Lessons Linux Should Learn From Windows and Mac

Published on October 20, 2008 in General by Ian McLean

It shouldn’t be too much of a stretch to assume that a good portion of those whom read this blog are Linux users, and so are involved to varying degrees in what is commonly called the ‘Linux Community’. Anyone who’s been into the whole Linux thang for a while has probably noticed this; I haven’t even been into it for very long (just a year and a bit, perhaps), but I’ve seen the following attitude on display here and there throughout the community.

When there’s not a massive amount of people whom are using Linux, or really anyone that shares a common interest in any particular thing in general, we’re going to tend to band together, to be a really close-knit community. By and large, you’re not going to find a whole lot of Windows users really getting too chummy because there’s literally millions upon millions of them. Even Mac, which only takes around 8% of a share of the market, that tiny 8% is millions as well. Linux takes less than 1%, according to statistics provided by Marketshare.

So when we’ve got such a small community we can tend to, well, get a bit caught up among ourselves. Sometimes we can be pretty quick to dismiss the competition and really try to aggressively push the Linux ’cause’, if you get what I mean. ‘Winblows’, ‘Micro$oft’, and all other kinds of oh-so-very-witty remarks get thrown around liberally and regularly, but it only takes a second of non-biased clarity to see that often, we’re walking in their footsteps. And really, we can see that Windows and Mac do a great number of things right, and not all of them are things that Linux gets perfect.

Windows XP

Microsoft’s baby may be holding 90% of the market due in part to their brute-force approach to marketing and business practices, but there’s also the little fact that Windows, in its current days, really isn’t all that bad of an OS. Nine of ten computer users are Windows users, and so it’s pretty safe to say that well more than nine of ten of us have tried it before. I’m only twenty years into my life so I grew up with Windows and the fact of the matter is, it’s not perfect, it’s not bulletproof (but what OS is? Really?), but it gets the job done pretty efficiently, once you know your way around it.

Firstly, there’s the little matter of hardware support. Windows’ position in the industry ensures that support from hardware vendors and OEMs is second-to none. It should be noted though, that an out-of-the-box installation of Windows XP or Vista don’t have this advantage. But nevertheless, since a large portion of Windows setups are OEM installations, it’s a boon that Windows enjoys and one that we’re still struggling with, so it’s always going to be an area that’s worthy of putting effort into improving.

One point we can’t argue with much is that Windows really makes an effort to be welcoming for the average computer newbie. You don’t need any knowledge of using the command prompt, you just click Start and you’re on your way to doing whatever you feel necessary. Plugging in hardware, it searches for drivers and installs them totally transparently (when it works). It makes a decent effort at configuring networks automatically and only tells you what the layman computer user needs to know, and nothing more unless you ask. Controls and options are in plain English more often that not, instead of tech-jargon that only an experienced user will understand.

Windows is the workhorse, the jack of all trades, and it does its job pretty well. In comparison to its competition, it’s not at all unique or incredibly special, but Microsoft selects its features very carefully and we get more or less what we need from it. No more, no less. And that doesn’t just apply to the computer savvy; it applies to the layman too, the kind of person some of us tend to forget about in between compiling kernels and configuring xorg config files.

Mac OS X

Love him or hate him, I’m under the impression that Steve Jobs has some kind of crystal ball telling him what should be the next big thing to try out with his operating system. Compositing windows? The dock? Expose? Where did we see all of these things first? I’m not lumping credit on Apple for the invention of these concepts, but it was way back in 2001 that they were really jumping on them and pushing them forward into the mainstream eye.

Innovation is the name of the game here and it seems to me like a lot of ideas or programs that get praised among the Linux and even Windows public appear to be things that the Mac already did ages ago.

One of the big things I love about Mac’s interface is that it looks awesome, partially because of the art style, but also because stays out of the way. Everything is streamlined, functional, logical, and nary a pixel of screen real-estate is wasted, not even on window borders. It’s also consistent, something that Windows and especially Linux users can’t always boast about so confidently, and it contributes a lot to the feeling that you’ve got a working environment before you that’s solid and always makes sense, no matter what you’re doing.

My last major point is that OS X is closer than any of the others to being an OS that really ‘just works’. When you turn on a Mac you’ve got everything you need right there in front of you, configured and working. No unstable software, no driver hunting, no dependency hell. In fact, in my experience, I’ve found it so stable and consistent to use it approaches being totally boring, and I actually found it preferable to focus on getting some work done!

