Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Use Windows and love it

7 (63.6%)

Use Mac and love it

1 (9.1%)

Use Linux and love it

0 (0%)

Dual-Boot and love it

1 (9.1%)

Hate my life, operating systems, keyboards, the internet etc.

2 (18.2%)

Total Members Voted: 10

[Max™]

Linux kinda does a lot of that, but by it's nature there is no market outside of edge case enterprise stuff like red hat, or the domesticated family android/chromium.

I convinced them to really move on to linux on the old downstairs system when the original windows 7 drive started bugging out, I got a new drive for them, installed mint on it, and showed them how you can pull up the old drive to grab files they want to keep, without having to actually leave it running any longer than necessary, didn't occur to me to point out that linux reads NTFS*/FAT32 drives just fine, didn't occur to them that you could access their old recipes and addresses and all that jazz with a new system without actually logging in to the old one.

*It's been so long since I screwed with them I forgot that it wasn't NSFT.

[Infinityforce]

I feel like I should say that makes linux sound like a slut, and comment about marriage being at least in part a financial transaction, but the better half may hit me.

Noooo! Linux isn't a slut! Linux loves me, and we're going to get married! I'm in love with her!!!! (Linux, I'mma marry you)
As long as there is a partition with room on it, she will stay in my life, without asking for a single penny. (Because her goals are true)
She didn't ask me to get rid of Windows. As long as there is a Dual-Boot, I will always have a choice. (and I will always come home to you)
And with a little WINE she can do all the things that Windows can do too (thanks for everything babe, you know I only love you)
And I know Linux wants what is best for me, and everyone else, namely: freedom to do what we see fit. (So i'll always be free to love and follow you)

How could I ever spend the rest of my life with someone who's only worried about selling me the next update, the next software, device or app?
Someone who won't let me choose my next machine or device? (Linux is more than twice as nice and all for a 0^th of the price! and installed anywhere I like!)
Someone who disables my options? (Why can't I install what I want? I should be able to choose my adoptions! They're my children too and I have to pay for a lot of them!)
Someone who restricts my access? (If I want to change your style, what then? Linux can wear ANY dress!)

Ok, just disclosing, I'm not a computer expert.

Can somebody make a system that works, isn't evil and is compatible with other systems?

This is probably a much bigger task than I realize. It can be a two level system with an "expert" and an "end user" interface. If somebody could do that with the basic "sell it outright and not a license or as a service model," then they'd be rich and beloved.

The idea of a computer operating system that could do these would bankrupt technology titans:
A.) Open, edit, and be compatible with other systems / documents;
B.) Be safe enough and / or repairable if it's hacked;
C.) Allow for a reasonable amount of user customization;
D.) Not be "as a service" but outright ownership with no "licenses;"
E.) and widely used."

Subscription service is the stupid fever dream of a finance major living off his family's money. If you want a stream of payments, then make the product cost more with features to justify it. Same deal with the upgrading / buying new versions. Minimize bloatware and do elegant systems requiring minimal resources instead of constant expansion. Lean operations (in terms of resources).

If one of you manages that, you'll be the richest person on earth, without gouging people.

Great idea Truean!
B) is pretty much impossible though, for any system. Even the Govt. has problems with hackers. "It's much easier to attack than to defend"
A better thing to hope for is probably something like "lots of users dedicated to improving, expanding, securing etc. the system"

[SirQuiamus]

This is some kind of a parody, right?

You're not hurting anyone's feelings, you're just doing a phenomenally bad job at promoting the thing you're excited about.

I've been an enthusiastic Linux user for over a decade now, but your posts really made me want to uninstall it from all of my computers and go buy a cartload of Windows 10 licences.

1. The real parody is that software giants and faceless corporations rule the world, and the thing it parodies is the human spirit. This is not a joke, it's the fate of the free world, and I happen to live in it, so excuse me for being passionate (read: annoying)

I'll wager you're quite passionate about many other things as well.

2. Glad I didn't hurt anyone's feelings. I wasn't trying to promote Linux, I assumed most of the people who came to this thread would be Linux users.

