Linux 'is' ready for the desktop

I've read many postings and rants about Linux not being ready for the desktop, while my experience tends to state the opposite. Linux is – and has been for the last couple of years – ready for the desktop.

It all boils down to the type of audience you speak to.

Windows has been developed with the industry in mind. That implies that you have a group of well-trained IT guys who do the Windows laundry while you, at your desk, can work without bothering whether the latest patches are applied, the AV in up to date, Anti-malware filters are in place, …

But let's look at a typical home user.

What does a 'Joe Doe' - would like to - do with its computer?

• Browse the web
• Send / Receive Mail
• Instant Messaging
• Twitter
• Skype
• Rip audio to MP3
• Play and organize their music collection
• Transfer music between PC and MP3 player
• Upload pictures/movies for a digital camera
• Red eye removal and minor enchantments of pictures
• Watch movies on DVD
• Edit own video recordings
• Burn CD/DVD
• Write a few letters
• Keep budget in check with a simple spreadsheet
• Make small posters for festivities
• Create and maintain a website
• Play games
• Install new software
• Interact with wireless networks and bluetooth devices

Those actions seem familiar and they 'can' all be done with the pre-installed Windows.
Correction. Not if you stick to your pre-installed Windows. For most of those actions you need to buy expensive software, which for most of us is not tax deductible.

Looking at that list through Linux glasses, with the exception of some games, all can be done using a free modern state of the art Linux distribution.

So, Linux clearly has the edge on Windows here, and Windows being pre-installed anyhow, we always have a fall-back for the few things that could not be done through Linux. Should Windows not come pre-installed, Linux would struggle especially in the games area, but  the simple fact that Windows comes pre-installed, plays in the hands of a dual-boot Windows/Linux solution.

What should the same Joe Doe not be doing?

• Tamper with the system
• Bother about the legal status of the OS
• Fighting malware and other nastinesses of the Internet
• Be responsible for maintaining system integrity through updates and patches
• Buy new hardware every 3 years to be able to accommodate the latest imposed upgrades
• Buy expensive software

When using Windows, this is just what Joe Doe has to do to keep its box running. The problems and performance loss inherent to the Windows system are a far cry from the fun and joy of having a computer they expected.
A modern Linux distribution is much simpler to maintain. Its concept prevents a user to cripple the system by disallowing him to venture in typical system folders.
There are no legal issues. Their distribution can be copied, passed on, … without problems.
There are almost no risks that viruses or malware will cripple the system.
Installing software is free and comes from a certified single set of servers.
Runs much longer on the same hardware

All in all, Linux has the edge on Windows here too.

But, Linux is hard to install. You cannot expect an average user to install Linux in dual-boot.

Linux is not harder to install than any other Operating System. But as Windows comes pre-installed and all the user must do is to activate it to get going, the only thing we – Linux users - must do, is to install it on their box in dual-boot, and give them a few howtos on how to work with it.
Isn't it something we all have done in the past many times ?

Linux is ready for the desktop if you never hear those converted users again. It works and it just keeps on working. And that is something that cannot be said from the other pre-installed operating system.