First of all, installing an operating system is not a task for those who do not know what they are doing. This goes for any OS. If one cannot handle it or learn how to do it, then it is always better to ask someone who knows.

It appears that the author does not know that Windows is installed by booting a computer from the Windows install disc and not by downloading and running an .exe file. Even the point made about .exe files is rather weak. It is not overly obvious that .exe means ‘install something’. That association is *learned*.

The ISO format is an international standard for disc image files. Any average computer user should know this. The most popular Windows disc burning utility, Nero, has a clearly labeled ‘Burn disc image’ tool as do most other burning applications. And these files are automatically associated with the appropriate program. Moreover, every installation guide I have seen explains that the ISO image be burnt to a disc. I fail to see the difficulty here. If this is too hard, refer paragraph one.

Linux is really just the kernel used by distributions, just as Mac OS X uses the Darwin kernel. If you are looking at companies and advertising, Canonical backs Ubuntu, RedHat backs RedHat, Novell backs SUSE, and so on. These companies advertise and promote their own distros. However, most resources go into development and not advertising. If you wish to purchase their professional support you will get it. Others like Arch, Gentoo and Debian are backed purely by volunteer communities, so we can’t expect much in terms of advertising, but community help and support is outstanding.

Each Linux distribution is purpose built. Microsoft does this to a lesser extent with the desktop and server lines. The whole point is building the right tool for the job. For example, you wouldn’t go off-roading in a Prius or tow a caravan with a scooter. I’m sure we all agree that we wouldn’t want all car manufacturers to make just one model of car. Don’t take away the options, just choose the right one.

Using something new always involves a learning curve. This is true for everything in life. And Linux is an alternative, another way of computing. Unwillingness to learn how to use this tool will only lead to problems and frustration. There is a plethora of documentation, guides, tutorials, etc in every format – written, audio and video, available to anyone willing to learn. Should one face problems, forums and chat rooms are an excellent place to look for help. Of course, professional, paid-for support is also available.

In conclusion, my personal recommendation to new users is Linux Mint. IMO it is the easiest distro to get started with. The learning curve is not as steep, but it is still there. Linux is *not* Windows.

So, the ISO which is an international standard for disk images, and is a format which Microsoft uses to distribute disk images, isn’t in your worldview and therefor needs to be fixed? Please. I think it would be great is MS included an ISO burning package, but there are plenty of apps that already support this. An ISO isn’t an application like .exe files are. Bundling the two would be nice, but then we’d hear about ‘I downloaded this linux thing and it asked for permission on my machine, what is it doing??’

Your other point is that the FLOSS community needs to focus on one or two distros, but unless you can convince them which it would be, it’ll never happen. The whole point of FLOSS is that it cannot be controlled by any one entity, and there are too many opinions to have the FLOSS community support one one solution. Plus without the competition, we wouldn’t have the amazing amount of innovation and growth within these apps and releases. How long did it take Microsoft to ‘innovate’ to get Vista?

Your primary complaint regarding Linux installation is that it is hard to burn an iso on Windows, because Windows comes with no default image burning application.
Basically you’re saying that by adding a link to the download page (http://infrarecorder.org/?page_id=5 for example), the linux installation will suddenly become easy…
Oh wait, there’s already a link there (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/BurningIsoHowto)
So, how does the linux community can make sure you would actually read the information to which you have direct links from the download page, marked “How to burn a CD image”?
Please advise…

What a ridiculous assessment… Like Lefty said, ISO is actually used by all OS’s to put the disk image on the disk. It’s something that Nero has supported for a very long time. You’re clueless…

Second, the reason there are so many different distros is because someone can and will create a better mousetrap. Personally, I love PCLinuxOS and Mandriva most. Others prefer something else. So what? When I fire up my system, and I’m running KDE, it acts just like KDE in Ubuntu, or Fedora, or Suse… It’s still KDE. There are some differences, but they’re not glaring differences unless you really dig under the hood. It’s like driving a Mercedes isn’t too different from driving a Toyota, unless you want to work on the engine.