Why preach to the choir? Why are you doing this?

3. Err. Okay. I'm glad.... you feel that way.....? In any case, your strategy seems to be well thought out, so, yeah, if you feel like doing that, go ahead. I realise my style is a lot more vehement than what most people are used to, but I didn't expect anyone to convert to Linux (or to Windows!)

Have you ever considered a televangelist's career?

Maybe people don't use Linux because Linux evangelists are aggressive and condescending, and when asked why people should use Linux the response is "Think of the possibilities!" as opposed to a feature list or superior software.

That was really not the purpose of this thread.
Although I DO want support for Linux, I very much more want support for Mac/Windows to decrease.
In the same way that if people want freedom to reign, they have to remove terrorists, greedy bankers, corrupt politicans.

Are you some kind of a cypherpunk crypto-anarchist? Do you want to "stick it to The Man/NWO/ZOG/whatever" with real stronk computah magicks? Have you ever used Tor or gpg? Do you think that using Ubuntu is really a meaningful subversive act against our corporate overlords?

Noooo! Linux isn't a slut! Linux loves me, and we're going to get married! I'm in love with her!!!! (Linux, I'mma marry you)
As long as there is a partition with room on it, she will stay in my life, without asking for a single penny. (Because her goals are true)
She didn't ask me to get rid of Windows. As long as there is a Dual-Boot, I will always have a choice. (and I will always come home to you)
And with a little WINE she can do all the things that Windows can do too (thanks for everything babe, you know I only love you)
And I know Linux wants what is best for me, and everyone else, namely: freedom to do what we see fit. (So i'll always be free to love and follow you)

How could I ever spend the rest of my life with someone who's only worried about selling me the next update, the next software, device or app?
Someone who won't let me choose my next machine or device? (Linux is more than twice as nice and all for a 0^th of the price! and installed anywhere I like!)
Someone who disables my options? (Why can't I install what I want? I should be able to choose my adoptions! They're my children too and I have to pay for a lot of them!)
Someone who restricts my access? (If I want to change your style, what then? Linux can wear ANY dress!)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

PS I'm almost certain you're a troll, and I appreciate the effort you're putting into this little performance, but frankly, your routine is way too cliched to be actually funny.

[spümpkin]

How could I ever spend the rest of my life with someone who's only worried about selling me the next update, the next software, device or app?

wow what business are made for profit

you've gotta be kiddin me guess i better give up all my paid services and go all out being a hermit

Someone who restricts my access? (If I want to change your style, what then? Linux can wear ANY dress!)

hey they can wear whatever they want
equality
why should you choose thei clothes
:v

note: this post is not (entirely) serious and please take it with A Grain Of Salt tm



Also why is your purpose bringing down Windows/Mac?
If you truly want it to be a free market, let consumers choose, and build up Linux to be a more user-friendly platform. It's like the difference between misandry and feminism.

[Truean]

There really isn't a free market, because producers and purchasers are incredibly limited and choice power is oddly distributed.

Limited producers is an oligopoly, essentially acting as a monopoly. This is becoming apparent as the difference between PC and MAC become less and less noticeable.

People are going to get chosen for by schools, employers, government, and similar large consumers. Individual consumers are going to be led by group consumers, like it or not. Case in point, if your children's schools, workplace, and all or most significant actions, use something, then are you going to be the standout? Not if you're the overwhelming majority of people, nopes.

Sure you've got your RC and other colas, but it's mostly Coke and Pepsi, and pretty much every restaurant serves one of those two.

Actual free market, requires interchangeable (homogenized) goods, perfect information, perfect price sensitivity, and a load of other things that don't exist in this type of market, but do in commodities like grain (Farmer A's grain is the same as Farmer B's grain). "Free Market" has become a set of magic words, like Hocus Pocus, or Abra Abracadabra when, people, policymakers, politicians etc don't want to see the real reasons things end up how they do. It's easy to say "let the free market handle it" and it's hard to actually figure out the truth.

It's marketing mumbo jumbo. People think they want things, because they've been mislead and misinformed about what they're actually getting. Read any licensing agreement. Consumers would rather own the software outright, and would never willingly agree to allow companies to turn their expensive hardware / software into expensive bricks. They "do" though, because they have no choice. Companies justify everything they can by invoking the illusion of choice while essentially saying "our way of no way" after they sweet talk you with sales lies.

It isn't a choice, because it is an uninformed, misinformed, misunderstood, complicated thing with little to no real options and increasingly little to no difference.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2889905/if-you-hate-pc-bloatware-here-are-the-vendors-to-avoid.html
http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-awful-secrets-no-one-telling-you-about-windows-10/

[Sensei]

Alas, as much as I'd love to switch to Linux, I'm just plain hooked on DirectX. I've got too many games without a good OGL or Vulkan component, which is the main thing I use my computer for.

[Infinityforce]

Alas, as much as I'd love to switch to Linux, I'm just plain hooked on DirectX. I've got too many games without a good OGL or Vulkan component, which is the main thing I use my computer for.

1. Make a partition on HDD
2. Install Linux w/option for Dual-Boot (you will see a screen everytime you turn your computer on, asking which OS you want to use- check before installing though)

@SirQuiamus

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'll wager you're quite passionate about many other things as well.
...
Why preach to the choir? Why are you doing this?
...
Have you ever considered a televangelist's career?
...
Are you some kind of a cypherpunk crypto-anarchist? Do you want to "stick it to The Man/NWO/ZOG/whatever" with real stronk computah magicks? Have you ever used Tor or gpg? Do you think that using Ubuntu is really a meaningful subversive act against our corporate overlords?
...
PS I'm almost certain you're a troll, and I appreciate the effort you're putting into this little performance, but frankly, your routine is way too cliched to be actually funny.

You are quite right, I am passionate about many things. I am sorry if that is a negative, in your eyes.
Is sincerity so passé as to be frowned upon? Or do you "wager" because you seek some form of gain(-saying)?
Is being right so important as to discount the feelings of others? Or is it that feelings are not as good as logic?
"You have a choice, use it
You have a voice, don't lose it
If you care prove it, and don't abuse it"

Preaching to the choir?
Okay. Without trying to second guess anyone's intentions, I could say that this thread celebrates Open Source.
In another way, I could say this thread is an expression of my feelings, and whatever people respond with, is purely up to them.
In no way was I trying to elicit a specific response. I very much enjoy Open Source, in theory and practice.
Kudos to Open Source!
Long live the free!

Career as a televangelist? How cold. And also presumptuous.
If you knew how cruel you were being, you wouldn't say such things.
For a start, most televangelists are highly paid and sponsored. In many ways, they are "the enemy"
Now, soapbox preacher, that's more my style.
Crazy guy with a sign, that's right up my street.
(once I was blind, but now I see, was lost once, but now am free)
I thrive in preaching the gospel to whoever will listen, not to be heard for fame or profit.
From sharing what is good, what do we lose? I am glad if people find the truth!
Especially if the truth helps them. If they benefit, so much the better!
And the Truth also benefits from being shared, known, celebrated.
Those with the most to gain are the needy, and those with most to lose are vampires.
Those who give, benefit from being known and supported. They also die from neglect and abandoment.
Why should we abandon our helper, and embrace our sworn enemy?

Am I a cypherpunk crypto-anarchist? Not really. I just say my mind, if anything.
Some people think this is an indication of radical/militant left/right-wingism.
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
What has truth to do with labels?
Whether I call myself one way or another, still it does not do the Truth justice.
I don't like to call myself in any specific way. Technology is only a part, a facet, of human existence, albeit a major one.
Why should I make myself less by serving the cause of machines?
Rather, machines should serve the cause of people.

Have I used Tor?
Yes, briefly, and I know (a little) about how to use such things. I don't have much to hide however.
Is it really necessary? Or did you just want to see if I knew some basic stuff?