Yes, Linux is at a disadvantage of not having official hardware to bundle with, and not having widespread hardware vendor support. But if you’re interested in improving Linux, these are things that need to be acknowledged as challenges to overcome, instead of excuses for coming up short.

Upstage them!

Being open source, Linux is blessed with a unique advantage that these mainstream, closed platforms don’t have. Microsoft and Apple pay employees to work feverishly to getting a polished product, but they’re still companies and they still have limits to their resources. The open source community has anyone who’s computer literate at its potential disposal! Even one who’s not an artist or programmer still has a voice, and that’s still a way to help mold the state of things for the future of Linux.

But we face a similar challenge to even the industry giants; we need to collaborate and we need to communicate. Inspiration and passion are our greatest assets and all that’s needed is a place that everyone can pool them.

So where to with Linux?

Everyone’s got their own ideas about how we could improve and progress, and I absolutely encourage anyone reading this to voice their thoughts too. So for now, here’s mine.

Collaborate!

This is an inherent problem with open source software; if you’ve got the talent for it, you can split off on your own and produce something that’s entirely under your control and you can take all the credit for it. In that sense, that’s often the reason why we’ve got hundreds of Linux distributions.

Hundreds of distributions may present a good amount of choice for the discerning Linux user, but for the average newbie it’s daunting, and not only that, when you’ve got hundreds of distros, you’re spreading resources thinner on the ground.

If we had everyone working together on just a tiny handful of distributions as opposed to hundreds, just what would those few distributions be like?

This works on the level of individual programs too. Take for example, the numerous dock programs we’ve got lying around. We’ve got Avant Window Navigator, Cairo Dock, Kiba Dock, KsmoothDock, Engage Dock and SimDock, just to start with. That’s six different programs made to do the exact same thing, and they’ve all got their own strengths and weaknesses. Why should we have to choose? Why don’t we just work together on one single dock that does everything right?

Microsoft and Apple may be huge, but even so, the entire Linux developer community, if they were to band together to a common cause, would dwarf them. All that’s required is some focus in the community of users and developers, to shape one thing and make it incredible. Don’t let your ego get in the way, and if you’ve got ideas on how to make a distro better, don’t fork, contribute to one that’s already in progress and improve it. An idea by itself will go nowhere, but a lot of them in once place, can make a great amount of difference.

Doing Something New

It’s easy to derive your ideas from that which already exists. If I’m playing music, it’s easier for me to cover a song than to come up with my own. But you never see cover bands selling out shows in arenas, and you’ll never see Linux dominating the mainstream market if it’s just seen to casual folk as a ‘me too’ OS.

Take again, the example of a dock program. I think a dock is a really cool feature, but it’s already been done by the Mac, and because of that, it was only the Mac doing it that ever made me raise an eyebrow and think, “That’s so cool, I’ve never seen anything like that before.”

To be honest, I didn’t personally become interested in Linux because I woke up one day thinking, “Gee, I wish there was an operating system that I could use that was free of charge, open source and community developed.” Actually, I became interested because I saw Compiz Fusion on YouTube spinning multiple desktops across a 3D cube and setting windows on fire, Gnome-Do navigating around the whole computer with a few key presses, Conky throwing up computer statistics that integrated seamlessly with the desktop. I’m sure that sounds silly and shallow, but it’s true, and I don’t think I’m the only one like that either.

Being unique is a universal quality that can apply to every level of the Linux community, from the entire community’s vision, to a distribution, to a program, down to the tiniest details. If we’re willing to break new ground instead of treading the safe path, that’s when we’ll end up with something that will not just impress fellow Linux users, but will impress anyone.

About Ian McLean

I'm an Australian born, currently Romanian based amateur web designer and writer, as well as aspiring musician, and connoisseur of free and open source software.

«

»

  • bill468667687
    Windows has grown from the awkward 3.0 days--Linux is still the dork in green polyester. The dweeb that comes up with a properly documented Linux distro will---oh never mind, he won't get any market share either.
  • Mike
    A good article but there are a couple things I think you are missing.

