PDA

View Full Version : Linux Desktop Readiness Thread



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

zaratustra
February 27th, 2007, 05:49 PM
Here they come again:) If you don't like it, don't use it and don't complain. If you have no knowlegde or will to learn or even ask us to help you (and we do that all the time), pay for your software to do job for you.

halfvolle melk
February 27th, 2007, 05:55 PM
This will probably make a fine new addition to the desktop readiness thread.

Ob1
February 27th, 2007, 05:57 PM
Canon has no hardware support for Linux. And getting the official Nividia driver on Ubuntu is very easy, just use automatic installers like Envy or Automatix they install it within a minute or two.

And if you are inexperienced/ignorant about GNU/Linux, then don't use it. Every piece of software requires some learning.

chewearn
February 27th, 2007, 06:09 PM
I have tried Linux Ubuntu and Kubuntu for some months, and i must say that you need to have a lot of time, and a lot of interest in solving problems on computers to use this OP. To have a video card to work - NVIDIA - one have to write a complete A4 with commands. And a printer from Canon can not be used at all, maby if you write another A4 page with commands, but only maby.

Who among the common computer users do you think is prepared to do that? And further, is it not time to take the step outside the nerd community and create a software for the common man?

I think i speak for most people when i say that i want to USE my computer, not spend all the time making it work by writing a lot of commands i don't understand.
There are nicer things in life than computers...

Windows may have flaws, but it is working...

You are deluding yourself man. Windows is not easy, it only appeared so. Right now, your Windows machine is betraying you behind your back, stealing your personal information, your money, and clogging up the internet with spam. And you don't know how to lock it down.:rolleyes:

_Robin_
February 27th, 2007, 06:22 PM
I think that;
linux is not only for nerd especially ubuntu is a lot userfriendly and finds that with passing of the time steps from giants all over the world * NIX are being made. I think that unix it is a lot piu' stable of dos and think that Windows is KNOWS piu' the diffused but not best one. Linux only for nerds? No.
Sorry for bad english,

Robin from Switzerland
darksin.net community

aysiu
February 27th, 2007, 06:30 PM
Merged into the desktop readiness thread.

This ground has been covered many times before. The conclusion stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of why people need to fiddle with Linux in the first place--it has nothing to do with the quality of the software and everything to do with the lack of preinstallation.

Non-"nerds" don't install Windows. So it's a false comparison.

It's like a child seeing her parent withdraw money from the ATM machine and thinking that when mommy says "We're out of money" that the family can just get more by going to the machine that spits out cash. To the child, it appears the machine is a great place to go any time you're low on money, but to the parent--who understands the situation and everything involved--the ATM is only a tool to get what money the parent already has. If the parent doesn't have money, there's nothing to withdraw.

Likewise, to many users, Windows doesn't seem to require any tinkering because it comes preinstalled. But users don't think that Windows is difficult to install. They just think, "Hey, I turn on my Windows computer, and it works. How come I have to do all this fiddling with Linux?"

Buy a Linux preinstalled system and then complain. Otherwise, at least make an effort to understand the market (i.e. economic) forces at work and not blame everything on the software. Criticism is great, as long as it's constructive and based on a complete understanding of what's wrong, not just that something is wrong.

mikeym
February 27th, 2007, 06:57 PM
Honestly, I'd be interested in a new, deep, innovative, clever analysis of why Windows is dominating the desktop market and what it would take for Linux, or a Linux distribution, to take that position.
So far all I've heard is "command line sucks", "brown and orange, eewww" , "things break" and other moot points. That's just not good enough - and it being repeated over and over by you and many others doesn't make it more valuable.

HiYa,

Here's my interpretation of the situation as a long time Windows user who's now kicked the habit for a couple of years for ubuntu and now just started working with OSX as well.

As I see it an average desktop user as defined in the thread will not use an operating system unless they can do everything by GUI. Linux does have a fantastic shell but that is only ever of interest to power users and if you want to speed your user base beyond this then changes have to be made so that everything you need can be done as standard from the GUI.

This means no more text-file only configurations or installations. Every part of the system should have a graphical "Space" that can be accessed by the user. This includes things such as daemons, networks and searches.

The reason that Microsoft still dominates the market is that it has commercial support by coming pre-installed an virtually every machine, having driver support and commercially produced applications and games. This application development will come if it becomes a large enough market of linux users.

Keep it simple - keep it consistent. Don't let linux get fat or you will risk loosing your traditional base. My current XFce install has a panel item that keeps copy and paste / highlight and paste functions consistent, why does this not automatically happen? Concentrate on making the user interface (by which I mean GUI) as innovative and user friendly as possible - make it customisable by all means but not at the expense of becoming fat.

There are two things I love about OSX and I never thought I would say that. One is the menu organisation with each window within and application sharing the same menu and the option to cycle between applications using [command]+[tab] and between windows within the current application [command]+[ ` ]. This eliminates the need for tabbed applications. It is simple ideas like this that makes an operating system. The other thing is proper support as standard for accessibility - this is something that I am sure that Ubuntu should be investing in - such as "text to speech" integrated as standard. Another useful access feature from the point of view of someone who has a fairly severe form of dyslexia is the widespread spell check feature that is standard in most OSX applications.

PS. I like the brown scheme, it's warm and welcoming. It's much better than a frosty blue colour.

PPS. Moot points are a moot point. ;)

mahlib
February 27th, 2007, 07:44 PM
Here they come again:) If you don't like it, don't use it and don't complain. If you have no knowlegde or will to learn or even ask us to help you (and we do that all the time), pay for your software to do job for you.

That sort of attitude is what puts open source behind. If you don't like it, then developers should take that user input and implement a better solution. Don't complain? What is this? North Korea?

I take crap from users all the time and as a developer I take great care in developing software.

My experience on IRC and forums in general have taught me that people who say stuff like "If you don't like it, don't use it and don't complain" aren't mature enough to handle criticism.

aysiu
February 27th, 2007, 07:53 PM
That sort of attitude is what puts open source behind. I agree. More details here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2221336#post2221336).
My experience on IRC and forums in general have taught me that people who say stuff like "If you don't like it, don't use it and don't complain" aren't mature enough to handle criticism. Criticism is a necessary part of the improvement process. Criticism should be presented in the right fashion, though.

What bugs me is criticism that:

A) Comes off with an obnoxious or demanding tone
B) Takes into account only one user's needs or preferences
C) Doesn't really understand what developers have control over (economic market forces, for example)
D) Refuses to be redirected to proper channels (e.g., Launchpad or Bugzilla)

Brunellus
February 27th, 2007, 07:54 PM
That sort of attitude is what puts open source behind. If you don't like it, then developers should take that user input and implement a better solution. Don't complain? What is this? North Korea?

I take crap from users all the time and as a developer I take great care in developing software.

My experience on IRC and forums in general have taught me that people who say stuff like "If you don't like it, don't use it and don't complain" aren't mature enough to handle criticism.
you're barking up the wrong tree.

IRC and Forums are populated by users, by and large, rather than developers. If you want to hit developers:

- File a bug report/feature request, either in the official bug tracker or in the appropriate Dev mailing-list. The locations of these are not secret. If you do, be prepared to show data and otherwise deal with the developers directly. Post-and-run is likely not going to get you any real useful responses. Devs have lives, too.

- Fix a bug yourself. Linus just made headlines with his very public bellyaching about GNOME. He finally submitted a bunch of patches; if they're accepted into the main tree, then great. If not--well, Linus has the program he wanted.

- Pay a developer to fix it. Commercial developers are responsive to you, their paying customer, because you're paying for their food/housing/equipment/WoW time. They'll solve your problem when they get around to it unless you convince them they should do it sooner. If love doesn't work, money might.


Bellyaching is not the same as bug reporting.

prizrak
February 27th, 2007, 07:59 PM
If you want to actually complain about real problems in Ubuntu here are some.
1) Bluetooth - even though my Bluetooth hardware is working there is no nice "My Bluetooth Places" application that Windows has. Other than file sharing just about everything else requires a CLI program that is fairly complicated even to someone experienced. Now THIS is an actual problem as the hardware support is there but the software is just not up to speed yet. BlueZ also doesn't seem to support DUN over BT, that is also a problem since just about any cell phone nowadays has Bluetooth and 3G net capable.

2) Tablet support - the tablet driver doesn't come preinstalled with the OS. At least Xorg.conf is setup for tablets now so really all that is needed is wacom-tools package. There is no setup program that I found to actually calibrate the tablet (you might not think it's a big deal till you try to get at something at the edge of the screen and the cursor doesn't go there). No handwriting recognition is present (there is one program but it's more like gesture recognition, can't remember the name). The new on screen kbd crashes if you run Beryl (at least last time I checked).

3) No Ubuntu Media Center Edition - at least not official I think there is one that is maintained by 1 person or something. MythTV is great and it would be really nice to have a low effort HTPC based on Ubuntu. Although I think Feisty should change it making it a simple apt-get install.

These are actual problems that don't stem from any issues of marketing, lack of hardware support or users unwilling to learn something. If you wanna complain do it about things like that. However complaining on this forum is useless, if you don't/can't donate/program you can (and should) create a bug report. If Canonical doesn't know about it, they won't do anything about it. These forums are not Canonical.

P.S. If having to learn a new way of doing things makes an OS not ready for desktop then OS X isn't ready either.

halfvolle melk
February 27th, 2007, 08:04 PM
What bugs me is criticism that:

A) Comes off with an obnoxious or demanding tone
B) Takes into account only one user's needs or preferences
C) Doesn't really understand what developers have control over (economic market forces, for example)
D) Refuses to be redirected to proper channels (e.g., Launchpad or Bugzilla)
E) Fails to acknowledge that the devs are aware of these(99.9999%) issues thus rendering the criticism redundant.

aysiu
February 27th, 2007, 08:11 PM
P.S. If having to learn a new way of doing things makes an OS not ready for desktop then OS X isn't ready either. Well, truth be told, many of the criticisms leveled against Linux in the "isn't ready for the desktop" category also apply to OS X, but people rarely say OS X isn't ready.

