Do you think if someone sold a Linux distro for $300 more people would use Linux?

Question

I think people assume it's no good if it's free. If they saw it in the store next to Windows for the same price, I think they'd give it a try. What do you think?

Answer 1

I'll get technical here, even though I don't know how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.



It's possible that if someone sold a Linux distro for $300 more people would use Linux, but I doubt there would be a direct cause and effect. I read Groklaw and comment a lot. I won't deny some of the criticisms of it are valid but the people who run it do a lot of serious research about legal issues involving Open Source and Linux. If you go to the home page in the right hand column there is a link to something called MS Litigation. I strongly recommend clicking on it and reading it. It deals with the most recent anti-trust cases brought against them, and some other issues.



In essence you shouldn't need Groklaw to understand that one reason Linux doesn't have more market penetration (as Ubuntu) is because Microsoft is trying to make it as expensive as they can to run it. They've done this to everything, which is a reason we're talking about Ubuntu rather than the BeOS, say.



I won't talk about what a pain Gnome has been since they introduced Mono and MS technology except to say that while KDE has always seemed so bright, peppy and utterly without inhibitions it always reminded me of someone on Ecstasy it has become my primary desktop.



Meanwhile Steve Ballmer has claimed -- while refusing to be specific -- that "Linux" infringes on 124 or whatever the number is patents. Does he MEAN the kernel? Linus Torvalds has asked, "Just because Windows does it what makes you think that is EVER a good idea?" and this actually does seem to be part of the design philosophy behind it.



Microsoft is abusing its monopoly power to keep Linux off the desktop. Whether Linux should run on everyone's desktop is another question. There really should be room for an OS specifically for power users.

Answer 2

There are three reasons why Linux is not popular.



1. There are too many variants. If there was one GUI, people could move from job to job and start using the program instantly. That's not the case right now.



2. Business does not like supporting free software. The word free is not in their vocabulary (That fits in with your logic)



3. Microsoft went to bed with many of the large commercial software developers, so Linux porting was (is) out of the question. Thus, Linux software has to be developed on site, or to special order, making the cost prohibitive. Most Linux software is open source, so it may not have the polish most people want.



BUT It's rumored that Google is about to take on Linux as their own OS. Once Google gives the nod, commercial developers will immediately start producing ported versions of their software and things will begin to change. When it happens, it will happen fast because I'll bet every developer has a Linux version locked away in the safe waiting for the big day. I hope it will be sooner rather than later.

Answer 3

Actually there's evidence that Linux is now on a trajectory to begin to pose a real threat to Windows. Its mass uptake has largely been delayed because historically it has required a good deal of technical nouse to install and configure it. Now that distros like Ubuntu are available, which are almost at the stage where anyone can use it, Linux is set for a potentially much bigger uptake. Forrester study supports this (makes for very interesting reading).

Answer 4

Linux is getting more and more popular, and nowaday, even HP, IBM have Linux pre-installed in their desktop for sales. So we just have to wait slightly longer, when more people tries Linux, they will find that in term of the usage, it is same as window. Then they will used.



But the problem is that there are toooooooo many distro of Linux, and this cause non-techie to confuse and get worry, unlike Window, just 1 version.

Answer 5

No.



A lot of people use Windows because it is user friendly, and its easy to learn how to use the basics. Linux, on the other hand, is open source. You'd have to know some programming to get it to do what you want. Also, you'd need to know stuff about computers, like installing each piece of hardware by itself.



People have sold their versions of Unix, have a prepackaged version of everything ready to go out of the box. Some examples are Redhat, and other places have free linux projects like Fedora,.

Answer 6

all people must to know. Thats open source and freeware means is THERE IS NO GUARANTEE.... And its depends for the people that need some service... If you a guys have got problem with some distro and you have take time to make more service and give a guarantee... Maybe thats the way to make a brand new bussiness...

Answer 7

It is perfectly legal to sell Linux as long as you pass on the GPL licence and are prepared to issue the source code. Unfortunately if you do decide to sell it for a lot of money, you then need to offer support for it. I actually install it for most of my clients for sever use, and many of them for workstations. I do NOT rip them off, my initials are not BG or WG. I do however charge for this as I need to eat. For this I also have to offer support. This can be a bit of a nuisance, but only due to user finger problems mostly, as the system is very reliable and stable.

Answer 8

nope because everyone is in a windows world and everyone knows how to use windows so if they have windows problems know someone who is good with computers they can call them up and say my computer is doing this what do i do if they are running seperate programs he cant call his friend because his friend probably wont have a clue you shouldv'e bougt stock in windows

Answer 9

just add aguarrantee or warranty and put any price linux wiil do