What do you think? Can Linux make it as a desktop OS?

Maybe...but not yet. It's too impossing to new users if they need to change settings that don't have a GUI (then again drop into a DOS box and start typing a few commands and a fair few people look at you as if you are some kind of Windows guru) 'hardcore' Windows users take one look at Linux and tend to get that funny look on their face, and then walk off. Unix user on the other hand seem to take to Linux a lot easier for some reason

not at this moments... ultimatelly lots of peoeple are speaking about Linux is similar to Mac OSX (The home, the users, where you find the Desktop Folder) and graphically are excellent and very customizable (more than XP) specially with KDE3, gNome2 and Nautilus. The community are working hard. Maybe United Linux can reach a really "compatible" Linux for the masses.
Personally, i like more Linux now, comparing to the past year it's positive

I think it would take a some major blunder by M$ combined with some important advances in Linux. Tighter and tighter liscensing restrictions by M$ and it becoming more and more expensive to use could do it.

One major problem for Linux is lack of a gaming API. One of M$ best moves was the creation of DirectX. The gaming developers have said they will continue to not port games to it until it has a similar API. Some people might scoff at the idea that games are holding Linux back, but how many of those same people have at least one game on their computer? They may not play games but most households have at least one person that is going to be very disappointed if they can't play games anymore.

Drivers are another issue. How many winprinters and winmodems are out there that don't work at all with Linux? Last time I checked most still didn't.

Broken/incomplete programs. Sure you can do most things on your Linux machine, just be good at figureing out how it works on your own. Lack of documentation can be a real killjoy to a user. So are visible buttons that don't do anything. Programs that don't start for no apparent reason is real fun as well.

Lack of a simple file system. If I am looking for a program in windows it is almost always in C:\Program Files\(company name or program name). Common things tend to only go into a few directories. In Linux they are liable to be anywhere. This can be extreamly frustrating. "I know I installed it. Now, where the h*ll did it go!?!?!"

Either KDE or Gnome needs to become dominate. Too many programs work with one or the other and sort of with the oppisite.

The ability to configure it has gotten much much better.

It has come a long way. It has a long way to go. I hope it makes it. We need more choices I think.

p

ha!!!!

I doubt it. It would take a serious mistake by M$ to do it and I do not think they will do that.

But as far as servers and in the office, it is possible that Linux can take over that (or at least 1/3)

Yes, no doubt it, it's getting there.
The main problem with Linux is the lack of software compatibility with Windows. With projects like Lindows where virtually all Windows programs could run withing the Linux OS, then the answer is undoubtably yes.
I know I'll switch to Linux in a eyeblink if I can still run all my Windows programs. Games will follow too, the equivalent of DirectX is being ported on the Linux plateform.
I say another 2 to 3 years maximum and Linux will be ready for primetime.

Linux is still some years away from the desktop. How ironic if it turns out to be helped by the Mono/.Net efforts.

For sarcastic humor purposes:

WOW! A click and install from the net option for $99 a year! {Please do not reinstall the OS or these apps after that 12 months, because you'll lose them).

WOW! They renamed the hilariously obtuse icons!

Linux on the desktop isn't quite "stumble-along-acceptable" yet. Corel had a line on it years ago. Mandrake seems to have some of that clue as well. GNOME/KDE are helping, but its a matter of the underlying distribution as well.

It will remain about as popular with users in general as LiteSTEP is with Win users in particular.....too great a learning-curve will put most off.
I just spent half a day re-coding my latest theme's step.rc and script.rc to be 'cleaner' and 'better'...and that's after 5 years of meddling with LS.....enough to put a lot of people 'off' switching from Exploder...

I love Linux, but there are always walls coming up when using it. You want the latest, coolest add-on hardware for your computer and you can't find any linux drivers (unless you want to use some pre-alpha-test version of your distribution). I appreciate the extensive testing before making stable releases and all the gigantic effort that goes into making distributions (usually without getting any money), but I don't think Linux can keep up when it comes to the normal user.

As for small companies (and big ones), it is a very cheap and excellent solution. I should know, since the company I work for are forced to upgrade to win2000 in order to keep getting MS support. Liscensing fees are outrageous, whereas Linux is...free.

I hope linux will one day be able to compete with MS.

Don't forget that OSX's core is Unix. With interfaces such KDE/Gnome getting more and more advanced, the ease of use is becoming a piece of cake. Even installing a software is getting to be easy with RPM files.

By the way, did you know that there are more Linux users than Mac users? (I'm not kidding, it's about 6% vs 4%).

The problem is that these boxes, being sold by WalMart, are being targeted to home users. 90% of the time, folks will buy these computers and won't realize what Linux is. They will be expecting some kind of "Windows" box. They will take them home, set them up and say stuff like ... "well this doesn't look like Uncle Berts' computer..." I just don't think that this is going to be a very positive experience, which will set the linux movement back a few years.

What werewolf said. I also think it's going to be a support nightmare for Wal-Mart.

Well, I haven't seen it at Walmart so I don't know how they are going to sell it, but I hope they will clearly indicate that the system is not Windows.
Besides, people who would buy a Linux based system without knowing what they are buying, would IMO give support nightmare to anybody, even with Windows.

Hey, any one notice how a lot of these linux distros seem to need a non-NTFS formatted space to install to, and to get it running NTFS, you have to patch later? Well how do you get it installed to get to be able to patch if the original drive is preformatted with NTFS because you are running win2k?

Can you run some proggie that removes part of the NTFS partition and converts it to FAT32 to do the install?

Or is it not possible to run FAT32 and NTFS on the same physical drive?

Or what about having a slaved drive running FAT32 with the master running NTFS? Does that work? Although, would it even boot to Linux since it would be installed on the slave drive?

hmmmm...and yes, I have been digging around on FAQs and distro homesites, as well as trolling the help sites I have found. I wish they had post dates on them...some I came across were from pre-win2k, so there was not much of an NTFS issue back then...

Lindows boxes are curently only to be sold on Walmart.com and not in the stores where HP has the exclusive contract.

Can Linux make it on the desktop? Only time will tell. It needs better driver support, better support for common tasks with a gui for getting them done and there needs to be a common set of applications with common names to get all the usual tasks done ( office stuff, Web browser, email, PIM Ect...) Also there need to be a common interface Choice is good but standards make things work...

I've been playing with Linux for a couple of years now and I like it (not as my main OS though). The only way I can see Linux becoming acceptable for the masses, is when people like my mother can use it. Right now, she can fire up her system, log onto the Internet, check her mail and do a small amount of other things. When it gets to the point that it is as easy to use as Windows, it might stand a chance. Until then, it is just going to be a niche market for technical types.

Just as a passing note...I seem to recall that the gaming industry accounts for billions of dollars (pounds, euros, lira, etc.) per year. Now, remove the console market, and you don't end up with much outside of windoze runners. I don't recall hearing anything in, oh, since the creation of the desktop pc being mentioned about any other type of software making that kind of an impact in sales...so I would guess that there are a huge group of games-oriented pc users out there that do SOME work on their boxes, or graphics, etc., as hobbies (or work at home, etc.). So if you have the OS and work-related stuff available and you still don't have a decent market share for home users, why not do the obvious last thing possible to grab the most in the shortest time, and port games or design new ones from scratch for Linux systems?

I think THAT might make a big impact...my two cents (I don't pay VAT in the US )

OSX might create more goodwill towards Linux and the like. It's what people need really. Something that's easy to set up and works.

But I think that'll take quite some time.