What is he saying? Linux is incovenient for the “average” Windows user?

I suspect this proverbial “average” user by most definitions is someone who, like you suggested in #6, doesn’t really have any conception or opinion about operating systems and for that reason, it’s begging the question to ask them why they don’t switch to Linux. They will use, or learn to use, whatever comes installed on their computer or whatever their friends use -the group who influence most of their decisions in life.

“Courting” the average Windows user is futile because that kind of person doesn’t make decisions, they let others make them for them. (Did I just flame Windows users?)

Although I like Adrian Kingsley-Hughes’ opinions, I think he’s using this undefinable “average Windows user” to justify what are really just his own opinions (which are probably a pretty accurate assessment, on their own). Furthermore, the Linux world is a pretty varied community too, and generalizing about them is risky.

In the end I think the benefits of Linux are obvious to anyone who appreciates them (security, privacy, community, innovation, freedom in general…) and in the end, like any kind of tool, your personal experience and personal preferences are just as important as the design of the tool in making up your mind to stick with it or go back to whatever you were using before - whether it’s an operating system or an axe for chopping wood.

Point 3 lets Vista out right away. Much hardware still does not work with it. Just today another contributor here explains how much trouble setting up an MS brand web cam was on a Vista machine.

I agree with your point 7, but disagree totally with point 6. One would have to have lived under a rock for the last 20 years to have no idea that there are other operating systems. Just look at the Mac commercials of late. Even MS makes people aware of the concept of an OS each time they roll one out [Remember the Rolling Stones singing ‘Start Me Up’?]

I would like to add one more to your list [although I’m a user of Linux, I still don’t like the next thing].
8 - Why do the programs have to have such stupid and/or cryptic names? It certainly doesn’t make it easy to pick what you need from a list unless you have some idea of what the program does. I suggest using names close to established Windows program names, but just out of legal recourse range.

Well said, Tim.

I agree with you about Vista - and frankly, I don’t understand it. Vendors have known for a long time that Vista is coming - and for a Microsoft piece of hardware to be difficult to set up? Inexcusable!

There are a lot of users “living under a rock” - like my mom. Those of us who are passionate about computers sometimes forget that not every user shares the same level of interest.