How Linux Can Win (or Lose)

Linux is at a turning point in it's short (but eventful) history. Ubuntu, Linspire, and other easy to use operating systems are making it possible for the average end-user to install and use free Linux-based operating systems. Proponents of the open source software movement and the general mish-mash of the crowdsource are adding fuel to the fire with more advertising, major manufactures shipping Linux preinstalled on some desktops, and there was even a billboard advertising Ubuntu in New Jersey. Everything seems to be going well, but there are quite a few potholes to fill on this road.

One major problem with Linux is that there is no general public-friendly tech support system over the phone that anybody can use for free. For one, if Linux is going to even start thinking about penetrating the general end-user desktop market, then companies such as Canonical need to start moving support off of forums and onto the phone. It may seem like a step backward, but most non-techie people won't try and bother with registering at a forum or looking through a tech-babble troubleshooting booklet.

The first thing you see when you turn on a computer configured to dual boot between a Linux-based operating system and Windows is generally Grub. REDESIGN IT! I cannot say in words or emotions on how non-user friendly this boot loader is. No matter how simple, quick loading, or headache-inducing, Grub will not cut it for the soccer moms and day traders needed to shift market shares in Linux's direction.

Although it's been said over and over again, here it comes again: simplify everything. People don't want to go through the whole process of compiling a program, get something automated or simpler; like how a program is installed on a Mac or PC. Just don't stop at the operating system, when I say "simplify everything" I mean: "simplify everything". Simplify how people download/buy the correct version of the operating system. Quite frankly, if I show a random person at my local mall and tell them to choose from PPC, i386, and AMD64 to install on their computer, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be able to tell. Simplify the labeling, how people interact with other people, and give general driving directions to Redmond for people with torches and pitchforks.

Should Linux even bother to be as flashy as Vista Aero or OS X? A major factor when a person looks at a computer is how good it looks. Linux, at it's current stage, is passable, but the integration of software such as XGL and Compiz will make the consumers weak in their knees when they see all the special effects. Sure, it doesn't really add much usefulness, but look at what it's been doing for OS X and Vista. Lot's of praise and nearly free publicity for the special effects.

With all of the advantages of Linux over Windows, why hasn't it gained that much popularity with the public? For one, ask anybody out on the streets of Chicago "What is Linux?" and you'll probably get a puzzled response. Nobody really knows what Linux is. So all of you companies, Novell, Canonical, get advertising! Show off more billboards, get television commercials, and maybe a few newspaper ads. Although the internet is probably the biggest instant advertising medium, the powers of TV and radio also have quite a lot of power.

Emphasize freedom. Get controversial. Go get rallied up about breaking from the chains. Tell everybody how they've been stuped, ripped off, and reamed by the ridiculously high prices of software. Without compelling ads, you won't really get much attention at all. Make the line below freedom bold, and make sure people get the facts. Remember the number one rule while trying to sell something, the person listening will always have no clue about what you're selling; so make sure that everything is easy to understand.

Have people develop software that actually runs natively on the Linux operating system. If possible, limit translation programs such as Wine to a minimum. In order to gain acceptance, Linux needs to have developers make software just for the Linux platform. Have people not just think about developing apps for the Linux kernel, but actually have people develop the software. People need their apps, and if Linux can't offer a good selection, why bother switching?

Something that I've always thought about is the total effect of the Web 2.0 movement on the general operating system. If people can move tools onto the web, then there will be a general decline in the neccesity of choice of operating system for the user. So, it would boil down to which operating system can best integrate with the online community and applications. For that, Linux has fallen behind it's competitors. Microsoft has been taking initiative with Windows Live while Apple has been steadily moving forward with it's .Mac service and the other applications that easily integrate with online services. Linux, unfortunately, only has its rag-tag online forums and the buck stops there. The main problem with something like crowdsourcing is that the company doesn't really have enough funds to create and maintain online services that serve to make their operating system(s) more appealing to use.

In conclusion, the Linux operating system has still a long way to go, but it still holds even more potential. While Ubuntu & Xandros recieve raving reviews from tech publication editors, we're still waiting for that one operating system. A killer combonation of crowd sourcing, company structuring, and free software just could make Linux hit it big time.