Just yesterday, my pastor posted on his blog that the video camera he bought wasn't compatible with his Mac. After finding out the hard way it didn't work, he did an internet search and found a review of it warning Mac users not to buy it. At this point, he's at a loss for what to do. I think he'd rather not have to return it.

Well, if you substitute in the word Ubuntu for Mac in the above paragraph, you'd most likely have to add in "Then he proclaimed Linux was crap and not ready for the regular users and switched back to Windows." Since it's Mac, he (like most people) is a little more forgiving of the lack of third-party support.

Tazix
February 27th, 2007, 08:12 PM
I voted other, because to me it's a combination of some things on the poll... not just one.

They are:

Any person can install it on any computer without any problems. (Actually should read "very few problems"... there is always someone that will run into issues no matter how easy it is)

AND

Anyone can use it once it's already been installed and configured.

AND

It automatically detects most hardware without the need to hunt down drivers. (And Drivers not included are very easily accessible and installable)

You will notice that, at this point, it's the top 3 things voted on in this poll... which says alot, IMO.

Phrawm48
February 27th, 2007, 09:24 PM
I've been running Dapper for a bit more than four weeks now and wish I could run it all the time. (Alas, I'm occasionally obliged to boot into Windows 2000 Pro to exercise certain programs and take screen shots of those programs...)

How much have I enjoyed running Ubuntu? Well, I've been recommending that my friends start with a live CD and go from there. Since I'm not in the habit of intentionally pissing off my friends, that says something.

BUT, I also must confess to those same friends that Ubuntu isn't quite as easy to deal with as Windows. Simply put, a user cannot get his or her system working without some non-trivial amounts of:


Knowledge about using complex, often cryptic, command lines
Ability and willingness to experimentally hand-edit text-based configuration files
Insight into the explicit and implicit uses of what I've come to call "Linux semi-internals" such as fstab, xorg.conf, and more


Virtually all dual-boot users will also need an ability to remain calm when Grub breaks and their computer becomes, even temporarily, completely unbootable.

(Note too that most users will for the first time encounter the process whereby a program gets installed or upgraded by a script that attempts to resolve a scary sounding thing called "dependencies", attempts to download the right source code, and then compiles it. Some users find this highly un-Windows-like process nervous-making, at least initially...)

So, my experience has been that Ubuntu is ready for the desktop of a technically competent user, but almost certainly not for the desktop of a non-technical user.

Stated another way, Ubuntu has most definitely done a lot to bring Linux's usability into the twenty-first century, BUT there's still more work that needs to be done...

Cheers and thanks! to Ubuntu and this forum for getting me this far,
Ric
SFO

Brunellus
February 27th, 2007, 09:27 PM
I've been running Dapper for a bit more than four weeks now and wish I could run it all the time. (Alas, I'm occasionally obliged to boot into Windows 2000 Pro to exercise certain programs and take screen shots of those programs...)

How much have I enjoyed running Ubuntu? Well, I've been recommending that my friends start with a live CD and go from there. Since I'm not in the habit of intentionally pissing off my friends, that says something.

BUT, I also must confess to those same friends that Ubuntu isn't quite as easy to deal with as Windows. Simply put, a user cannot get his or her system working without some non-trivial amounts of:


Knowledge about using complex, often cryptic, command lines
Ability and willingness to experimentally hand-edit text-based configuration files
Insight into the explicit and implicit uses of what I've come to call "Linux semi-internals" such as fstab, xorg.conf, and more


Virtually all dual-boot users will also need an ability to remain calm when Grub breaks and their computer becomes, even temporarily, completely unbootable.

(Note too that most users will for the first time encounter the process whereby a program gets installed or upgraded by a script that attempts to resolve a scary sounding thing called "dependencies", attempts to download the right source code, and then compiles it. Some users find this highly un-Windows-like process nervous-making, at least initially...)

So, my experience has been that Ubuntu is ready for the desktop of a technically competent user, but almost certainly not for the desktop of a non-technical user.

Stated another way, Ubuntu has most definitely done a lot to bring Linux's usability into the twenty-first century, BUT there's still more work that needs to be done...

Cheers and thanks! to Ubuntu and this forum for getting me this far,
Ric
SFO
I've not broken GRUB yet in almost two years of running Ubuntu.

OK, I lie. I've had two kernel panics--but those were from me experimenting with a kernel, and so are user error, not the fault of the distro.

aysiu
February 27th, 2007, 09:36 PM
I've not broken GRUB yet in almost two years of running Ubuntu.

OK, I lie. I've had two kernel panics--but those were from me experimenting with a kernel, and so are user error, not the fault of the distro.
And, despite what some people would like to think, regular users do occasionally experience unrecoverable Windows crashes and need to get expert help. The only difference is that Windows has a command-line based recovery mode (which may not even work) and Ubuntu has a GUI live CD that will boot no matter how crashed your installation is.

Sunflower1970
February 27th, 2007, 09:44 PM
And, despite what some people would like to think, regular users do occasionally experience unrecoverable Windows crashes and need to get expert help. The only difference is that Windows has a command-line based recovery mode (which may not even work) and Ubuntu has a GUI live CD that will boot no matter how crashed your installation is.

And that command line is more cryptic than in Linux, which, I've begun to notice, some of those commands actually make sense and are easy to remember, as opposed to the DOS, or Windows commands which I need to have some sort of guide next to me to know what to type.

aysiu
February 27th, 2007, 09:53 PM
Google search for help "windows won't boot" (http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=help+%22windows+won%27t+boot%22&btnG=Search) currently yields 38,800 results.

Google search for help "ubuntu won't boot" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=help+%22ubuntu+won%27t+boot%22&btnG=Google+Search) currently yields 32 results.

That's Ubuntu (a usually not preinstalled OS) being 0.08% of the Windows (a usually preinstalled and preconfigured OS) results.

Here's an excerpt from the second result in the Windows search:
If Windows XP (or 2000) refuses to start, press F8 right after you turn on your PC but before the Windows log-on appears (it may take a few attempts to get the timing right). At the resulting menu, select Last Known Good Configuration to restore your Registry to an earlier date.

If this doesn't get your PC working, reboot and press F8 again, but this time select Safe Mode, and then choose Start, All Programs, Accessories, System Tools, System Restore. Follow the wizard's instructions and pick an appropriate backup.

If that approach doesn't work either, or if you can't even get to this menu, use your emergency boot floppy. If your hard drive's boot sector or Windows' basic boot files have been corrupted, this disk will circumvent the problem and boot you into Windows. If you don't have an emergency boot floppy, you may be able to use one created on another PC running Windows XP or Windows 2000, but there's no guarantee that it will boot your machine.

To make one, insert a blank floppy disk into drive A:, select Start, All Programs, Accessories, Command Prompt, type format a:, and press Enter. When asked if you want to format another disk, type n and press Enter. Type the following commands, pressing Enter after each one.

xcopy c:\boot.ini a: /h xcopy c:\ntdetect.com a: /h xcopy c:\ntldr a: /h

Now type exit and press Enter to close the window. Remove the floppy disk and label it "Windows XP boot floppy." Put this emergency disk in the floppy drive of your inoperable machine and boot up. Windows should run with no problems. You could simply keep the floppy in the drive all the time, but to truly fix the problem, launch the command prompt as described above, type xcopy a:*.* c:\ /h, and press Enter.

If the emergency boot floppy doesn't work, try the Recovery Console, a Windows utility that provides a DOS-like command line from which you can run some repair programs. It's tricky to use if you're not accustomed to command lines, and you can damage your data, so be careful. Doesn't look very user-friendly to me.

In fact, it's because a crashed Windows is so intimidating to a regular user that people make Craiglists posts like this one (http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/cpg/279945052.html) or this one (http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/cpg/281852593.html), asking for help recovering data off a crashed Windows installation. And those are just from Craigslist San Francisco.

Any Ubuntu user would presumably have a live CD handy...

Brunellus
February 27th, 2007, 10:00 PM
And that command line is more cryptic than in Linux, which, I've begun to notice, some of those commands actually make sense and are easy to remember, as opposed to the DOS, or Windows commands which I need to have some sort of guide next to me to know what to type.
I'd say CMD.EXE (Windows' shell) and bash are equally cryptic to the uninitiated. I used to be extremely comfortable in CMD.EXE (and its predecessor, MS-DOS and Win95's command interpreter/shell, COMMAND.COM), but that was because I used to use them all the time. Gaming in the early '90s under MS-DOS was an education in the black art of memory management and parlor tricks with MS-DOS's bootup sequence. . .

Phrawm48
February 27th, 2007, 10:30 PM
It seems to me that throwing stones at the syntax of the Windows' command line completely misses the point.

The great majority of ordinary users can install and configure Windows without resorting to a single command line. I've done it several times and so have many others.

The great majority of ordinary users cannot install and configure Linux, even Ubuntu, without resorting to a command line and hand-editing a text file at least once, and probably more that once. I've been obliged to do it several times and so have many others.

A focus on how ethically malodorous Microsoft is, or how some seldom-encountered aspect of Windows means the Windows user experience is unacceptably "bad", simply ignores the user's reality.

With this in mind, choose one:


Want more people to use Linux? Keep making Linux easier for more people to use.
Want to complain forever that people are "too stupid" to use Linux? Leave Linux / Ubuntu as it is today.


Simple, really...

Cheers, thanks, & hope this helps,
Ric
SFO

Brunellus
February 27th, 2007, 10:35 PM
It seems to me that throwing stones at the syntax of the Windows' command line completely misses the point.

The great majority of ordinary users can install and configure Windows without resorting to a single command line. I've done it several times and so have many others.

The great majority of ordinary users cannot install and configure Linux, even Ubuntu, without resorting to a command line and hand-editing a text file at least once, and probably more that once. I've been obliged to do it several times and so have many others.

A focus on how ethically malodorous Microsoft is, or how some seldom-encountered aspect of Windows means the Windows user experience is unacceptably "bad", simply ignores the user's reality.