For Linux to succeed, there simply needs to be a major commercial push behind it from a name that everyone can latch onto. Right now, the only name that comes to mind is Google that has that kind of marketing power that could do it. However, ChromeOS, despite being based on Linux, isn’t Linux. A major name has to package Linux extremely thoughtfully, get major hardware brands to release it on the hardware pre-installed, and have lots of hyped up wiz-bang marketing behind it – similar to what they’re doing with Android. The public will gain interest quickly.

As is, the public mostly doesn’t even know Linux exists. I bring up Linux when I talk to my friends sometimes and they look at me like I’m an alien or something. They’ve never heard of it. They have no concept that a PC can run anything but Windows on it. Most of them don’t even have a concept that Windows can be reinstalled instead of buying a new computer when it acts up…

When was the last time you clicked an .exe to install Windows?

The assertion about ease of use in reference to an ISO image is an example of misconceptions that help prevent Linux from being adopted. If your Windows desktop is adequate with a proper CD burner, grandma can click on the ISO image and burn a CD/DVD very easily. The fact that you couldn’t do it attributes not to what Linux lacks, but what your Windows setup lacks, as the ISO format is Industry Standard.

Now, your legitimate point is about packaging. Yes, that’s a big key. IF multi-distributions are to flourish at the same time, a universal packaging method would be essential. I think packaging does need to move toward that realm….

… but that’s not the big issue. If Apple was created to release MacOS and OSX as an operating system to deploy on PCs in general, and never ever made an actual computer to put it on, you’d have people jumping through the same frustrations & hoops, and it wouldn’t have taken off.

Everyone saw Ubuntu, and thought, “Well, that’s it. They tried for the desktop, and failed.” No, Ubuntu has a horrible “control panel” that Mandriva/PCLinuxOS/Suse are far better at. Ubuntu is the most popular, so places gravitate toward that packaging. But there are even problems with packaging outside the standard repositories from Ubuntu (PPA anyone?).

A company needs to come forth and make systems set for their distro of Linux. High end AND low end. Sleek, stylish, and at the same time, packages that are easy to coincide outside of a repository, and an EASY/INSTA-WAY of getting updates of said software outside official repository.

What some Linux distros have on the desktop is almost there. But almost is as bad as “far away” if there are enough issues to cause frustration. Linux in many ways IS easier to install on a new computer w/ more out of the box (with the right distro) than Windows.

A company could come in, polish the edges, have select hardware for their PCs, and an official list of compatible hardware… and a PRETTY/VISUAL apt-get like program to show how it is actually easier to download/upgrade apps, too. If that’s all done, with GOOD marketing and thumbs up by Google and other companies — you’d see it take off.

http://isorecorder.alexfeinman.com/isorecorder.htm

I think that is software written by a MS employee but was never included in the MS Window releases. I could be wrong though. Enjoy!

Your assessment is pretty stupid. If you don’t know about .iso files go back to school, it comes from my knowledge since the 80′s.

Linux is all about choice. You can choose any distro you want for $0. If you choose your favourite ms$ you never have a choice and you never stop paying for the same rubbish. Please wake up, things has changed.

Sorry to say it, but the author is clueless. Operating system distributions ALWAYS come as an image file (for example .iso), so you can burn or flash it to a storage medium and boot the machine with it, without relying on a specific operating system or software already installed/running. If someone doesn’t know what an .iso file is and how to use it, he shouldn’t be installing operating systems.

Also, Linux already dominates numerous segments of the operating system market, of which desktops are a meager few percent. Why should Linux give Windows special treatment by wrapping into Windows/x86 specific executables, notwithstanding the fact that it can’t easily modify the boot sector and partitions, and probe the hardware within an already running OS?

Last but not least, the reason there are hundreds of distributions is a matter of plain necessity. Linux runs on everything starting with microcontrollers in your TV or garage door opener, up to the world’s fastest supercomputers. One-distro-fits-all is impossible under such circumstances.