During my first year of undergrad, I had a neighbor who swore by Linux. He was coding on his computer constantly and kept telling me that if I would only put Linux on my computer, I would see the errors of my Windows ways. Needless to say, the prospect was daunting and I shied away from all the complicated coding and stuck with what I know. This article made me realize that it might not have been the giant undertaking I made it out to be. Starting out as a system created to make operating systems universal and adapting to each system makes it seem like the best option. When everything from computers to cell phones can be run with Linux, it makes sense to want the system that can cross the most boundaries and do it well. It was odd to find, however, for a system based on a universal use principle, that when it was moved to an individual usage it became more exclusive. The idea that you needed advanced computing knowledge and skills is what kept me away from the system, and as this article reads, kept many others away as well. Though the article does do a good job at pointing out the changes to Linux, and that it is now a more user friendly system, replicating the look of Apple and Windows so that the user is comfortable. Unlike other systems, it is customizable and adaptable to a huge extent, allowing users to go into the core of the system. It also has huge firewalls and safety features that come standard with the package. Looking back on previous articles where virus protection, updates and cost were important factors in updating a libraries computer systems, on starts to wonder if perhaps Linux is the better option? It can be downloaded for free, customized to your specifications, and as amazing security. Any updates that needed to happen would also be free, and all one has to do is spend sometime learning the system, a process they would go through for any new software. Would Linux be a better OS for libraries with the new digital movement?
Mac OS X-
The Mac Os is certainly the prettiest of the operating systems, given that Linux and Windows have copied the design aesthetics. This design edge makes Mac OS X appeal automatically to graphic designers and artists, something that was pointed out in Amit Singh's article as being a preconceived notion of the system. His article goes into the nitty gritty of the system, talking about layers that no one really ever sees under the polished look of X. I took for granted that the system was so easy, never thinking about everything that happens within the computer. Apple is the company that many are familiar with today, with the popularity of the iphone and the ipod it is visually recognized by most and user friendly.
An Update on the Windows Roadmap-
This article focused on addressing concerns with the Windows Vista operating system. While windows is easily usable and found on basically every PC, it seems that Vista caused more problems than expected. Microsoft was focused on making sure the OS was compatible with as many people as possible. this was probably the reason behind releasing so many versions of the OS, such as Vista Business and Vista Ultimate. In a sense, it was like Linux, where you download what you want and can go adjust the core system but without needing the computer knowledge, the system is customized for you. They made an effort to figure out how customers were using the OS and making sure it was updated to suit their needs. In the end it just seems like an OS was released before it was ready, causing a lot of pain and frustration for Windows users. If these users had been libraries, what could have happened? Would there have been a need for multiple updates of the system almost immediately? Or could the library do as the article suggest and exercise their "downgrade rights" to get back to a system that works?
That's a good point about the implication of the problems with Vista for libraries -- and an argument for waiting before updating a large set of computers to a new operating system (usually the budget approval process forces institutions to move slowly anyway).
ReplyDeleteI've heard that Vista was an attempt to replicate the Mac OS but was just too full of bugs. I could be wrong on that though.
ReplyDeleteI've never used Vista but even with simple programs like Office 2007, everything is organized inconveniently. I think Windows just doesn't do simple things very well. A lot of the problems I've had with my old windows computer were simple operating things like running virus scans and using applications.