With this in mind, choose one:


Want more people to use Linux? Keep making Linux easier for more people to use.
Want to complain forever that people are "too stupid" to use Linux? Leave Linux / Ubuntu as it is today.


Simple, really...

Cheers, thanks, & hope this helps,
Ric
SFO
The user's reality is this:

Most users have never installed operating systems. No, I am not talking about having the system thrashed by spyware and then resorting to the OEM 'recovery' CD images: I'm talking about installing the operating system.

Win XP ships with no drivers. I was amused recently to find that even the OEM install images for my father's computer shipped without drivers for my father's wireless card (admittedly added later). The Ubuntu Desktop CD detected and configured the card without fuss or hassle.

The world can be made safe for the clueless through OEM installation or good professional system administration (in the enterprise). It took Microsoft a lot of hard work and sharp elbows to make that happen for them.

m.musashi
February 28th, 2007, 03:50 AM
It seems to me that throwing stones at the syntax of the Windows' command line completely misses the point.

The great majority of ordinary users can install and configure Windows without resorting to a single command line. I've done it several times and so have many others.

The great majority of ordinary users cannot install and configure Linux, even Ubuntu, without resorting to a command line and hand-editing a text file at least once, and probably more that once. I've been obliged to do it several times and so have many others.
------
The following isn't aimed at you personally. Your comment just sums up a lot of what we hear and it's a nice summary to respond to.
------

Sorry, but this argument doesn't hold water. While I can install windows from scratch and not need to use a command line. I can also install Ubuntu and not need a command line.

What is interesting is how usable the two installs will be. A scratch install of windows on the dozen or some computers on which I've done an install from scratch never once were very usable. The resolution was 640x480 with 8 bit color, the sound didn't work, there was no network connectivity. These were the major problems. Now, on an install of Ubuntu (since Dapper - breezy didn't work as well on my custom build) I had sound, network, and full resolution. I know not everyone gets that but I did. So, I'd have to say that if comparing apples and apples you get a better install with Ubuntu - and Ubuntu is free to boot. Quite a bargin.

Now, if I wan't to tweak my system and get some added bling, I might have to use the command line. I say might becuase much of the bling can be added with a GUI. However, most help you find will give you CLI commands because it's EASIER - just copy - paste. Windows bling is pretty easy to install too. Just search the web, download and install. If you are lucky your bling will work and not be loaded with spyware, popup reminders to send someone some money and won't load a bunch of crap processes that end up slowing the whole thing down and when you get sick of it and decide to uninstall it will hopefully actully remove itself.

If windows floats your boat then enjoy. If you think maybe windows is lacking and you want to try Linux then enjoy. If you end up not liking Linux and want to go back to windows then enjoy. If you want to tell me that Linux doesn't work, is too hard or whatever then it's clear you really don't know what you are talking about. You are not sitting in front of my computer that works absolutely as well as it does in windows - better really, it's faster, cleaner, more attractive and has more bling. Oh, and I've only used Linux for a little more than a year, I've used windows since 3.1 so if anything I'm a more experience windows user.

Just because it works for me doesn't mean it will work for you just as if it doesn't work for doesn't mean it can't work for others. If it doesn't work then either take the time to figure out why, try a different distro or use windows or osx. It's your choice. And my choice is mine.

/rant

SouthernGorilla
February 28th, 2007, 01:53 PM
As another new convert to Ubuntu I felt it necessary to add my two cents.
The point of the original post was that Ubuntu is not exactly a simple switch and that many people will quickly get frustrated and change to something else. I see this pretty much every day here at my home. I love a challenge and solving problems, my wife likes shiny things. It doesn't bother me that I have to enter the command line, move files, track down missing files, and do all sorts of mental acrobatics just to get a simple game to work. My wife, on the other hand, is very much a fan of plug'n'play. I suspect the vast majority of computer users share her sentiments. If Ubuntu truly strives to be "for the people" it needs to be much simpler to change things. Until then it's more "for the people who know at least something about programming".
True enough, the problem of proprietary codecs is not an Ubuntu issue. However, Ubuntu needs to make it clear from the start that this will happen. I had no idea when I switched that all my music files were about to become useless because MP3 was a proprietary code. Nor did I know there would be websites I couldn't view or other data I would not have access to. This is important information that needs to be shared up front on the ubuntu site so perspective users know what they're jumping into. It should also be pointed out that there are solutions available.
The comment made here and elsewhere that "if you don't like it you can change it" really gets my goat. This is a very elitist point of view. It basically tells people they have no business using ubuntu unless they know how to program. At the very least it says they have no right to complain, that they need to shut up and figure out how to make it work the way they want. I was president of my high school computer club and was a half decent programmer, but that was in Basic almost twenty years ago. I switched to Linux because I want to get back into programming and Linux offers all the tools without all the cost. But, even with my experience I'm lost in C++. I don't have a clue where to begin "fixing" apps to work like I think they should. It will take a lot of reading and practice before I am competent enough to due anything productive. There is simply no way you can expect Ma Kettle to put that kind of effort into creating a program to play her music while she's baking pies in the kitchen.
Complaints and suggestions from users are what is known in various consumer-driven industries as "feedback". The vast majority of users have zero programming knowledge and absolutely no desire to acquire it. Just like the vast majority of car owners have no idea how to change their own oil, something I consider mindlessly simple. If programmers want their programs to be widely used they need to understand that not everybody is going to have the skill to fix code problems or the desire to gain the skill. I can't imagine General Motors saying "if you don't like your new truck you can change it". They listen to feedback and adjust the new models according to what the end user wants, within reason. They don't custom build vehicles for each and every customer, but they do make changes when a large enough group is looking for it.
Obviously there are limits to what ubuntu can and should do. Adding proprietary software is out, that would violate the stated intent of the OS. I would narrow the original eight items down to two.

1. Provide better documentation up front about the differences between Windoze and Linux. That way people can make an educated decision which will eliminate 90% of these "Ubuntu needs to be more like Windoze" threads. I may have missed it when I first looked at the site, but I don't remember reading anything about the "problems" of switching over. They need to point out warts and all.

2. Make program installation more intuitive or at least easier to troubleshoot. Even with my programming background and love of tinkering with things I get frustrated by the process of tracking down missing files when I'm configuring a new program. It's even worse when I know the file is already installed, but the configure program doesn't recognize it. Yes, Synaptic does a good job of making most installations point-and-click, but there are a huge number of programs not available through the repositories. It would be nice to have a generic installer program that handled these outside programs.

To sum it up, Ubuntu claims to be "for the people". They've got a ways to go before they truly are. No, they do not need to make it a Windoze clone. But it does need some polish before it will win over a significant portion of computer users. If winning converts is not their goal they need to change the slogan.

aysiu
February 28th, 2007, 05:04 PM
Yet another thread merged in here.

newbie2
February 28th, 2007, 05:19 PM
Nick Farrell:Linux almost desktop ready
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37913

aysiu
February 28th, 2007, 05:25 PM
Nick Farrell:Linux almost desktop ready
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37913
A.Y. Siu: It doesn't matter if it's "ready"
http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktopmyth

prizrak
February 28th, 2007, 07:56 PM
Google search for help "windows won't boot" (http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=help+%22windows+won%27t+boot%22&btnG=Search) currently yields 38,800 results.

Google search for help "ubuntu won't boot" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=help+%22ubuntu+won%27t+boot%22&btnG=Google+Search) currently yields 32 results.

That's Ubuntu (a usually not preinstalled OS) being 0.08% of the Windows (a usually preinstalled and preconfigured OS) results.

Here's an excerpt from the second result in the Windows search: Doesn't look very user-friendly to me.

In fact, it's because a crashed Windows is so intimidating to a regular user that people make Craiglists posts like this one (http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/cpg/279945052.html) or this one (http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/cpg/281852593.html), asking for help recovering data off a crashed Windows installation. And those are just from Craigslist San Francisco.

Any Ubuntu user would presumably have a live CD handy...

Even funnier is that nowhere in any of my computers do I have a floppy drive. I don't even know of any place that sells floppy disks. It's damn near impossible to restore a borked Windows installation without reinstalling everything. You might get a half working install just to grab your files off the drive but that's about it.

The great majority of ordinary users cannot install and configure Linux, even Ubuntu, without resorting to a command line and hand-editing a text file at least once, and probably more that once. I've been obliged to do it several times and so have many others.

That's funny because out of all my non-techie friends/relatives (by techie I mean those who either went to school for IT/IS/CS/SE or someone who knew me long enough to learn random stuff) I have to reinstall Windows for all of them. None of them even know how to do a full reinstall that formats the HDD and have ended up with pretty bad issues after an unsupervised attempt at it. I also encounter many IT people who have problems with Windows. My father for instance while a great DBA (kicks my butt with one kbd tied behind his back) needs my help in figuring out alot of administration issues in Windows. Another DBA I work with (Same team as my father) who is also a wonderful and very knowledgeable lady is generally clueless about things in Windows. She ends up asking one of us for help on what seem to be completely ordinary and common things.

I'm tired of these arguments, want to prove something? Go to www.system76.com buy a machine from there, make sure all the a/v goodies are setup (like flash), get a total n00b and tell him/her to try it. Repeat that procedure with about 5,000 people from different backgrounds, income levels, occupations, and places of residence. Then tell me what the reactions were and how difficult it was for those people to use that computer. Until then use w/e OS you like.

koenn
February 28th, 2007, 11:45 PM
I'm tired of these arguments, want to prove something? Go to www.system76.com buy a machine from there, make sure all the a/v goodies are setup (like flash), get a total n00b and tell him/her to try it. Repeat that procedure with about 5,000 people from different backgrounds, income levels, occupations, and places of residence. Then tell me what the reactions were and how difficult it was for those people to use that computer. Until then use w/e OS you like.

sounds like a plan

m.musashi
March 1st, 2007, 12:08 AM
Nick Farrell:Linux almost desktop ready
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37913

I think this Nick Farrell must be something of an idiot. I don't know him but anyone who writes about technology ought to at least know more about technology than the average person. Now, I may be a bit above average but I'm no tech guru. I've installed about 1/2 the distros he tried plus a few he didn't and they have all been more or less useful - networking or sound might not have worked (actually lately it has with everyone) at first but it doesn't with windows either until I install the drivers.

