Magnitus: I think an remaining issue with Linux distributions, for the desktop, is that they still have a lingering "by geeks, for geeks" feel.
When asking most people why they don’t use Linux the most common answer is that they just can’t be bothered with it. I’m not sure where this geeks for geeks things is coming from.
Magnitus: With Windows, assuming you have laymans' needs (for programmers and IT professionals in general, it's a different ballgame and Windows sucks for most of these uses),
What is this argument based on? One of the most used compilers is visual studio C++.
Furthermore most development suits such as Autodesk game engines and other assorted are made for Windows. And on top of that if you’re programmer working on a project it’s Windows that you’ll be using to test it.
Magnitus: you'll have what you want built-in the OS or you'll fork 30$+ for some commercial offering that works well out of the box.
So? This is a problem why?
Magnitus: With Linux, you'll find an open-source tool to do what you want, but then you'll have to fiddle, either with quirks or with some extensive configuration setup that assumes you are a domain expert or with command line utilities because some features are missing from the GUI (ironically with a lot of for-Windows software, you'll hit the reverse problem where the GUI does everything you want, but its not really automatable with scripts). Now, many of the open-source tools just work like a charm out of the box, but you can't consistently count on it.
This right here is most likely the reason no one wants to use Linux. In the world of business as well as everyday life. Consistency in your tools is very important.
Magnitus: I'd say at this point, you can do ~80%-90% of what you want on the friendliest of distros using the GUI, but you'll want to complement it with the command line for the rest.
If you think Debain or anything based on it can do 80% of what Windows can do then you mustn't be aware of what computers are capable of. Android which is based on Linux but doesn’t count as s distro is far more capable then anything on Distro watch but still no where near as capable as Windows; and Android shows us what Linux would be like if and when it’s potential is reached.
Magnitus: I still think Linux is the future (the open-source model doesn't necessarily makes sense for all software, but it does for an OS and system-level tools, that's why Linux has pretty much conquered the majority of use-spaces if you look beyond the desktip)
It really hasn’t though. This is a common case of comparing an entire kernel familay to a single desktop OS. Linux is the kernel and Ubuntu is the OS. Windows is the OS but NT is the kernel. NT is not just used in Windows. It it is used and customised for specialised machines and circumstances. Some business will commission Microsoft to modify the kernel for them while others will use SKD.
People have been saying Linux is the future for years now and frankly never go into details as to what that even means. Does it mean that the kernel is the future? If the latest update of Windows integrated Linux code into it’s NT kernel does that count as being part of the envisioned Linux future?
Open-source closed-source. these are just methods of software production, it’s the results and not the methods that truly matter.