    1.) UI configurability. - Mac and Windows have the ability to look like Mac and Windows, which is partially good from a support perspective because a support person can tell the newbie user to look for the start button. In Linux window managers the possibility for configuration is nearly endless... which is great if you love to tweak the look of your machine and get the "wow" factor from someone looking over your shoulder. If you like the mac interface, customize your linux window manager to mimic the mac interface. If you want it to look like windows, use KDE(sorry, that's an out of date shot at the KDE folks ;) ).

    2.) When you say "collaborate" and then in the next section you say "do something new", you realize that the two are somewhat contradictory. Sure there's lots of distributions which seem similar. However, as software decisions are made by the leadership on a project, those who disagree may be more inclined to branch the software on their disagreement in order to prove it's efficacy. Take for instance Compiz and Beryl. Beryl was a branch of Compiz in which the two worked on seemingly similar concepts that they probably could not have done in the same project. Eventually they merged back together, but in the end they benefited from the unfettered ability to try new things. Ubuntu is as welcoming as it is to the new user because it was not under the Debian umbrella. If they were simply committing to Debian, trying to install an Nvidia graphics driver would result in your system telling you that the new driver "taints the kernel" all the time. Don't get me wrong, the Debian folks have, in my opinion, built the strongest distribution for customization and a base for new distributions... but the practicality of their strong free software stance holds back their penetration into the new user market and promotes the idea that you have to be a zealot or a programmer to use Linux.

    So, you see, while it may push things forward faster if we all joined hands, picked a "best of breed" and set out to kill the butterfly, it would kill the innovation that is happening all the time in the open source world. And usually, the innovations that are really good end up getting roped into the other distributions anyway. And Linux is already ahead in some things. Ideas are tried and either accepted or discarded far faster in the Linux world than they are anywhere else, which is why Aero and Leopard look so lame in comparison to what Compiz can do.

    In the end, it's your computer who should follow your commands, not the other way around. Look at it through this analogy. If you want to jump off a cliff, Windows will prompt you at every step, "Are you sure you want to do this?" A Mac will simply say, "Sorry, I can not allow you to do this." Linux, depending on the distro, might suggest a parachute. Other than that, it assumes you aren't going to do anything you actually don't want to do.
  • SAVET MORM
    Dear Madam and Sir,

    I would to reseaching about the Linux for my assignment at school. so i would like you to help me to find the result, i hopefully you could help me, thank you very much.
    best regard
  • tuxhugger
    It is not hard to tell that I prefer linux hands down. But I am an applications programmer!!! The vast majority of people want a system so easy a kindergardner can use it. If we can build it that easy to use,Linux would rule the desktop market just like it does in business.
  • SyCo
    Rants about Linux are usually due to a lack of Linux experience. Rants about Windows are usually due to a lot of Windows experience.

    I still use Windows but because I have to. As a pro photographer Carbonite, APC tools and Adobe are everyday needs for my professional PC. My personal laptop has been Linux for years.

    Someone said Windows has easier to install apps, now that made me laugh!!
  • Lessons Linux Should Learn From Windows and Mac
  • Kopachris
    Very well done article!
  • macuser
    i guess i am only casually working 14 hours a day. who knew?
  • Thinking about this blog post form Hehe2 http://tinyurl.com/5lualu
  • Durand
    I don't think you need to use the command line to install drivers. I'm unsure because I've never had to install a driver manually though I guess I am on a desktop. If hardware manufacturers stuck to standards, people wouldn't be having these problems. Dell desktops and laptops seem to work pretty well with linux so I guess thats testament to linux working :S
  • Durand
    Ubuntu and Windows aren't that similar...Windows doesn't give you an operating system that works the moment you install it. With windows, you need to download/buy the majority of programs that you would use on a daily basis. Ubuntu comes with an Office suite, Music Player, IM, Email Client, Video player, and a ton of drivers. Windows doesn't.
  • Shane
    @RobotFriendly: So whats your point? They still pick the hardware if not manufacture it, which is what I meant in the first place, I just did not convey it properly. It still means they have to get the OSX working on only limited hardware.
    I am aware of all those links you sent me and let me tell you that I have tried installing OSX on non MAC systems and eeePC and Pystar have to try very very very hard to get it working on their hardware. Other companies like Pystar can put MACS on their systems coz they have a whole staff dedicated to figuring out how to get OSX working. I was wondering if you have tried putting OSX on a Dell of your choice at home. I have and it sucks and I am a Programmer and despite my trouble shooting efforts that lasted for over a month it was all in vain.
    The point of my post is not whether another company can install OSX on their system. Of course they can. They will probably need to hire kernel hackers to do that (maybe not) but the point is whether a DIY person like myself can install OSX at home.
    Linux provides me with that freedom OSX doesn't, its that simple. Next time try installing OSX on a custom built system of your choice and then get back to me.
    I think you need to enlighten yourself before you reply to other people's posts..
  • Ian needs to read "The Mythical Man-Month" by Fred Brooks. It's required reading for software project managers. The summary? Throwing more people at a problem doesn't solve it faster: in fact, the project slows down.