Do I think using Ubuntu is a meaningful subversive act against our corporate overlords?
You and I have different ideas of "Victory"
Let me put it like this, if you don't mind.
If a person eats fast food, such as McDonalds, grows tired of it, sick of it, and says:
"I will no longer eat McDonalds, because it causes suffering to animals, and illness to my body and mind"
In what way is that a "subversive act"? Rather, it benefits that person (and animals).
And if they say
"I will eat at local eateries, to stimulate my mind and body (with variety) and the economy (by not giving money to huge corporations)"
Is that subversive?
Will they crush the evil McDonalds? Probably not.
Will they benefit? Certainly!
Will small businesses and local economy benefit? Sure, if, and as long as they choose it as an alternative.

PS You are certain I am a troll
You judge a thing before knowing it.
Since when has guessing been the mark of knowledge?
And who are you trying to prove it to?
Did I come here to troll you, or did you come here to troll me?
I would sincerely like to think that it is an issue between gentlemen/gentlewomen and not a cause to spread to disrepute, slander anyone, see anyone fail etc.

Rather, those who know, don't need to ask, and don't need to guess.
"Those who know, don't say.
Those who say, don't know"
And it may be the case that many you call "trolls" are misunderstood, and those you consider "misunderstood" are actually trolls.

Perhaps you didn't mean it to be offensive, but to call the voice of my heart a "performance" or "routine" is to do me injustice.
When a person weeps, do you say "Oh! Great show! But everyone knows you aren't really sad! Now knock it off, it's annoying!"
In a similar way, you've made out that my speech is a show, and not the genuine feelings of my heart.
If you really want to know, test me, and I won't mind (I promise).
But the spontaneous, intuitive, is always more and deeper than a superficial "act".
Where a mere practised or rehearsed "act" gets tired, the real, spontaneous, spark of zen, grows and adapts, offers forth continuously without ceasing, does not grow tired from being, does not get worn out etc.

@DigitalDemon

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

How could I ever spend the rest of my life with someone who's only worried about selling me the next update, the next software, device or app?

wow what business are made for profit

you've gotta be kiddin me guess i better give up all my paid services and go all out being a hermit

Someone who restricts my access? (If I want to change your style, what then? Linux can wear ANY dress!)

hey they can wear whatever they want
equality
why should you choose thei clothes
:v

note: this post is not (entirely) serious and please take it with A Grain Of Salt tm



Also why is your purpose bringing down Windows/Mac?
If you truly want it to be a free market, let consumers choose, and build up Linux to be a more user-friendly platform. It's like the difference between misandry and feminism.

I have no beef with "profits" but "monopolies" and "oligopolies"
We don't have "survival of the fittest" but "survival of the richest"
"Let the poor drink the milk while the rich eat the honey.
Let the bums count their blessings while they count the money."

Also, you can't modify Mac/Windows in any way you want. It is illegal to do so.
But Linux can wear any style you can dream of and you can modify anything/everything.

What is the purpose of bringing down Windows/Mac?
The same as killing parasites, vermin, pests, vampires:
Richter Belmont = Open Source
Dracula = Windows/Mac
    Open Source: Die, monster! You don't belong in this world!
    Windows/Mac: It was not by my hand that I'm the most popular OS. I was installed here by humans who wish to pay me tribute.
    Open Source: Tribute?! You steal men's currency and make them your fanboys!
    Windows/Mac: Perhaps the same could be said of all software.
    Open Source: Your words are as empty as your license agreements! Mankind ill needs an software platform such as you!
    Windows/Mac: What is a man? (flings his wine glass aside) A miserable little pile of money! But enough talk! Have at you!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

TO ALL THE NAYSAYERS:
Can your precious OS do.... THIS?!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[spümpkin]

honestly no, and honestly i cannot see any forseeable time in the future where i would ever need to do that


but hey if it works for you thats alguds dude


im honestly just here because its funny

[Reelya]

People buy Mac/Apple, and their reward is to be locked into a system of software and products which are vastly over-inflated in price.
Windows is the same, it just has a longer/more-established history.

Not quite. The first version of Windows was in November of 1985. The first Apple Mac was in January of 1984. If we go back to the text-based computer era, Apple was still first. Apple released their first PC  in July 1976 vs Microsoft's first MS-DOS version in 1981.

They are forced to live in isolationist and insular technological ecosystems that only allows compatible hardware/software from the same company.