So, how can this Nick manage to screw up so many installs and yet be allowed to write about technology. If I'm going to listen to someone they damn well better know their way around a computer. I don't think I'll be listening to Nick. Thanks for the warning.


I'm tired of these arguments, want to prove something? Go to www.system76.com buy a machine from there, make sure all the a/v goodies are setup (like flash), get a total n00b and tell him/her to try it. Repeat that procedure with about 5,000 people from different backgrounds, income levels, occupations, and places of residence. Then tell me what the reactions were and how difficult it was for those people to use that computer. Until then use w/e OS you like.
Excellent.

Matzas
March 1st, 2007, 07:24 PM
An Op that demands writing a full A4 sheet of commands in order to get commercial hardware from major manufacturers to work, at least in some sense work, (yes i mean Linux Ubuntu and Kubuntu), that Op is not Desktop ready. It doesn't help if you have manuals to assist you in writing this sheet of commands. That Op will only be for computer geeks.

You should at least publish a list of hardware that works smooth and hardware that demands a lot of work and knowledge to use with Linux. That list should be published centrally in the wiki-section about installing Linux.

Maby that would also be an incentive to the manufacturers that do not publish smooth working Linux drivers for their hardware. Like Nvidia graphic cards and Canon printers.

Best regards

aysiu
March 1st, 2007, 07:32 PM
An Op that demands writing a full A4 sheet of commands in order to get commercial hardware from major manufacturers to work, at least in some sense work, I don't know where you're getting this idea. Maybe you had to look at an A4 sheet of commands to get your hardware to work, but many of us didn't. And I don't agree with that criteria anyway, since most people buy Windows computers preinstalled.


You should at least publish a list of hardware that works smooth and hardware that demands a lot of work and knowledge to use with Linux. That list should be published centrally in the wiki-section about installing Linux. Those lists already exist.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupport
http://www.linuxcompatible.org/

deanlinkous
March 1st, 2007, 10:05 PM
I don't think I'll be listening to Nick. Thanks for the warning.
.
Exactly. My thoughts on that are similar....

Some people think GNU+Linux has to measure up to windows and if it cannot then it is not ready for the desktop or usable or whatever. For me windows has yet to live up to GNU+Linux. If windows did measure up (and free software wasn't my fav feature) then I would be using windows.

I find it hard to believe the sound card issue could of been much of anything if other linux(s) had no problem with it. I wonder if he knows what a mixer is?

I thought it was a poor article. When you go looking for stuff to complain about - you usually manage to find it. Once again someone compares linux rough spots to windows smooth spots.

I do agree he should stick with windows. In fact, if he never used linux or evaluated it for desktop use again I would be very happy.

FyreBrand
March 2nd, 2007, 12:22 AM
Exactly. My thoughts on that are similar....

Some people think GNU+Linux has to measure up to windows and if it cannot then it is not ready for the desktop or usable or whatever. For me windows has yet to live up to GNU+Linux. If windows did measure up (and free software wasn't my fav feature) then I would be using windows.

I find it hard to believe the sound card issue could of been much of anything if other linux(s) had no problem with it. I wonder if he knows what a mixer is?

I thought it was a poor article. When you go looking for stuff to complain about - you usually manage to find it. Once again someone compares linux rough spots to windows smooth spots.

I do agree he should stick with windows. In fact, if he never used linux or evaluated it for desktop use again I would be very happy.My thoughts exactly. I'll easily give my dog and cat more technical credibility than this guy. He's not fact finding to come to a conclusion. He's already drawn a conclusion and is searching for narrow anecdotal evidence to support his beliefs so he has something to drivel on about.

bronevaya
March 5th, 2007, 04:47 AM
I really tried. love the interface with beryl, love the programs, but its just too much of a hastle. upgrading the video drivers is such a pain and never work, you cant watch a full screen movie with beryl running, its just one thing after another. maybe in another 5 years there will be a real user friendly linux distro.

raja
March 5th, 2007, 04:52 AM
You chose to try Beryl ! If you want a hassle -free system, you really should not be trying Beryl. It is definitely the most unstable component of my system at home. At work I have elected not to have Beryl. Also, you should be prepared for some frustration when you are starting life with a different OS. I find so many things frustrating when I have to use windows now.

Mr. C.
March 5th, 2007, 04:53 AM
Welcome to the world of computers.

Zzl1xndd
March 5th, 2007, 05:16 AM
You chose to try Beryl ! If you want a hassle -free system, you really should not be trying Beryl. It is definitely the most unstable component of my system at home. At work I have elected not to have Beryl. Also, you should be prepared for some frustration when you are starting life with a different OS. I find so many things frustrating when I have to use windows now.

Gotta agree here Beryl is still Beta software. I do have it installed but only use the Emerald windows manager when showing people what it can do other then that I stick with MetaCity.

adarkmethod
March 5th, 2007, 05:20 AM
I really tried. love the interface with beryl, love the programs, but its just too much of a hastle. upgrading the video drivers is such a pain and never work, you cant watch a full screen movie with beryl running, its just one thing after another. maybe in another 5 years there will be a real user friendly linux distro.


I understand your frustration man, but i really thing you're screwing yourself. How long have you been on windows? how long did it take you to get everything figured out? My guess is that you gave it more time and than you tried with this. I've only been on Ubuntu for about 5 days now, and i have it doing almost evrything i did in windoze. The only thing i can think of right now that i cant do is burn .bin/.cue movies to DVD, and i could do that if i wanted to convert them to something else first, im jsut trying to get them to burn directly first.

The community here is amazingly helpful, you should give it jsut a little more time i think

aysiu
March 5th, 2007, 05:21 AM
maybe in another 5 years there will be a real user friendly linux distro. Maybe in another 5 years flamebait will become original and I'll stop merging it into this thread.

ramjet_1953
March 5th, 2007, 05:21 AM
If you want stablity, you shouldn't be using Beryl.
Beryl is still very much in development and if you read posts on these forums and go to the Beryl forums you will get the same information.

If you are having problems with getting the correct video configuration, it is a pointless exercise blaming Linux.

The real problem is the hardware manufacturers, who will not release open source drivers and try to lock their customers into Windows.

Hackers are doing a mighty job in reverse engineering and creating drivers for hardware, but it takes countless hours of non-paid work.

If you feel that strongly about it, I would suggest complaining to the manufacturer of your video chipset.

Regards,
Roger :cool:

bikeboy
March 5th, 2007, 05:31 AM
Maybe in another 5 years flamebait will become original and I'll stop merging it into this thread.

Couldn't get a more apt statement than that, which is good because I love apt..itude :)

FyreBrand
March 5th, 2007, 06:18 AM
Maybe in another 5 years flamebait will become original and I'll stop merging it into this thread.I hope you're right, but I think you're being overly optimistic.

Slingshot
March 8th, 2007, 07:02 AM
there a little program called Pro/Engineer availble for Linux. On the cheaper (much cheaper) end of the scale theres VariCAD. Tell him to put that in his pipe and smoke it.:lolflag:

karellen
March 8th, 2007, 08:14 AM
I guess many people make confusion between an OS (with it's kernel, architecture etc) and it's software environment. Windows is "better" than linux just because there are so many programs writen for it, many of those having no real linux counterpart in terms of features (photoshop, macromedia, ms office, even yahoo messenger)...The average joe user doesn't care that windows it's not equivalent with all the stuff he can run on it. But I hope this is really going to change as more and more people adopt linus as their main desktop os

aysiu
March 8th, 2007, 08:30 AM
Ah, "just a toy"--how could that one have slipped through the cracks?

It's now merged.

PatrickMay16
March 8th, 2007, 12:22 PM
Linux will be ready for the desktop when there are good and fully-featured applications for all or almost all tasks, such as

* Office tasks: presentations/wordprocessing/spreadsheets
* Audio and/or music editing
* Image creation and manipulation
* Video editing

Currently there are good office tools available, but they still need improvement.
Audacity is excellent, but it doesn't have as many features as, say, Goldwave, and it seems a little glitchy (at least to me).
There's plenty of imaging programs, like GIMP and Krita, but apparently GIMP's interface turns off a lot of people. I can't say anything for Krita since I haven't looked into it much.
And as for video editing, I don't think there are any readily available programs for video editing on linux. I don't know much about this, though, maybe someone else who has tried to do video editing on linux can come and comment.

There are other problems which don't help linux on the desktop.

* Applications from different GUI toolkits sticking out against each other

If you use GNOME and you have to use a KDE application or an older GTK application, it just sucks. GNOME doesn't apply its color scheme to qt or GTK1 applications so if you need to use qt or gtk1 apps and you also want your desktop to look somewhat nice, you have a lot of work on your hands. I've attached a picture to this post to show what I mean.
Complexnumber, you can deny this all you want. It is a problem.

[img=http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/4799/qukuz0.th.png] (http://img218.imageshack.us/my.php?image=qukuz0.png)

* No GUI for some essential things

In today's world, the average user should not have to use a command line at all. If you use linux seriously for a long amount of time, you will have to use the command line at some point. Unacceptable if you're going to be pushing linux as a desktop operating system for anyone who wants to buy a computer.

* Poor software sound mixing

Most soundcards cannot mix multiple sound streams in hardware. If you have a soundcard like that, and you have an OSS application and an ALSA application, they cannot both make sounds at the same time. Of course someone will argue that with the ALSA-OSS wrapper you can work around this, but it doesn't work with all applications and an average user will be confused about why they have to open a terminal and type "aoss realplayer" so they can listen to music and hear message notification sounds from their IM client at the same time.

I'm not complaining, I am just telling things as they are and giving my answer to the original question of this thread.

