The ongoing race of who will rule your desktop is clearly not over. Its not a sprint, but an ongoing marathon. We all know that Windows rules supreme in terms of marketshare. But I read a recent study that looked at the usability of various operating systems. How user friendly was it, how well designed was the user interface. They pitted Windows XP, Apple OSX and four versions of Linux against each other to see what the end result would be.
The results of first and second place didn't surprise me.
Apple Mac OS X and Microsoft Windows XP were easier to use than any of the Linux distributions tested - but not by much.
Mac OS X lost marks for poor help files but was easier to use for most common tasks. Windows XP had excellent help files but scored lower for installation, which was complicated and time-consuming. You may also need to spend extra money on additional software for common tasks.
Xandros Desktop OS was the top performing Linux distribution. It was easy to install with very good help files but was more complicated to use for tasks such as burning a DVD and viewing digital photos. It didn’t include DVD burning software and you need to find the correct folder for photo and movie files. However, at $135, it’s a considerably cheaper option than Windows XP or Mac OS X.
What did surprise me was the comment about OSX and XP being easier to use - but not by much. This is a strong message to Apple and Microsoft - Linux is coming. They are catching up in what looks like the classic tortoise and the hare scenario. Apple came out with an outstanding user interface and the let Microsoft catch up. I have no doubt that Apple will continue to innovate to maintain that top spot. They are masters of great design. I have no doubt that Microsoft will continue to evolve Windows XP, liberally borrowing ideas from Apple, no doubt. But the threat remains in the last line of that passage above - at $135, it's [Linux] considerably cheaper. The combination of increased usability and cost effectiveness is what will push Linux into the mainstream against these operating systems.
To read the complete details of the study you can find it here.
Interesting also that there is no mention, without paying the fee for the report, on the criteria for the testing or even the qualifications of those doing the test vis-a-vis the nebulous and often ill-defined field of usability.
I also note that they say the Linux distribution falls over on the task of burning a DVD, which I know from my experience using K3B is a trivial task with the right software, a wasps nest with the wrong choice. But the question I'd like to propose is this: How often does a typical user burn a DVD?
To be meaningful, this study needs to report findings in specific computing problem domains. I'd be interested to know the relative marks for usability in tasks like "send a digital camera photo to grandma" (in Linux/Emacs, I would do it with C-c C-m C-f and do auto-completion on the filename from an auto-mounted flash disk, but I expect all three O/S GUI-desktoppers will use some form of labourious wrist-wrenching drag of a drop from a snails-pace thumbnail renderer)
One reason I really like Jef Raskin's book "The Humane Interface" is that, if you had never seen the system he describes and only seen the Mac/Windows/KDE sorts of worlds, you'd think it all a pipe-dream, but if you lived as I do almost completely inside Emacs, you just nod your head and say 'yup' a lot :)
Posted by: mrG | February 03, 2005 at 01:20 PM
Also worth a really big note, that article with the exec-overview contains the following pre-amble:
and yet the results they post all have nothing whatsoever to do with the OS, but are exclusively focussed on specific applications and apps within specific desktop interfaces.That's like comparing a Ford and Rolls Royce by describing the window-washer lever.
Posted by: mrG | February 03, 2005 at 01:26 PM