New article in the Economist criticizing Linux usability

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: charles chris <cccharlz-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org>

| The usage of Linux can be greatly increased by providing an easy
| deployment method to computer stores, recyclers and non profits like
| Free Geek Toronto and Computers for schools in Mississauga.

This is the second message where you seem to be saying:

1) "what Linux needs is X"

2) as if that were the answer to the problems listed in the Economist
   column

3) where X is already the case

Perhaps you need to phrase your answers in the form of a question
"Does Linux have X?".

As I understand it, Free Geek does deploy Linux on their used
computers.

| Many computer stores do NOT load Windows on used computers because
| they cannot afford the license fees.

I don't know.  Used computers aren't that common in stores -- new
computers are so inexpensive now and old computers are usually weaker
/ obsolete.

There are a few places that sell off-lease computers.  They don't load
OSes because it is labour intensive (off lease computers that I've
bought usually have stickers with Windows licenses).

|  Recyclers and non profit
| organizations like Computers for Schools in Mississauga and Reboot
| Canada should deploy Linux onto the computers they donate or sell.

I think that they do.  It scares Microsoft enough that they have a
program for cheap or free licenses for some operations like this just
to crowd out Linux.

| Also, good support is needed to help people with Linux boxes install
| peripherals.

Labour intensive!

These days, skilled labour to deal with that kind of random minutae
would seriously increase the cost of a used computer.

The arithmetic of recycling most things is like this.  When producing
a computer in the first place, the runs are 10k to a million (pure
guess), resulting in economies of scale.  With recycling computers, you are
lucky if you get any run at all.  Think of Walmart vs Value Village --
the run lengths have drastic effects.

The hardest computers to deal with are the most worthless: the oldest.
Although I use computers that are a dozen years old, it makes no
practical sense to redeploy a machine older than perhaps four years
old.  As a hobby, the rules are different (my oldest hobby computer is
approaching 40 years old; older if you count my sliderules).

There are stores that sell used Macs.  I think that this is viable because

1) the Mac world has much less diversity than the PC world

2) Macs retain their value much more than PCs

3) the stores selling used computers gain an edge selling new ones
   since they can offer to take the old ones in trade.

| I believe my method of deploying operating systems onto standalone
| computers is most efficient.  See http://drpcdr.ca/LMLXDE.pdf

A pretty strong claim.  Since you haven't even enumerated let alone
discussed other methods, I find that hard to credit.

Do you know the other methods?  Heard of Kickstart?  PXE booting?  Live
Fedora or Ubuntu CDs?  And there are plenty more.
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists