Also the probability to get in contact with linux is way much bigger than in the days I knew.
But I encounter quite a lot of people struggling to make out which distro to choose.
Then I give them Ubuntu.
I barely mention the different types of Ubuntu, but that’s the influence of Barry Schwartz on me. (ref. to the video in the post)

And I might add, I’m glad to see big companies bringing linux to the masses too.
This is the most comfortable way for people to to get it, as they just don’t trust anything they get for free.

Nowdays there are more Linux users around, better distributions for beginners, better forums on Internet, better hardware support etc So todays users has a much better situation then in those days. And I has installed things like Prime OS on a Prime 750 around 1984, which is not this easy

The problem is that ASUS, Dell, HP etc isn’t selling Linux (or at least FreeDOS) preinstalled on new customer machines on all markets. Just some, and mostly for company markets. So I partly agree with Tom Drazul and Kim Tjik on this.

In short, we, the customers, must demand to be able to buy computers without the need to pay for MS taxes (preinstalled software from MicroSoft). Preferable with Linux preinstalled, but at least with FreeDOS or no OS at all.

Linux’ main and most known choices:
- all might become whatever you like it to be; desktop, server, mediacentre and so forth (only if you by purpose choose a very specialized distro will you to some extent limit your further choices)

Windows’ versions:
- the full package, different scales of how crippled it is, some less crippled but with a bonus of another feature; very few can become anything above its basic limits, besides if you pay for an upgrade

There’s no similarities between these two bundles of choices. Hence making a conclusion on top of this misconception will fail.

Choices within Linux is another discussion. Linux grow and develop because of the freedom to make it into whatever you like. To demand sever change, in effect to cut off the majority of branches attached to the Linux tree, would be the same as killing off the motivation to create. Of course, as an old timer wrote recently, John “Maddog” Hall, it’s good practise to check whether a tool already exists before reinventing it once more and hence waste time, but that’s a totally different matter.

Why this obsession about the masses? Linux shouldn’t compromise its strengths just to appeal to group of people, who frankly wouldn’t appreciate Linux beyond what they see on the screen. That’s not the same as pushing those people away, may that not happen, but to let time work and open inroads. Who knows, Linux might split in different camps by time, since Intel and others seem stubbornly decisive in making Linux a common place house name in all kinds of gadgets. But don’t demand Linux to become something that the ones mostly involved don’t share.

A new linux user is going to use whatever some friend recommends (and installs), is used at work or school, some computer magazine writes about, shown in a TV show or what is delivered with the new computer.

Very few will ever do a search an choose from 220 different distributions. Most uses what is given to them, and that is why MS is so big in the market. Not becouse all customers have done lots and lots of research.

Most of those is not even usefull on a desktop. More like embeded systems or servers.

That’s why some are vastly more popular, like Ubuntu.

Even the user of this crappy example might google “easy linux distros” or “linux for beginners” and not have to dig through 220 listings.

Just like when you want to buy a car you don’t research every fucking car in existance, just the COUPLE that interest you.

Is too many models of cars making it too hard for people to drive?

Yes, the world of linux is complicated if you try to just jump in without thinking about it.

Or even more extreme… perhaps we should be pushing a single distro as our primary source for newbies…? That would never fly I understand, as most people believe “their” distro is the best etc. etc… but it would be what is required.

Don’t be so dismissive of the key problem though. If you hear about linux, and want to give it a quick try… where do you start? I’m not going to spend 3 nights researching different distros, strengths, weaknesses, communities etc. for something that I may only download and run once.

The article is absolutely right… getting into linux is as confusing as hell because it is very difficult to tell which are the largest distros, which are the easiest, which are the most user friendly etc.