There's a old saying - You can polish a turd all day, but it's still a turd. That pretty well describes desktop Linux. Merely putting more polish on it won't fix the real problems.
Ubuntu, Suse, Mandriva, Red Hat, etc. - they're all stuck in the X11/Gnome/KDE world of inconsistent amateur superficial lipstick-on-a-pig Windows 95 GUI workalikes.
They target lowest common denominator hardware with a primitive graphics architecture, so they don't support advanced technology for screen drawing. The system fonts and typographic layouts are ill-proportioned and look awful, so it's hard to look at for any extended length of time. A good working knowledge of Linux system commands is still needed to use them, so it's best suited for hobbyists - not a typical computer user. It's not a desktop system I'd want to use for more than a few minutes, or recommend to my friends unless they were dirt-poor and couldn't afford a decent computer.
Mac OS X has the superior technology at affordable prices for desktop computer users - without requiring the user to know anything about UNIX.
^^^^^^^^^^^There's a old saying - You can polish a turd all day, but it's still a turd.^^^^^^^^^^^
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!! I'll take your word for it.
http://members.aol.com/kupan787/Rhapsody.htm
LOL
^^^^^^^^Merely putting more polish on it won't fix the real problems.^^^^^^^^^
All you're doing is proving your lack of seeing what the "problems" really are.
^^^^^^^A good working knowledge of Linux system commands is still needed to use them^^^^^^^^^^
A lie repeated a thousand times is still a lie.
^^^^^^^^Mac OS X has the superior technology at affordable prices for desktop computer users - without requiring the user to know anything about UNIX.^^^^^^^^^^^^
SuSE has the superior technology at affordable prices for desktop computer users - without requiring the user to know anything about UNIX.
Ubuntu has the superior technology at affordable prices for desktop computer users - without requiring the user to know anything about UNIX.
Linux is competitive even with the mac. *YOU* personally don't like it. Which is fine. But passing off your opinions as reality when you yourself admit you're using a distro which is designed as a foundation for servers shows the desperation of your argument.
Would you put your grandma on win2k3 server beta 1? I wouldn't either.(assuming linux didn't exist) I'd give her something that's got more polish, and is designed for the types of usage that she'd be going for. Flip the argument. Would you put your server on XP home? In both cases in this paragraph, it's total idiocy.
If you want to make a case for/about joe user, at least base your argument on software that's designed for joe user.
FreeBSD is about as user-friendly in the interface as the Linux kernel. Mac OS X is essentially a highly-polished turd.
So what Linux needs is a better polish.