Kindred
March 8th, 2007, 12:54 PM
* Applications from different GUI toolkits sticking out against each other

If you use GNOME and you have to use a KDE application or an older GTK application, it just sucks. GNOME doesn't apply its color scheme to qt or GTK1 applications so if you need to use qt or gtk1 apps and you also want your desktop to look somewhat nice, you have a lot of work on your hands. I've attached a picture to this post to show what I mean.
Complexnumber, you can deny this all you want. It is a problem.

[img=http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/4799/qukuz0.th.png] (http://img218.imageshack.us/my.php?image=qukuz0.png)



Do you think this is much of an issue? I mean, go check out WinAmp, iTunes, Nero and Word for example. It's not so bad on Linux really.

toasted
March 8th, 2007, 01:50 PM
Every OS sucks

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2514730680283477734

:guitar:

Frak
March 8th, 2007, 02:03 PM
Every OS sucks

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2514730680283477734

:guitar:
He does have quite a point for the new community. Speaking of Linux, which he mispronounced like 30 times.

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 02:51 PM
I doubt this is the correct forum, but I installed Ubuntu on three machines last month. Initially I had a great time, got the correct drivers, got beryl working lovely. :KS

But it was hard work, believe me, sudo this, sudo that, download this package, update the repositry, apt-get this and that. Man it is way off for the home user. :confused:

I class myself as an IT professional, I have developed high end CAD applications using MFC, wxWidgets, QT, OpenGL etc, but I have to say Ubuntu is great but its still years behind WinXP.

After really trying hard to use Ubuntu full time, last week I reinstalled WinXP, no problems installed all the usual applications, I have always used the OpenSource applications anyway like OpenOffice, FireFox and Thunderbird.

But installing other applications in Windows is just plain easy, a download package normally comes with everything, no external dependencies for libX or libY version 1999.929.2.2.2, its just simple.

Another huge issue for home users is software from bargin buckets or free on magazines, WINE is great bug again its focused on getting the kill app of the moment working like WoW, but not on the Kids software for learning how to read and write.

So I am sad to say that Ubuntu will have to wait, I will still run one machine with it, but for me it was "ok" not small "ok" not OK, but for my wife it was impossible.

I challenge anyone to get an entire system up and running in a shared windows network as easy as WinXP, including printers & scanners etc.

Also is it even possible to exist entirely outside the "sudo command prompt" world, note my wife has been running WinXP since the day it was release she has never opened a command shell, and she fully maintains here system, installs software, devices etc.

Sorry about any bad spelling....

Bachstelze
March 8th, 2007, 02:53 PM
No. Ubuntu is not a Win XP replacement and never will be. Linux is not Windows !

srt4play
March 8th, 2007, 02:57 PM
No. Ubuntu is not a Win XP replacement and never will be. Linux is not Windows !

Thank you! It's amazing how many people expect it to be.

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 03:15 PM
I am not expecting Ubuntu to be a Windows replacement, I am just asking it to work as well as my current desktop OS, Windows the dominant desktop OS, Ubuntu aims to change this.

In order to do it, it must perform as well if not better, issues on where is does not measure up are -

Graphics cards and monitors, so complex to stops most people dead
Installing software, too complex, too many systems, not straight foward, DLL hell to N-th degree
Printers nightmare, not Ubuntu's fault just hardware vendors and Linux
Scanners nightmare, not Ubuntu's fault just hardware vendors and Linux
Networks, smb great but hello command prompt again
Software not working across smb shares

Note, the average windows users has never heard of regedit, regsvr32, .ini files, etc, all Ubuntu & Linux users have used sudo, vi, gedit, init.d, .conf files, see the difference.

Ubuntu is fantastic, much better than my previous distros, Gentoo and Redhat, but it is far from a desktop replacement for the home user, I agree with general comments it can work for the busness market when you have dedicated IT staff to set it all up.

If Ubuntu wants to fight in the home desktop market it needs to improve significantly to even measure upto WinXP, let alone Vista.

prizrak
March 8th, 2007, 03:16 PM
* No GUI for some essential things

In today's world, the average user should not have to use a command line at all. If you use linux seriously for a long amount of time, you will have to use the command line at some point. Unacceptable if you're going to be pushing linux as a desktop operating system for anyone who wants to buy a computer.
I agree here. Compiz (aka DesktopEffects) can only be setup via gconf. There is a GUI for it but for that you will need to grab an extra repository and install a 3rd party program. It can be argued that it's a bit too much for an average user.

My biggest two gripes are lack of GUI tools for Bluetooth and Tablet configs. Tablet is not configurable via GUI at all and BT has a very basic GUI that doesn't provide even a fraction of usability that even Windows's default BT GUI (and it sux) has.

Why do people have all these problems with Beryl? It worked fine for me save for the latest Fesity alpha. Though I think in that case it's a mismatch between the newest xorg and Beryl. Compiz works fine (tho does open some Windows off screen sometimes and lacks a nice config tool out of the box) with the latest Feisty just by being compiled right for the setup. I never had a single issue with fullscreen video, even quicktime HD 720/1080 work fine in fullscreen streaming or local and I don't even have w32codecs installed. Haven't tried DVD's yet but I got a TV for a reason ;)

Ozor Mox
March 8th, 2007, 03:19 PM
No. Ubuntu is not a Win XP replacement and never will be. Linux is not Windows !

This has become very apparent to me after being on Linux for 5 days, and in no way did I expect it to be a replacement for Windows as I knew there would be lots of things I'd have to get used to.

But the original poster makes a good point that the average computer user just could not use Linux as there is just too much technical stuff to do to get things to work. Two points about this: Firstly, it will never achieve a significant market share of the desktop user. Not the fault of Linux, it's clearly designed for the power user, but when I try and imagine people I know who are computer literate but not very technical trying to use Linux I cringe. I consider myself fairly computer literate and I'm having numerous difficulties, though I consider it a learning process. There are so many people out there though who want their computer to just work, and Linux is not for them...yet. Secondly, also not the fault of Linux, there is simply not enough hardware support, which is a real catch 22 as vendors will never bother to release drivers for Linux until it has enough of the market to be worthwhile, but in its current state it will never achieve a large market share.

Basically, Linux is excellent for servers and experienced, knowledgeable computer users, but not user friendly enough for the average desktop user. I'm struggling a bit with it, but I'm prepared to give it my all and hopefully come out the other side knowing more about Linux and Ubuntu and sticking with what I consider to be a superior system with a significantly steeper learning curve, but so many people would have given up way before I have, or not even have been able to get going in the first place.

Again, please take these as observations of my limited experience of Linux. As I've stated many times, I like it, prefer it to Windows, and hope to stick with it if I can make it through the difficult transition period of a long time Windows user.

Bachstelze
March 8th, 2007, 03:20 PM
Graphics cards and monitors, so complex to stops most people dead
Installing software, too complex, too many systems, not straight foward, DLL hell to N-th degree
Printers nightmare, not Ubuntu's fault just hardware vendors and Linux
Scanners nightmare, not Ubuntu's fault just hardware vendors and Linux



Complete rubbish. I have all of that working perfectly, sometimes better than in Windows.

What you haven't uderstood is that Linux's goal is not to "measure upon" Windows. It is to suit the needs of Linux users better, period. If some Windows users want to switch to Linux, fine. If they want to stay with Windows, fine also. But it's people who like Linux who make it, not people who don't.

ahsile
March 8th, 2007, 03:20 PM
Maybe part of the problem was trying to go for the unofficial eye candy support. Unless you're trying to do something special one almost never needs to enter the terminal to do things. My setup has worked quite well for my wife and I, and the only reason I really *needed* to hit the terminal was to get the xorg config set up via the ati command line tool. I have shared folders set up for my wife and, which work flawlessly on both OSX and Windows (using Bootcamp), a multifunction printer shared for both of our use.

I admit, I enjoy working on the terminal to do a lot of things, but it's just necessary if you don't have to. But then again, as was already stated, Linux is not Windows. It never will be. I, personally, love it and will never be switching back to windows, but it's not for everybody. At least you gave it a shot, which is a lot better than most who bash Linux can say.

melancholeric
March 8th, 2007, 03:28 PM
This has become very apparent to me after being on Linux for 5 days, and in no way did I expect it to be a replacement for Windows as I knew there would be lots of things I'd have to get used to.

But the original poster makes a good point that the average computer user just could not use Linux as there is just too much technical stuff to do to get things to work. Two points about this: Firstly, it will never achieve a significant market share of the desktop user. Not the fault of Linux, it's clearly designed for the power user, but when I try and imagine people I know who are computer literate but not very technical trying to use Linux I cringe. I consider myself fairly computer literate and I'm having numerous difficulties, though I consider it a learning process. There are so many people out there though who want their computer to just work, and Linux is not for them...yet. Secondly, also not the fault of Linux, there is simply not enough hardware support, which is a real catch 22 as vendors will never bother to release drivers for Linux until it has enough of the market to be worthwhile, but in its current state it will never achieve a large market share.

Basically, Linux is excellent for servers and experienced, knowledgeable computer users, but not user friendly enough for the average desktop user. I'm struggling a bit with it, but I'm prepared to give it my all and hopefully come out the other side knowing more about Linux and Ubuntu and sticking with what I consider to be a superior system with a significantly steeper learning curve, but so many people would have given up way before I have, or not even have been able to get going in the first place.

Again, please take these as observations of my limited experience of Linux. As I've stated many times, I like it, prefer it to Windows, and hope to stick with it if I can make it through the difficult transition period of a long time Windows user.
I could make a point that windows isn't particularly well designed for the "average" desktop user, the mysterious Joe Sixpack,

How many of those Joe Sixpacks actually realize to get an antivirus and firewall on their own? Or replace IE with a bit more secure browser? Or defrag the hard drive occasionally? Or to not download every random cool screensaver they see somewhere? Etc.

Over 90 % of all email is spam. And over 90 % of that comes from hijacked windows boxes.

Of course, if linux userbase grows large enough, we'll have the malware problem too.

See also: Linux Is Not Windows (http://www.linux.oneandoneis2.com/LNW.htm) and What's Wrong With Microsoft? (http://www.linux.oneandoneis2.com/wrongms.htm)

Not that I agree with everything in those articles, but they make some very good points.