Well, not really here either. Any OS requires that you have compatible software, even Linux funnily enough, which is the #1 reason people don't get Linux: their favorite things aren't compatible. And hardware compatiblity, that's not even the fault of the OS maker, and is also a thing you just have to live with regardless of OS, even on Linux. Your other claim is that it has to be "from the same company" but I'm happily sitting here using tons of third-party software on Windows which doesn't need to be certified by Microsoft. Sure, you can argue a pile of reasons against Windows, but being forced to use Microsoft everything isn't one of them, because it's a straw-man argument.

[Infinityforce]

honestly no, and honestly i cannot see any forseeable time in the future where i would ever need to do that


but hey if it works for you thats alguds dude


im honestly just here because its funny

People who are honest don't need to say "honestly" so much, DigitalDemon. Unless you REALLY REALLY needed me to know how sincere you are being. Which I'm sure is "very". "Very sincere". How much? "very". "Very sincere".

Hey, that's cool if you don't want to install Linux, but if anyone was wondering about installing Linux, dual-booting with another OS is really common and effective. It's as much for people perusing the thread and people interested but deterred from installing Linux.
You can install Linux and keep your old software too! It's a sweet deal. Boot whichever OS you like. It's your choice, but Linux users have more of them.

People buy Mac/Apple, and their reward is to be locked into a system of software and products which are vastly over-inflated in price.
Windows is the same, it just has a longer/more-established history.

Not quite. The first version of Windows was in November of 1985. The first Apple Mac was in January of 1984. If we go back to the text-based computer era, Apple was still first. Apple released their first PC  in July 1976 vs Microsoft's first MS-DOS version in 1981.

It seems you are quite right. Perhaps I should have said "more well known" (which also could be phrased as "well-established")

Well, not really here either. Any OS requires that you have compatible software, even Linux funnily enough, which is the #1 reason people don't get Linux: their favorite things aren't compatible. And hardware compatiblity, that's not even the fault of the OS maker, and is also a thing you just have to live with regardless of OS, even on Linux. Your other claim is that it has to be "from the same company" but I'm happily sitting here using tons of third-party software on Windows which doesn't need to be certified by Microsoft. Sure, you can argue a pile of reasons against Windows, but being forced to use Microsoft everything isn't one of them, because it's a straw-man argument.

I was more referring to Apple/Mac, since they are the main offenders of "use our product ecosystem"
Windows also has a problem like this. Ever seen a variant of Windows that runs better, more efficient, less bloat or has custom content? It's illegal.
Your only options are: Upgrade (to Windows), Downgrade (to Windows), Keep (Windows).... and all by Microsoft, and none other.
If you want to use Windows programs you can only use the preset Windows versions. That's all the Windows models produced by Microsoft, with no alternatives or options to modify them.
Don't like Windows 8/10? Tough luck, you're stuck with whatever they feed you.
Once a person starts to use Windows applications, there aren't really any alternatives (except for WINE... on Linux)

[Reelya]

Well if you look at MacOS, they have a 4% market share. The lock-in nature of things has added to that.
https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0

Haven't they ever heard of the terms SUNK COSTS or VICIOUS CYCLE?

I also think this is off-base. Linux would need more work to get up and running that to keep using Windows. That's the literal opposite of sunk costs.

Instead of 3 different standards/styles, there would be 1 main one, with many splinters and off-shoots.

But this is pretty much what we have now. 90% of the install base is Windows, with <5% of anything else.

No more paying license fees to Windows or Macintosh!

Microsoft doesn't charge ongoing licensing fees, now. Unless you use a cloud service like Office 365, and in that case you're paying for the right to host material and have cloud backup working. And you can bet that providers such as Adobe will still charge excessive licensing fees. The cost to get an OS is a pittance compared to the cost to get legal licenses for any sort of creative third-party software. And no, Blender isn't going to replace 3D Studio and Maya.

[Infinityforce]

Well if you look at MacOS, they have a 4% market share. The lock-in nature of things has added to that.
https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0

Haven't they ever heard of the terms SUNK COSTS or VICIOUS CYCLE?

