Why Linux Isn’t Mainstream: Marketing

Marketing of any Linux distribution is often sub-optimal if it is to gain share in the desktop market for the simple reason that it is geared towards either gaining distro converts (people already familiar with Linux) or developers interested in the development of something new. It is also aimed at companies who want an OS for their servers and whatnot however that is beyond the scope of this blog series.

For example, Ubuntu is a Linux distribution which is renowned for its usability however its marketing is clearly targetting other Linux users (because the website was down at the time of this post, the link will take you to the Google cache of the page). This is disappointing as it clearly has the potential for widespread use on the desktop.

The marketing of a Linux distribution is often hindered by the fact that it is a Linux distribution and is stated as such. There are so many distributions of Linux it is often very confusing for Linux newcomers especially since they do not understand the concept of open source. A Linux distribution, as mentioned in the above post, should not be stated as a Linux distribution at the beginning as it creates confusion and confusion hinders acceptance of software.

The Linux Myths. There are many, ranging from “Linux can’t open multimedia files” to “You have to be a system administrator to run Linux properly”. I completely disagree with these statements for many reasons. For example, in Linux the need to defragment is virtually non-existant. The need for anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewalls and similar security software is next to zero, in fact almost useless to the average user (with the possible exception of using WINE). The need for disk cleanup is greatly reduced, though admittedly not obsolete for some uses. The GUIs of today’s Linux are exceptionally mature and with the upcoming KDE 4.1, soon to be superior to commercial competitors in my opinion. Installing software using the current Linux system of using repositories, while not ideal, is far easier than installing software on Windows.

Why Linux Isn’t Mainstream: Support

Now, let’s face it. When you get a product you want to be assured of commercial quality support. Well, that used to be few and far between when it comes to the Linux desktop. Many companies don’t go near Linux for this reason. I think a lot of people are stuck with an age old impression of Linux.

There are various options for commercial support, the most popular of which would appear to be installing Ubuntu (which is free, as in beer) and purchasing support. This assumption is based solely on the fact that Ubuntu is currently the most popular Linux distribution, though certainly not the best in my humble opinion.

Companies can also hire a Linux guru to do all the administrative tasks and troubleshooting for them. It seems, however, that they are unaware of how widespread Linux is in the world and tend to believe that it is near impossible to find someone with the necessary skills required for the job.

Another option, which is probably out of the question for most business users, is to install a Linux distribution and if you happen to have a problem “Google is Your Friend” which is a hackers way of telling you to clear off. Of course, there often a helpful community of users willing to help you by means of IRC or the community forums.

Why Linux Isn’t Mainstream: Portability

This post is about the portability of binaries! The pre-compiled agents of the dark lord himself. Okay, I’m exaggerating and being a knob at once. So, binaries are what is commonly distributed by software vendors who want software installation for average users to be simple. That’s all well and good in Windows in many cases (I’ll leave the ratios to yourselves) but when it comes to Linux it’s nothing short of a nightmare. In fact, significantly worse, because if you pinch yourself you’ll know it’s reality.

Why is it a problem? Well, there are actually many reasons…

First of all, binary compatibility is defined by what versions of certain software your distribution has installed. Different distributions of Linux have different versions of software installed, and so binary compatibility is inconsistent. The LSB (Linux Standard Base) attempts to resolve this by creating a standard set of versions that distributions can conform to, in order to be compatible with each other.

Secondly, there are different tools used by different distributions to install software and therefore register it as installed so it can be uninstalled later if desired. This leads to a problem, because how is a software binary supposed to register when there are multiple tools which require you to register differently.

The LSB decided it would be a good idea for software binaries to use the following pattern.
Software Binary — API — Tool A / Tool B
API could also be taught to use Tool C and the Software Binary could be installed because it doesn’t need to know about it.
So you can use whatever Tool you like, so you can send the Software Binary to your friends even if they use a different Tool.
Unfortunately API was never made. We’re told to be patient…

I believe a significant reason for what I believe is the failure of the API is that we are trying to make existing technology work with the GUI and various tools which were never meant to be used in such a way and are difficult to use in such a way. It seems that the way out of this would be to either heavily modify an existing tool or start from scratch with the aim of providing a simplistic way to access various necessary tasks.

Liquidat covers this issue in greater detail.

Why Linux Isn’t Mainstream: Hardware

Let’s face it. Hardware compatibility sucks. For tech geeks it works with tweaking and that’s enough for us, but for the average user spending hours at the keyboard trying to get the monitor to work properly isn’t the way forward. This isn’t always the case, but can be, and contributes to the negative image Linux has.

That is, of course, only stating the current way of things, as this is likely to change in the future… at some point. For example, there is always the Linux Driver Project which offers free driver development for companies who are willing to release their hardware specifications. Or OpenPrinting which aims to help the printer situation under UNIX-like operating systems.

Then there is also the fact that there is no really easy to use database to check whether your computer will run Linux out-of-the-box. There is always the LiveCD but users are unlikely to understand this. And there is also the fact that some peripherals may not work at all. When buying peripherals, you need to scan the net endlessly to check prices, compatibility, features which are all limited to a certain scope when using Linux. By which I mean, hardware is likely to be old if it is compatible which means its likely to lack certain features which also means that by the time you can successfully use it with your computer you’re stuck with cheap hardware.

Now, in terms of databases to see what peripherals you can use I understand there is Linux USB Device Overview which is easy enough for a tech user who knows where to get the drivers and how to install them. But again, I’m thinking mainstream.

And for some of you who are a little less knowledgeable, you may be thinking hardware vendors could provide their own drivers on a CD. Well, I would think so too, but not with the current state of Linux binaries (which shall be covered at some other stage).

Why Linux Isn’t Mainstream

Well, basically, I want somewhere to post my thoughts. Somewhere I can keep a record of what I think/thought was a good idea in order to create something great for the future. It’s the reason why I spend more time reading blog posts, project documentation and asking friends using Linux what they think of it than actually learning to program. I want to find something to focus on, a goal that can radically change and improve the Linux desktop and market share.

I’m reading about why the incredible speed and reliability of Linux isn’t attracting all the users and companies of the day, why Linux is only just competing with the Windows OS of 12 years ago (reference), why people find it difficult to use, why the eye candy of 3D effects isn’t bringing users in droves.

Honestly, there is a simple answer and it’s not easy to hear or read. I’m going to be brutally honest as a great fan of Linux. Linux sucks.

Now the previous statement probably seems strange, if not completely alien that an avid fan of Linux would say that the operating system he stands by and promotes day-in-day-out sucks but I do have my reasons. I don’t think all of the problems with Linux should be explained in one long blog post so expect this to be spread out over many… to my horror.