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 03:47 PM
I knew this would start some debate, let me give you some history about myself, I have developed applications and used the following OS's -

Sun Solaris
IBM AIX
SGI Irix
HP-UX
Linux (gentoo, suse, redhat, debian, ubuntu, etc)
Windows (3.0,3.1, 95, 98, NT3.51, NT4.0, 2K, 2003, XP, Vista)

The best all round desktop OS is XP, beyond a shadow of a doubt. I have a large community of IT professional friends and colleuge, we all agree Linux is still in the domain of the accedemic who wants to prove they don't need Microsoft.

Lets be honest its a challenge, its not easy, you have to read forums, write scripts, cut and paste commands into the shell, its still years away from a desktop replacement.

For example, and please, please dont get me wrong here, I love Ubuntu, its truely great, but order to get OpenGL work on most WinXP PC its simple here are the steps -

1. It just works out of the box
2. Find the card type and manufacture, start (click), control panel (click), display (click), advanced (click)
3. start (click), internet (click), "google" (click), "nvidia"/"ati"/"sis"/"etc"/click, drivers (click), download (click), run (click), reboot (click)

And your done.

Ubuntu (Linux)

Synaptic Package Manager
Search "sis" nothing
Google "sis" nothing, if laptop dead!
Get new card from work, ooh Nvidia
Synaptic Package Manager
Search "Nvidia" cool
Install
Error, legacy card not supported!
Synaptic Package Manager
Search "Nvidia" legacy cool
Install
Error, no compatible kernal
Google, ahh sudo
sudo build kernel | uname -skjsjk | -include /usr/kernel, blah, blah, blah
Error, no kernel sources
Synaptic Package Manager
Search "kernel sources" cool
Install
sudo build kernel | uname -skjsjk | -include /usr/kernel, blah, blah, blah
Error, X running
sudo /etc/init.d/gdm stop
sudo build kernel | uname -skjsjk | -include /usr/kernel, blah, blah, blah
cool
sudo /etc/init.d/gdm start
cool
terminal, glxinfo
Error GLX extensions not found!
Synaptic Package Manager
Search "GLX" cool
Install
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE, ooh new short cut learned
terminal, glxinfo
Error GLX extensions not found!
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE
X fails to start, no google help!
Login to Windows machine, google, find answers
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE

See my point, not desktop replacement ready, YET, but I will keep watching

Sui Nim Tao
March 8th, 2007, 03:55 PM
I have been using this edgy now on and off (kubuntu) for a week or so, as well as suse 10.2 and feisty. I have a media box and a PC for work related things (web design mainly), I have only just sacked off windows and have no trouble doing my work with kwrite and gimp.

I see no going back, my wife is completely useless when it comes to computers, she can put a cd in and play music on the media box and thats about it and even she can use it, no trouble no bother, she actually likes it more.

Granted it needs setting up correctly, I am no novice to computers, and I struggled in some areas granted that too (due to lack of knowledge in linux). BUT once set up it runs without any need to mess with it.

I think the oridginal poster is getting mixed up with usability and installation, my wife is more than happy (apart from all the brown, which is why we have KDE, i know i can change it but still experimenting).

I tried feisty, everything yes everything worked even my zd1211 wireless chipset, straight out the box, only distro so far to do this and i have been through 8 or so, not even XP, it was painfull getting it working in windows and even then wouldn't connect till way after boot meaning virus update bombed out.

If you can't set it up, get someone who can or ask for some help here, then use it as an everyday PC like you would windows and then see what you think. I for one will be spending my time switching the users of all the repairs i do, instead of wasting hours cleaning there machines of virus's just to get them back 3 weeks later.

Paul

mar225
March 8th, 2007, 03:55 PM
As my Mom would say, it must be the weather.

My Grandad told me a couple months ago, I will pay for your hardware but you can not run windows. I bit. So far it has cost him a bundle. It took a while to learn the new terms and where some of the keys are that I never used before.

Not once did I have trouble typing sudo. I don't think it is in the dictionary but it wasn't hard to learn and the biggest problem I had was remembering when to use it. I never really thought of it as hard work though.

I can't comment on CAD. They don't sell it where I get my software. I know I can't afford it and Gramps would probably croak when he got the bill anyway. I guess I don't miss it because probably only one in ten thousand people use it anyway.

You must be using a windows version I haven't seen yet. The last time I had to reinstall XP it took a couple days. Had to call someone to get them to bless my system before I could even get started. They wanted to know alomost everything except who my last date was with.

Unless the bargain buckets you refer to are something new I have to confess. I did buy a program there once. Never again. It was full of snakes not bugs. Took me a monthe to get rid of all the sticky little parts that tried to find a home in my machine.

Yeah I do have to agree that a lot of wife types are challenged. Thats probably why over 60 % are single within ten years.

I would take your challenge if it wasn't for Gramps. I made a promise that I would pay him back for my machine the first time I put any windows programs on it. I think he cheated. He included wine applications.

Back to Sudo. It is easy to avoid that impossible to remember spelling. Just make a macro. That way you will never have to type it again.

Hey just turn on the spell check and you don't have to apologize anymore.

I found one bad thing about Ubuntu. When my boyfriend comes to pick me up it is hard to get him to leave the computer alone. Gramps thinks it is funny. I am getting a little irritated. Maybe I should sudo him.

jem7v
March 8th, 2007, 03:55 PM
Yeah, Beryl is... not really for "average" users. It's for people who want funky effects and don't mind using beta-quality software to manage their entire desktop.

- I've installed various flavours of Ubuntu on 4 vastly different computers, and I've never had difficulty installing it and setting it up (unless I used the wrong install CD, which happened once). Installing proper graphics drivers has ocassionally been painful, but that's often because graphic card companies don't want to release decent open source drivers for their products for fear of revealing their "industry secrets," so the installation processes are all different and convoluted... but they Do work. Could a beginner install them? I did. It wasn't easy, but the default drivers Did run smoothly until I figured out how to use the proprietary ones. With the video card stuff there: there Are very good driver installation guides for Ubuntu, frequently linked to in these forums. And there's a very good script called Envy for installing NVidia and ATI drivers...or you can download the NVidia driver installation script from their website and install the drivers that way, ensuring you get the latest version instead of the older version in the Ubuntu repositories.
- Installing hardware in Windows is not always easy either. I will refer here to the time it took us 3 days to get an ATI video card to display more than 16 colors in Windows, or my Lexmark scanner that would never scan in better than 8 bit color for some reason, or my Hewlett Packard scanner that the computer just stopped recognizing one day, or the same thing that happened to my Cannon camera that connects fine under Linux, or our printer that would just spew random sheets of paper if you tried to print a file the wrong way... So far, the only hardware I've had that didn't work was an 8 year old ethernet card on an ISA slot (and ISA slots aren't supported in the current Linux kernel, I believe) and a winmodem (but that's because it, um, was a winmodem. that's a long story).
- Software isn't Always easy to install in Windows - sometimes it just plain doesn't work. I've never had a Windows virus scanner that didn't cause me trouble during the installation, uninstallation, or maintenance of it. In Ubuntu, if you just use the Add/Remove Programs app all your dependencies are satisfied automatically anyway, and it's dead easy. Synaptic and Aptitude cover dependencies too.
- Printers and scanners? Partly depends on what brand you own. Personally, my nasty old Microtek Scanmaker worked fine as soon as we plugged it in, and the Brother laser printer we own even had Linux drivers (in .deb packages, too!) available on the website. Installing it was no more painful than trying to get hardware to work under Windows ever was. But I'll agree that some brands have really crappy linux support.
- The only issues I had setting up my network to hook up to the WinXP computer was that the XP machine's network dialogue gave me such vague information to work with that I had to experiment with various combinations until I found the right one that works. But as soon as I figured that out, everything worked fine. I've never had network issues, but then again I don't use a wireless card.

I dunno. Honestly, I do have a windows partition on this machine, but I don't think I've booted into it since December. For ME, Ubuntu is more stable, faster, easier to navigate and manage settings (the menus are pretty intuitive, being labeled for what they do rather than with brand names), more secure, not prone to adware, etc, etc. I suppose if I kept finding windows programs that I NEEDED to use I might consider it more often, but everything I use either has a native Linux alternative or runs passably in Wine. As it is, though, Ubuntu is much more comfortable to me than the maze that is XP.


Also, a lot of the Linux basics you need to know are covered in the Ubuntu Desktop guide, which one might consider to be a bit like reading the manual. I read through it before I started and didn't run into many surprises once I started using the OS.

oilchangeguy
March 8th, 2007, 03:59 PM
i'm writing this from my laptop, which runs only xp home sp2. and the reason is, i just tried to print a mailing label from the usps web site, using my ubuntu 6.06 desktop computer. it can't be done, you can get to the site, and probably view every page in the site, but try to print a label, you better have internet explorer. i like what ubuntu has to offer, the open source movement is great, but it's small things like this that will keep windows on top of the operating system war. so now, while i've got the lap top out i'll let it do all of it's virus and spyware updates, (things i don't have to do with my linux box) then shut it down and put it away, until the next time ubuntu or firefox lets me down.

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 04:02 PM
Complete rubbish. I have all of that working perfectly, sometimes better than in Windows.

What you haven't uderstood is that Linux's goal is not to "measure upon" Windows. It is to suit the needs of Linux users better, period. If some Windows users want to switch to Linux, fine. If they want to stay with Windows, fine also. But it's people who like Linux who make it, not people who don't.

Note: What you haven't understood here is, that Linux aims to be better than Windows, more open, more flexible, available to a wide community. In order to ensure something is better, you need a yard stick, a point to which you aspire for, or to be better than, today there are two sticks Windows and MacOS, Ubuntu is closer than any other Linux distro, but I firmly believe its years behind.

In your opening comment, "I have all of that working perfectly, sometimes better", see sometimes, it needs to be always better, and I bet you had to "sudo" to do it, read web forums, and compare that to the average Dell consumer who had it working straight out of the box.