I also think this is off-base. Linux would need more work to get up and running that to keep using Windows. That's the literal opposite of sunk costs.

Instead of 3 different standards/styles, there would be 1 main one, with many splinters and off-shoots.

But this is pretty much what we have now. 90% of the install base is Windows, with <5% of anything else.

No more paying license fees to Windows or Macintosh!

Microsoft doesn't charge ongoing licensing fees, now. Unless you use a cloud service like Office 365, and in that case you're paying for the right to host material and have cloud backup working. And you can bet that providers such as Adobe will still charge excessive licensing fees. The cost to get an OS is a pittance compared to the cost to get legal licenses for any sort of creative third-party software. And no, Blender isn't going to replace 3D Studio and Maya.

Sunk Costs/Vicious Cycle, was referring to consumers, not producers.
A person buys mac products (example) but can't quit because all their programs are on that platform and they already spent time learning how to use it.
Result? They keep buying Mac products, buying Mac software and learning Mac (not anything wrong with that).

Yes, the market is mostly geared towards Windows. But Windows is not in our power, as consumers, to change or modify etc. and we are stuck building our technological future on someone else's product instead of our own! If they decide to change it, there's not much we can do!

Also, Microsoft make a tonne of money from just selling the OS. 95% of the market is a lot of individuals. When the next upgrade rolls around, they all pay again too! Windows is more invested in making money through more releases, not better releases.

Also, it's not just consumers who pay license fees!
Anyone who wants to be certified as an expert (technician, producer, developer etc.) also has to pay their dues to Microsoft!
It's not just end-users who give money to Microsoft!

Windows and Mac have SERVICE INDUSTRIES and the money goes back towards the companies!
They profit from our malfunction!

[Reelya]

Yeah, but that only decribes 4% of users, so it's a red herring. Only 4% of PCs worldwide are mac. And the reason they're sticking with Mac is not because of sunk-costs: it would be cheaper for them to switch to Windows, but they don't. Macs are expensive to replace. So that should shoot a hole in the Sunk-Costs theory. When a user buys a new Mac, they need to replace all the software, which is very expensive. Getting a Windows PC instead and getting the equivalent PC software would be way cheaper than replacing a Mac.

So what's left is that it's easier to stick with a familiar system than to change: there's less costs in the future if you don't change. Therefore "sunk costs" fails to describe the issue. Switching creates more costs.

Also, you point out the real benefit to switching to Linux would be if everyone else does. But people don't make decisions as a hive-mind. They make decisions for themselves. And that decision-making process precludes Linux for almost all people who actually need to inter-operate with other people. Switching to an unpopular OS is not made into a rationally sound decision by pointing out that "if everyone else did to, it would be a great decision to switch". Well, no, part of the decision is estimating the likelihood of everyone else switching, vs the pros and cons of using a popular OS vs an incompatible unpopular one that's "better". People individually / rationally realize that the costs of switching are going to massively outweigh the benefits, therefore you never get the ground swell of people switching.

Here's a thought experiment. Qwerty vs Dvorak keyboards. Dvorak keyboards are objectively better than Qwerty keyboards, to an extent that makes switching OS look like child's play. Why don't you start typing with Dvorak? After all, nobody but you cares what keyboard layout you use, whereas having an OS used by more than 2% of the population makes you objectively more compatible.

[Infinityforce]

Yeah, but that only decribes 4% of users, so it's a red herring. Only 4% of PCs worldwide are mac.

Mac is not just computers, but also mobile devices such as iPhone, iPad etc. which are all integrated with each other, and not much else.
Linux is also used on phones (android) for example, as Windows is too.

And the reason they're sticking with Mac is not because of sunk-costs: it would be cheaper for them to switch to Windows, but they don't. Macs are expensive to replace. So that should shoot a hole in the Sunk-Costs theory. When a user buys a new Mac, they need to replace all the software, which is very expensive. Getting a Windows PC instead and getting the equivalent PC software would be way cheaper than replacing a Mac.

