting you out of business.

Originally posted by homer15 ok, my cousin has been building computers for family members as of late (family being 95% of my business, by the way, but i don't really care about that). he's pretty good at recommending parts that'll fit the users needs (good gaming cards, fast processors, etc). only one thing bugs me... actually, it bugs the sh*t out of me. he never installs windows on the machines. he always instead, goes with some distro of linux. i don't know if he does this to save money (using free distros) or what. he says he doesn't because he doesn't trust microsoft. while i don't trust microsoft that much either, it's a fact that their products are pretty much a standard. so, now there is a whole side of my family using linux, and none of them have any idea what's going on. they all ended up calling me for help. i'm no linux wizard, but i was able to help them with basic tasks. they were all dissapointed with linux, mostly because it wouldn't run their software. i recommend to all of them when they call that they get a windows os instead (which most of them are happy to hear). since they are family, and i feel bad that they've been getting the run around like that, i buy the os, sell it to them for half price, and then charge my normal family fee to set it up on their machines. my family, though i love them to death, is not full of the brightest and most computer literate people. linux to people like me, is nothing to be scared of, but these people are scared of computers anyway! my question to you guys is: would you ever recommend linux over windows to the average (of sub-average) user?

[homer15]

well, i'm breaking even with later labor and stuff. if it was anybody but my family, even my friends, i'd charge them full price.