If you have not see the google or youtube videos about PC vs MAC I suggest you check them out, honestly Windows is behind MAC by a few years, but Linux is even further away on the out of the box experience.

taurus
March 8th, 2007, 04:04 PM
I am going to move this to Cafe since it looks like it's a debate about why Ubuntu (Linux) is not better than Windows.

melancholeric
March 8th, 2007, 04:08 PM
and compare that to the average Dell consumer who had it working straight out of the box.
Only because Dell is not selling boxes with preinstalled linux to end users. If they did, why wouldn't everything work just as perfectly?

EnigmaStigma
March 8th, 2007, 04:09 PM
I haven't been working with linux but for maybe 5 week, actually getting ready to take my final on my first linux class, but so far Linux is a blast. I think so of it depends on what you're wanting to do and how much time you have to do it as well as how familiar you are with the OS your wanting to do, what ever it is your doing, on. (lost of jibber jaber ge tin trouble in english for that)

I haven't gotten comfortable enough with Linux to switch totally over to Ubuntu but I hope to in the future.

If you like windowsXP better and believe in your heart that it's the better OS that's cool man. I don't know much about the Linux community but in my first few days in I've found that one of the largest and most key elements/reasons for getting into Linux (for me anyways) is...well the community. Working together to make something new or searching through forums trying to find out how to get started. Especially here at Ubuntu that has been extremely helpful and easy going.

So you like XP...me too. Love it. Even media center. But Ubuntu and Linux is much easier, for my brain, and powerful when it comes to even small things like changing permissions on files and directories and lets face it...it's much more spiffy :mrgreen:.

If you're down with XP use it man. There's nothing wrong with that...not at all. Microsoft vs. Unix blah blah blah eh so what. We're all doing the same thing anyways, setting up printers, scripting, banging our heads against the walls. Enjoy it.

Thanks for the heads up though, there's obiviously a whole mess of stuff that i've got to learn before I'm ready to entirely switch over. Then again I'm kind of happy having both, but eventually I'm gonna have to partition off my HD and load both windows and Ubuntu on there.

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 04:12 PM
I think the oridginal poster is getting mixed up with usability and installation, my wife is more than happy (apart from all the brown, which is why we have KDE, i know i can change it but still experimenting).


I am not getting mixed up, installing software is a daily activity. Don't get me wrong here, Windows is not perfect, I still use "myuninstaller", and other tools, but its almost always simpler to install things under Windows.

Kindred
March 8th, 2007, 04:19 PM
I am not getting mixed up, installing software is a daily activity. Don't get me wrong here, Windows is not perfect, I still use "myuninstaller", and other tools, but its almost always simpler to install things under Windows.

Almost always simpler? Tried Add/Remove & Synaptic?

(also.. read http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=113874 , it's in this threads future.)

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 04:19 PM
Please please listen, I am not an Ubuntu basher, I love it, I am very proficient in UNIX admin, I got all working, I have Beryl set up on all machines I tried Ubuntu on, I have all the repositories installed updating all my software with the latest and greatest.

All I am saying is, its no easy for the average user, and has a long way to go to become a home user desktop environment.

Think about it most home users don't even know what Firefox is, you go round disable IE, install Firefox, and say "that will help with the spyware", they use it an see no difference.

Lets get in the mind set of these users, command prompts, terminals, and sudo commands, are not good enough for them.

Thats my point pure and simple, its not a home user desktop OS, its still for the die hard academics that love the freedom and control, and enjoy re-compiling the kernel.

I will continue to run it on one machine, as I said I love it, its great at what it does.

qamelian
March 8th, 2007, 04:22 PM
Lets be honest its a challenge, its not easy, you have to read forums, write scripts, cut and paste commands into the shell, its still years away from a desktop replacement.

Okay, let's be honest. It is easy. Everything you say above also applies to many situations in Windows. You can't deny it because I hear it everyday from people who spend time scouring various Windows related forums to resolve issues that they wouldn't have if they took the time to learn some basics before jumping in at the deep end.


For example, and please, please dont get me wrong here, I love Ubuntu, its truely great, but order to get OpenGL work on most WinXP PC its simple here are the steps -

1. It just works out of the box
2. Find the card type and manufacture, start (click), control panel (click), display (click), advanced (click)
3. start (click), internet (click), "google" (click), "nvidia"/"ati"/"sis"/"etc"/click, drivers (click), download (click), run (click), reboot (click)

And your done.

Ubuntu (Linux)

Synaptic Package Manager
Search "sis" nothing
Google "sis" nothing, if laptop dead!
Get new card from work, ooh Nvidia
Synaptic Package Manager
Search "Nvidia" cool
Install
Error, legacy card not supported!
Synaptic Package Manager
Search "Nvidia" legacy cool
Install
Error, no compatible kernal
Google, ahh sudo
sudo build kernel | uname -skjsjk | -include /usr/kernel, blah, blah, blah
Error, no kernel sources
Synaptic Package Manager
Search "kernel sources" cool
Install
sudo build kernel | uname -skjsjk | -include /usr/kernel, blah, blah, blah
Error, X running
sudo /etc/init.d/gdm stop
sudo build kernel | uname -skjsjk | -include /usr/kernel, blah, blah, blah
cool
sudo /etc/init.d/gdm start
cool
terminal, glxinfo
Error GLX extensions not found!
Synaptic Package Manager
Search "GLX" cool
Install
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE, ooh new short cut learned
terminal, glxinfo
Error GLX extensions not found!
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE
X fails to start, no google help!
Login to Windows machine, google, find answers
sudo gedit /etc/X11/X11.conf, google some more
CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE

See my point, not desktop replacement ready, YET, but I will keep watching


On both my laptop and my desktop, OpenGL works out of the box with the included open-source drivers. My desktop dual-boots with XP and every time I decide to reinstall XP, my sound and video cards are a nightmare to get working properly again. I learned the hard way that the only way new drivers will install on my current video card in Windows is to reboot in Safe Mode. Any attempt to do it in normal mode results in a BSOD and is only resolvable by reinstalling Windows.

Linux replaced Windows as my desktop along time ago. My dual boot is only for my sister's convenience when she comes over to use my PC. Heck, even my 10-year god-child is capable of using (and yes, installing) Ubuntu!

I use Ubuntu Linux for everyday tasks like handling office documents, surfing the net and checking email, but I also use it as the cornerstone of my home recording studio and for my side-line of restoring vintage audio and video recordings.

Linux may not be ready for you, but it sure is ready for my desktop and replaced XP along time ago.

karellen
March 8th, 2007, 04:24 PM
Complete rubbish. I have all of that working perfectly, sometimes better than in Windows.

What you haven't uderstood is that Linux's goal is not to "measure upon" Windows. It is to suit the needs of Linux users better, period. If some Windows users want to switch to Linux, fine. If they want to stay with Windows, fine also. But it's people who like Linux who make it, not people who don't.

the fact that YOU have all these things working perfectly in linux doesn't mean that others' opinions are rubbish. I have a webcam and I can't use it in linux while I chat in gaim/kopete. Is this rubbish too?

Ozor Mox
March 8th, 2007, 04:25 PM
Only because Dell is not selling boxes with preinstalled linux to end users. If they did, why wouldn't everything work just as perfectly?

This is the problem with the average desktop computer user switching to Linux. Too many of the damn hardware vendors don't support Linux. If I bought a computer with Linux preinstalled, everything would work beautifully, but both my laptop and desktop computers are Dell and came with Windows XP. As a result, the wireless card doesn't work on one, and the other one has a display resolution of 640x480 on a 128 Mb graphics card. There are ways of getting these things to work, and I'm prepared to read up on them and attempt them, but if I was less computer literate I would probably not even know where to start, forget actually getting these solutions to work.

It's great that the Linux community is so amazing as to write open source drivers for this hardware, write tools to enable the Windows drivers to work, and give help at every step of the way getting it to work.

If I bought a new computer, I'd likely buy it with Linux preinstalled because I know I'd love it once I've worked past all these hardware problems and differences with Windows, of which the latter I think I'm mostly there. Though I'm sure you all know as well as I do the success of trying to find a Linux-ready new computer...

Somenoob
March 8th, 2007, 04:28 PM
Sometimes I wished that Torvalds had named the kernel LINW(Linw is not windows). I'm getting tired of posts from people with XP habbits.

yaztromo
March 8th, 2007, 04:28 PM
Titan I use Ubuntu as my primary desktop OS but I still agree with all your points. They are based in fact, not bias.

You really can't expect anything less than everyone disagreeing with you when you post this to a linux forum though. It's a waste of your time. People here are going to be very biased against Windows.

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 04:30 PM
An example, real world case, actually happened last week.

So I have test machine at work, dual boot Ubuntu Edgy, Vista Ultimate. Basic config, dual P4 2.4Ghz, 2Gb ram, 120 Gb HD (split 60,60 for each OS).

I have Beryl running under Ubuntu and Aero under Vista, using GeForce 4 MX 256 Mb card. Note Vista worked out of the box, Ubuntu I had to install Nvidia legacy drivers and GLX, re-compile them for the kernel etc, update X11 config, then install Beryl, no big deal for me anyway.

So last week the graphics card went pop! Drove to PC world, got a new GeForce 6 256 Mb card, installed it.

Vista, ohh nice, Windows has detected new hardware and installed the latest driver, Aero works better than ever.

Ubuntu, X failed to start dead, no time, can't be bothered to fix it yet.

See my point, home user desktop OS, not yet.

qamelian
March 8th, 2007, 04:31 PM
All I am saying is, its no easy for the average user, and has a long way to go to become a home user desktop environment.
...
Thats my point pure and simple, its not a home user desktop OS, its still for the die hard academics that love the freedom and control, and enjoy re-compiling the kernel.

Again I have to disagree. I've assisted a couple of dozen average home-users to make the move to Ubuntu. Everyone of them found it as easy to use as Windows and has stuck with it. Most of them also agree that Synaptic makes it easier for them to find the types of software they need than trolling around the web. They also like the assurance that the software is coming from a trusted source rather than some random, unfamiliar website.