Why would a user have to keep replacing the software? Once you buy software, you have access to its use, which is mostly the case.
The obstacle is not cost, but exclusivity: You own the software, but you must have the correct device to run it.
Users are locked in to a cycle of buying hardware because of the software they own, and vice versa.

Sunk costs DNE money.
Sunk costs = Time, Effort, Data, Files, Preferences, Learning/Understanding etc. etc.
That users cannot change to another system is an example of sunk costs- they cannot recover any of the above.
Once they start using an OS, they start "paying" the above, but cannot get it back if they later decide to change platforms.
If they buy software for that platform, they become more invested in that system, and cannot change later on.

The real issue is not that users have to pay money, but that users have to keep paying money to the same companies without alternatives

Also, you point out the real benefit to switching to Linux would be if everyone else does. But people don't make decisions as a hive-mind. They make decisions for themselves. And that decision-making process precludes Linux for almost all people who actually need to inter-operate with other people. Switching to an unpopular OS is not made into a rationally sound decision by pointing out that "if everyone else did to, it would be a great decision to switch". Well, no, part of the decision is estimating the likelihood of everyone else switching, vs the pros and cons of using a popular OS vs an incompatible unpopular one that's "better". People individually / rationally realize that the costs of switching are going to massively outweigh the benefits, therefore you never get the ground swell of people switching.

Here's a thought experiment. Qwerty vs Dvorak keyboards. Dvorak keyboards are objectively better than Qwerty keyboards, to an extent that makes switching OS look like child's play. Why don't you start typing with Dvorak? After all, nobody but you cares what keyboard layout you use, whereas having an OS used by more than 2% of the population makes you objectively more compatible.

No one needs to "switch" to Linux because it is inter-operable. It can be installed alongside Windows, for example, and can access the hard drive and files on the Windows partition.
In any case, the success of Linux has mostly been driven by geeks with a love for what they do.
Their success is dependent on their skill, technique etc, and if people used/supported it, that would be better, but not necessary.
Whether most people use Linux or not doesn't seem to impact the Open Source movement as much as if people stopped using Windows/Mac, for example.
I guess you could say, Linux doesn't need you, you need Linux!

As for the Dvorak example, that's a very good point. You can easily continue this line of thought:
If you want people to use Dvorak, we should teach children to do so.
In a few generations, it would be the norm!
So if we want to change the norm of society in the future, we have to make some changes NOW! Hence this thread :p

[Antsan]

I'm stumped by claims that Windows supposedly is more user-friendly. Every time I try to do anything in Windows, it is an exercise in frustration.
New install? Good luck finding all the necessary drivers!
Dual boot with another system on UEFI? Write a script to actually be able to use the bootloader you want to use, instead of the one Windows writes into the UEFI on each startup.
Install some program? Those installers might look good at first sight, but in comparison to a proper package manager they're a pain in the ass.
Uninstall some program? Yeah, you might think that it's easy, but only if you don't care about a clean registry. And you should care about a clean registry.
Use multiple programs at once? Now I gotta dick around with one tiny panel that is hardcoded to be in a specific place, not to speak that I can't add additional ones and even if I could having multiple desktops is just way better and more comfortable to use than a frikkin' single panel.
Use a program that wasn't installed by an administrator when you're not an administrator yourself? Forget it, it's impossible.
Want to work at something uninterrupted? Nope, Windows updates will happen when they want, not when you are ready to take a step away from the computer. Not to speak of how updates require a damn restart every damn time. What the fuck, what year do we have?

At every damn turn Windows tells me it knows better than me when it actually doesn't. And even when looking at less savvy people using Windows I get the feeling that their workflow is full of workarounds that would be plain idiocy on a Linux system.
I think people only think Windows is more user.friendly because
1. they used Windows first
2. they still see Linux as it was 30 years ago
I know Ubuntu is the go-to example for a usable system, but frankly, it's a horrible mess, full of cruft and the same hand-holding that doesn't actually make using the computer any easier, even for beginners.
Debian, at this point, is perfectly fine for a casual user.

I can see that you'd want to use Windows for compatibility, which is what I do. User-friendliness, though… That's just plain ridiculous.