    Small teams work better and produce more than large teams. There's a reason Vista was years late to the market and eventually lost every interesting feature that was promised when it was started.

    Lots of small projects working to standards is a good thing. The Linux community has Freedesktop.org to create the specifications.
  • Most people think the biodiversity in the Amazon rain forest is a good thing and say that it should be saved, whether they do anything about it or not. Why is biodiversity important? Evolutionary changes are tried and can become successful without putting all the eggs in one basket and risking the extinction of ALL life.

    Free and Open Source Software is an ecosystem of great diversity. That's its strength.

    You are proposing to replace the rain forest with a pine farm.
  • vvv
    Macs are for casual users who don't really do much with their computer.
    Windows is for the average user, a little more involved but not that experienced.
    Linux is for people who can actually effectively use a computer, and who like all the customizing and interaction.
    It's really no use comparing them. They all exist for differrent groups of people, and for now, the people are okay with that.
  • Rokurosv
    Well I agree with some of the point made by the author, since we're very similar. The first OS I used was Win95, and I was a kid so I was blowned away with all the stuff you could do in it. Later on I discovered Linux.

    The main thing that bugged me was some of the community, people that thought that the user should do everything by themselves, cause that was the way to go. I'm happy to see that changing with distros like Ubuntu.
    The number of distros is amazing, but also frightening for the new user. I'm happy that there's a distro for every user. I'm used to Debian/Ubuntu/Mint, but others might like SUSE or Fedora or Gentoo, etc. but this confuses people, especially cause when you buy a computer, usually, you get an OS already installed in it. I might be wrong, but the only distro I know that comes installed in a PC is Ubuntu.
    I beleive that Linux will only get more popular as time passes, cause some distros are addressing key issues like easy of install, compatibilty, but it still has a long way to go to.
  • Shane
    1) Thats right use whats best for your needs even if that means spending in excess of $2000. Its no wonder USA is in such a financial mess. Linux = MAC + Windoze. So why use anything to the right of the equation. Everything has a learning curve, even robots do. We are only human.

    2) No one is worrying about anyone else. Just shedding some light on the ignorant ones.

    3) I for one am enjoying the fact that Linux just works.
  • I'm giving him some of his own poison. His comments haven't been quite constructive either. "Every time I hear a new version of KDE is out, I laugh"? That's disrespectful for the countless people who work on this project in their free time.
  • Willy G
    Ubuntu is so popular because believe it or not, it behaves like Windows. aagh it hurts saying that but think about it is true, it installs what you think you need and allows you to find what ever else you might need. The difference, Ubuntu's choices available are free.
  • Willy G
    Arrogance at its best. and the reason someone with a job that does not involve coding tends to keep away from Linux. don't be territorial if someone has a point recognize it. Decide that you will try something different but recognize the point. I think that maybe a basis for logic which you are familiar with as a coder.
  • Willy G
    I haven't read every response to the article but I did read the article itself. I agree with the writer, can learn from the competition. in war the US learnt rocket technology from the Germans and beat them in WW2, the Brazilians learnt football from the English and now dominate the world, the question is what can linux learn form the competition to exploit, tweak and make our own? but not as suggested to do the same thing as the competitor.
    Debates like this is not about killing the free and open spirit. debates like this should be about making this thing useful to the people who might want a free software especially the poor from LCD's and emerging markets of the world. If we ensure that the GPL is not watered down in newer revisions, and don't seek to protect commercial work (for which protection already exist) then there is no fear of the free and open concept dying.
    One of the point I disagree with is that we should focus on "ONE" thing, now choice is good always good. Nevertheless, the point of selecting a few and them focusing on them has a whole lot of merit. To this end someone like Linus Tovald whom I consider the "GODFATHER" of Linux with his presence and respect should be allowed to select 5-10 (non-commercial backed) distros and use them and the focus for consolidating developmental efforts using a 5-7 year cycle. The end result would be 5-10 solid, stable distros in addition to the SuSe and RedHat/Fedora etc that would continue. If the GPL is not watered down then anyone can pickup where they left off or start to branch from one of these new distros as usual.
    I love Linux but and became a watcher because a friend of mine rescued a virus damaged Thesis from my diskette with linux and that same day say him map his entire drive with just a few clicks of the mouse back in 1988 something that took windows another 6 years to do (and not as well). the big problem is that my resources prevent me from having a machine for just Linux, my time prevents me from fooling around to learn enough to be cool with a dual boot and in any case the is not very comfortable even though she sees lots of positives. Where am I after all this time? Just a Linux watcher & partially because everybody is busy "re-inventing their version of the wheel"
    i don't think this post was an attack but a reality check. The Linux community must stop being insular and see the potential that is there.
  • RobotFriendly
    "Driver support by the various hardware companies, on the other hand, sucks"

