| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
Is this about free software?
Is this about free software?
Posted Dec 16, 2006 1:12 UTC (Sat) by djabsolut (guest, #12799)In reply to: Is this about free software? by vblum
Parent article: "BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
... technical superiority was the really important thing; in the end that will promote free software best.
Technical superiority of the Beta video format didn't get it very far in the competition against VHS. From a maket point of view, it's more important to address a specific problem/need/want in a timely manner, with plenty of backing. Whether a particular solution works worse (though not terribly so) than the best solution, is of secondary importance. A relevant example is Sony's Playstation 2: it still steamrolled Xbox 1, not because it was better, but because it was there first.
The same applies to open source software. As much as I like using it because of the freedom it affords (freedom to mix'n'match, freedom to modify, not costing the earth), the Windows "solution" is good enough for 90% of people. It "works" now and has "worked" for a while. It plays DVDs, let's people play games, do word-processing, send emails and browse the web. There is really no compelling reason (though lots of little reasons) for people to switch en masse away from it. Most people don't care about DRM or other issues that are perceived as esoteric and/or philosophical. They just want the bloody thing to work. Case point: open source software needs more than technical superiority.
(Log in to post comments)
Is this about free software?
Posted Dec 21, 2006 4:14 UTC (Thu) by Erich_J_Ritzmann (subscriber, #39670) [Link]
The prevalence of a product in the marketplace is more about the user experience than aboutsomething as abstract as technical superiority. The latter, while interesting, is not all important.
Interestingly, Linux outshines Windows in many respects. In some ways OS X outshines Linux --
out of the box graphics are leagues better than what I've seen on Linux or Windows, for example.
Most OS X software you get with it is well-designed, with excellent attention to how users will
interact with it. It's an excellent environment when you just want to get things done and not
have to assemble the car before driving to the grocery store.
But, more to your point ... wasn't Beta a single company product protected with many patents
and royalty payments high? Whereas VHS was a standard which a plethora of companies bought
into because it was a more open standard? I simplify slightly to make a point. Linux seems more
like VHS in the early days in many ways. Beta had an early market lead but then was
overwhelmed by the VHS flood.
Windows has an early lead. However, as it becomes harder to copy, i.e. the company refers to
this as pirating, more people will look for alternatives. Most of the world's population does not
yet use a computer. That is about to change over the next ten years. The key to Linux' success
will in part be determined by early adoption in the developing world. Its price and the ability to
readily localize it for languages which Microsoft will ignore, will be key to its uptake. The other
important point to get -- we need to get the UI consistent and designed from the perspective of
the user -- currently there is too little of that in Linux.
Is this about free software?
Posted Dec 22, 2006 15:40 UTC (Fri) by NRArnot (subscriber, #3033) [Link]
VHS and Beta weren't enough different for consumers to perceive any difference beyond that they were incompatible, and compatibility was the most desirable thing. It was eventually attained by VHS coming to dominate the market, and video rental stores eventually ceasing to offer Beta movies.
Had every VHS player cost 10-15% more than a similar Beta one because of a licensing fee, the story would almost certainly have played out differently. In any case it's not relevant to Linux vs M$ - the story there is that the market is already dominated by M$. Linux is the newcomer trying to break in with a better product at a totally unbeatable price (zero). Don't under-estimate how much the average Joe is willing to pay for the familiar (and Microsoft's biggest mistake with Vista may come to be seen as having changed the user interface yet again!)
It's a lot more like Ghandi's struggle for Indian independance: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Well, we've reached stage 3.