Why does Linux Desktop no longer matter?

Linux Desktop is a collection of hard-to-use. Although there is already obvious evidence that Linux desktop has no chance to turn itself into the mainstream, those defending Linux still start to say: & ldquo; we have basically succeeded! & Hellip; to some extent & hellip; & rdquo; of course, it can be said that Linux has been seated at the & ldquo; table with the help of Android identity

Linux Desktop is a collection of hard-to-use. Although there is already obvious evidence that Linux desktop has no chance to turn itself into the mainstream, those defending Linux still start to say, "We have basically succeeded! ...... To some extent ...... "Of course, it can be saidLinuxWithThe Android identity has been firmly held in the "Desktop System" championship, but this proves that Linux has completely failed in the desktop operating system field.

The reason is simple: Linux has never been simple and useful for Valery.

Most Suitable for the operating system of Valery

Valery is a lady who has cut my hair every six weeks for 25 years. She is not an early user of any technology, but one of the current mainstream people. If Valery is using a technology, it basically indicates that all others are using it.

Valery recently tried switching from a Windows computer to a MacBook. According to her interest (mainly photography), I once thought that a Mac would be a great choice. However, she is struggling to figure out how to import the photos she saved on Seagate's mobile hard drive to Mac for editing, because Mac cannot recognize her mobile hard drive (which seems to be a common problem ). Best Buy customer service advice is that she needs to format her Seagate hard disk to make Mac OS X compatible. If she does that, all her data will be lost.

Valery was scared. She didn't want 32,000 images to be inaccessible, or even worse-no.

After I cut my hair, I tried to help him set her new MacBook. I noticed that her Windows laptop was installed with the Netflix application, but not on Mac. It turns out that on a Mac laptop, she does not know how to transfer files, delete programs, or anything else, which she can naturally do on a Windows computer.

Now, as an absolute Mac fan, I have a fully-owned MacBook Air and MacBook Pro. But seeing her pain on Mac, I finally suggested that she buy an Asus Notebook with a built-in 1 TB hard drive so that she can no longer use the mobile hard drive.

Therefore, the problem is not about which operating system is better, but about which operating system is more suitable for Mary.

But my grandmother will use Linux!

For most people, the answer is Windows in most cases. Or, with the popularity of iPhone and iPad, there are more people who choose Mac OS x because they can synchronize data perfectly with Mac OS X. However, the answer is rarely Linux.

Dan cuttzky provides a lot of reasons why Linux will never become popular in the enterprise, but for me, the real analysis targets all the "valils" in the world.

If she uses an iPad or iPhone, she has enough reason to use Mac. But she does not, because of the price, she owns Android smartphones and Android tablets. And most of these devices are used as a pretty movie player. Linux has no help or contact for these needs of Valery.

Therefore, when people argue that Linux is good enough, I will be puzzled:

For Linux, there is no need to "Beat Windows" in the Desktop System to succeed. What it needs is to provide a practical alternative to Windows or other desktop systems. It has been doing this for many years. Today, any Windows user who wants to abandon Microsoft can switch to Linux to meet their computing needs.

Obviously, this is not true. It is just so frustrating. Yes, people can get basic computing functions and even advanced functions from Linux. However, they cannot smoothly transition from an existing device or experience.

The network is the new Linux

Compared with Linux, I think Google is the winner of the new "Desktop System. Not Android, but Google itself. Google's Chromebook has been quickly purchased, as Steven J. von nickles mentioned, because it provides excellent and inexpensive Google services. I can see that Valery is using Chromebook because it expands her favorite Google experience to a new (actually not so new) form. Thanks to Picasa, she has used it to save copies of photos, so she no longer needs to worry.

Linux has nothing to do with balancer's needs. It does not mean that it cannot be implemented, but because Linux requires balancer to adapt to it, rather than its needs. So you see, there are thousands of "Valais" in this world. They choose desktop systems, not camp problems, but more convenience. While Linux desktop has done too much in the previous aspect, but it is not enough to consider the latter.

Via: http://readwrite.com/2014/01/23/why-the-linux-desktop-never-mattered#feed=/hack&awesm= ~ Ou6OVYfWhEnIe6

Translator: zpl1025 Proofreader: Mr eye