    Point taken - doesn't make the situation any less than what it is though, which falls somewhere between inconvenient and downright infuriating depending on the hardware. If any OS, be it Linux, Windows or OS X wants to be end user friendly and convenient, then installing drivers via apt-get in a terminal won't cut it. If you do not want your beloved OS to be user friendly for the masses, then by all means continue fighting the good fight of command line installs.

    The stance that "stupid users should just stop being stupid and learn the terminal!" just isn't going to cut it. These are the types of issues that need to be addressed by the Linux community as a whole if Linux is truly going to become a mainstream desktop OS, which if you read my entire comment, I really want to see happen. Personally I am more than comfortable using a command line when I need to, but it doesn't mean I want to and it doesn't take away the convenience of having a disk that comes w/ your new hardware that you put in the drive, click 2-5 times and call it a day. Maybe that means exerting more effort to get more hardware manufacturers on board to provide drivers for 'IX like they do for the other major OS's, I don't know. I do know that there will always be issues and room for improvement on any platform, even Linux.
  • It might be possible to learn few things by looking at how Os X and Windows are working, but it is dangerous to try to do things the same way as the competitors.
    It is more important to empesize how Linux is unique, and what Linux do in different ways than the others.
    I think one important reason why people love Linux on the desktops, is that they work efficient on this platform. There are a lot of tasks that you can do with few keystrokes on Linux, and you can do what you want in fractions of a seconds, instead of using much time on clicking around and getting confused. Linux should try to do what Linux do much better than the others.
    I love Kde3, where there are a lot of shortcuts and smart ways to work. In the file dialog, i can just use any protocol to access files on remote hosts. To use scp, i write fish://username@host/folder, and you can quickly navigate around with name complation of the folders.
    I am just shocked by kde4. Here, some of the real smart things that makes it possible to work fast, are just removed. Instead there are a lot of trendy graphical interfaces. I guess kde has totally lost the target group of users.

    Those people that wish fancy grapical interface etc, they don't need Linux. They can use OS X.

    Linux should not learn from the others. Linux should learn from the smart things that are done in the Linux-community. The others should have a lot of things to learn from Linux.
  • TK
    "Driver support sucks, get over it."

    I'd suggest qualifying that statement. Driver support by the kernel is quite good and improving constantly. Driver support by the various hardware companies, on the other hand, sucks ... get over it (or so they'd like to tell us)!

    I bought a Netgear WG511T wireless card, made sure the atheros driver was installed (a simple apt-get install command IIRC, it's been a couple of years), and Network Manager picked it up instantly. It just worked.
  • elgringobananas
    Maybe you did not know this, but compiz-fusion is here because of a fork. The original compiz deleloper did not want to have a lot of extra plugins. So then the fork beryl was born. Then the original compiz developer saw that beryl was a huge success and what the people wanted. Then they merged beryl and compiz and now we have compiz-fusion. So without forks we would just have a boring compiz. Survival of the fittest. The strongest will survive. So your point on forks is completely wrong.
blog comments powered by Disqus