But the thing they like best, is that they spend less time calling me to fix things that appear broken on their PCs. I kinda like that myself!

Ozor Mox
March 8th, 2007, 04:33 PM
Sometimes I wished that Torvalds had named the kernel LINW(Linw is not windows). I'm getting tired of posts from people with XP habbits.

This is the sort of thing I like NOT seeing here when I'm asking for help with Ubuntu. I admit it, I have XP habits. Of course I do, I've been using the darned Windows operating system for more than ten years, pretty much since I very first started on computers. But here I am giving Ubuntu a try because I want to use something other than Windows and see how I get on with it, and I think that's more than most people in their comfort zone with Microsoft would be willing to do.

melancholeric
March 8th, 2007, 04:43 PM
This is the sort of thing I like NOT seeing here when I'm asking for help with Ubuntu. I admit it, I have XP habits. Of course I do, I've been using the darned Windows operating system for more than ten years, pretty much since I very first started on computers. But here I am giving Ubuntu a try because I want to use something other than Windows and see how I get on with it, and I think that's more than most people in their comfort zone with Microsoft would be willing to do.

it's not that people have XP habits, it's whether they realize that they're complete newbies with linux and have a lot to learn. And, just as importantly, unlearn.

The problem comes when people think they know how to use computers when they know how to use windows, and when things don't work the same way they get frustrated and end up whining on the forums (not referring to this thread at all, but countless others come to mind ... ).

Remember when you first time used a computer? It's the same learning curve again. Not because it's that much more difficult, but because it's different. Atleast, that's how I felt when I switched to linux. And still feel.

hsweet
March 8th, 2007, 04:43 PM
I've switched my main home computer from XP after one too many crashes. (The last one was a hardware problem to be fair) to Edubuntu. My wife and kids use it with no problems except that the print queue is a bit slow. The install was as easy or easier than windows for a basic system.

The system is stable, recognized my windows machine, runs and boots faster than windows and has not been a headache for me. Plus all the main apps are already installed. How much time does it take to install all the windows apps after the OS is installed and the endless updates complete? And I'd rather edit a config file than type in those damn install codes where you can't tell the zeros from the ohs.

Winner--Linux

I'm also setting up a Edubuntu lab at school. Much harder. Here I do have to spend a lot of time getting cozy with the text in /etc. But than it's a more complex setup than the average home system.

I think that Ubuntu is more than good enough for the average user out of the box. (office stuff, internet, email, etc).

Average users probably shouldn't be messing around with OS installs. Windows, Linux or anything. They buy boxes with the OS already installed and go hire a tech to fix problems or live with them.

What is really needed is vendors giving customers a choice of which os to pre-load and price their products accordingly.

buuntuu!
March 8th, 2007, 04:53 PM
I think that Ubuntu is more than good enough for the average user out of the box. (office stuff, internet, email, etc).


i couldn't agree more!
you come to windows as a noob and you stay a noob forever,
you come to linux as a noob and you have the choice: if you just want to do average stuff you are well off with an unaltered ubuntu... install. most things work out of the box, really and it's definitely friendly enough for someone who does not care or does not have the time to learn. but if you want to you CAN do so, just by playing around.
what could be more user friendly???

EnigmaStigma
March 8th, 2007, 04:57 PM
Please please listen, I am not an Ubuntu basher, I love it, I am very proficient in UNIX admin, I got all working, I have Beryl set up on all machines I tried Ubuntu on, I have all the repositories installed updating all my software with the latest and greatest.

All I am saying is, its no easy for the average user, and has a long way to go to become a home user desktop environment.

Think about it most home users don't even know what Firefox is, you go round disable IE, install Firefox, and say "that will help with the spyware", they use it an see no difference.

Lets get in the mind set of these users, command prompts, terminals, and sudo commands, are not good enough for them.

Thats my point pure and simple, its not a home user desktop OS, its still for the die hard academics that love the freedom and control, and enjoy re-compiling the kernel.

I will continue to run it on one machine, as I said I love it, its great at what it does.

Unfortunately I don't know how much that is true since i haven't really installed anything on it or set up a printer or anything like that. Only thing is...windows has had a pretty tight grip on PC desktops for....well almost ever...if it had been linux instead people would have gotten used to that. In that light I see your point, it's an entirely different animal when you look at windows vs Ubuntu but...given the time and effort anyone can learn to use it if they want. Only problem is most things a geared for Windows this and Windows that. Most folks I know haven't barely even heard of linux much less used it.

I'm not saying you're wrong, in fact your quite right. But the difference between a minimal windows user and a minimal Unbutu user is a thin line. Most minimal users have problems installing stuff on windows, and it make take a little extra time to install stuff on Linux depending on your profiency.

So using hypothetical Joe/Jane if they wanted to try something new and didn't really do much but write letters and maybe surf the web it, maybe play a little solitare or yahoo hearts, it wouldn't really be that crazy of a switch. Plus most folks hammer help support lines and get other people to fix their computers so...eh. But yeah it is a windows run world for now, but I'm sure if someone( or rather a large group of someones) really wanted to make an extremely minimal user friends Linux they could. Maybe that's what Ubuntu is all about...hmmm :-k

beast name by the way (TitanAE) love that movie.

confused57
March 8th, 2007, 05:06 PM
"Deja vu all over again":

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=113874

Sad part of it is, I enjoy reading these types of discussion threads, when my time would be spent more productively trying to help new users who who need assistance with their problems and want to get their system working.

stalker145
March 8th, 2007, 05:07 PM
Moan, gripe, complain.

I think the problems with Win vs Lin can be narrowed down into two categories:

1) The durn companies that don't want to cooperate with the open source movement and open up their drivers for our use (well, it is their right as much as I may disagree with it)

2) Computer users who have had their minds closed off to learning.

Let's have some history here... I'm a military man who spent many years in military law enforcement and then moved into repairing circuit cards. I hate the technical side of my job and would much rather be out busting heads and protecting the public. Nevertheless, I have resigned myself to learning all that I can about my present job.
I have carried this over to my computer use. I started off with my first computer in '95 just clicking away, installing, and deleting. I killed Windows 95 and reinstalled it all on my own. Not because i knew what I was doing, but because I had the desire to learn how to fix it 1) to save money and B) because i wasn't going to let a few pieces of silicon beat me.
Since that time, I've learned a little here and there up until last year when I decided to try something new. Along came Linux to satisfy my desire. Was it easy? Not really, but I still learned all that I could in order to make my equipment functional.

A bit off-topic, maybe. My point is, though, that people are allowing themselves to become lazy in the realm of learning. Kids aren't doing so well in school because they don't apply themselves, young adults are skipping college because it's too hard, and computer users demand that everything be handed to them guaranteed to work for the rest of their lives.
It's all about choice. I choose to continue learning. If Winderz opened up and allowed us to do the things that Linux allowed, I might mosey on back over to that camp and tinker. They haven't and I haven't.
To all that thirst for knowledge, greetings. Stay the course.

Sui Nim Tao
March 8th, 2007, 05:10 PM
Let me get this straight, Linux is fiddly to set up yes i agree,

install, ad codecs, drivers, re compile kernel etc.

Windows XP,

Install windows xp, whoops no No default sata driver
Load in third party driver support
find disk that came with supplier, oh bother where was that last ahh found it

Cannont access cd drive hmmm. get floppy drive

Loading windows............... no sorry blue screen

Loading windows............... yay, ok service pack 2 disk

Ok sorted, sort out online security patches, hold whats going on surely not a virus already.

Re install windows.......... sp2..........AVG.........security updates

yay seems to be working, now where the hell is that thrid party wireless software it's not detecting my usb dongle.

ok sorted, think i'm ready, firewall on, virus protection on, ah god more updates ok install

Dvd's won't play, ok wheres power dvd gone there it is, install dvd player FOR CODEC SUPPORT. hmm not all my codecs are there, better google for some, ok got them, install them.

Fantastic all ready, send it off to whoever wanted it, only to get a phone call 20 min later, my screen is coming up 4 times and is all fuzzy, i'll go round and take a look.

THEN

3 weeks later it comes back as slow as a slug on weed laden with worms viruses you name it.

FACT

it's not that windows is user friendly or Linux is not, it is simply that COMPUTERS are not user friendly and are not a consumer item, it is a piece of equipment that has been adopted by the
consumer.

It wouldn't matter what OS was top they would still have issues with new users, it just so happens that windows functionality is sloppy, is full of security loopholes and they insist on sucking the cash out of your wallet.

Paul

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 05:22 PM
Thanks for the debate, I will probably bail, hey I will still use Ubuntu, but I now understand its limitations.

I have no problem with learning new things, come on I have developed UNIX and Windows applications for over 15 years, sharing source code, developing cross platform libraries etc. I have released a single source CAD style application on 8 platforms using the same source code, all using OpenGL etc. I learn new things every day.

That brings me to MSVC/MFC compared to Mono/Eclipse/GTK/QT and other things, but lets not start on that one.

Ubuntu rocks, but for me my desktop for now is still XP, not Vista, my god did they get that wrong.

Now if only I can work out how to get Beryl working under XP I will be truly happy. :)

yaztromo
March 8th, 2007, 05:29 PM
This is how it goes for me:

Windows XP with service pack 2 CD:

Bang it in. Choose to wipe the drive and quick format.
Choose country and similar stuff
Ok windows is up
Pop in CD for my audigy card, install
Pop in CD for nvidia and mobo, install
Pop in CD for TV card, install
Download security patches.
Install OO and firefox.
Done.

Never gone wrong for me.

Ubuntu Edgy Desktop CD:

Bang it in. Click Install, go with the defaults for partitioning.
Choose country and similar stuff
Ok ubuntu is up
So far things have gone well. BUT
Discover ubuntu has no idea how to get my monitor to use 1280x960 like windows does. Spend entire evening learning about modelines and getting one to work in xorg.conf
Install Nvidia drivers off adept. Nvidia drivers install to 386 kernel instead of generic one. Spend another evening reading forums and tearing my hair out.
Discover nvidia drivers have messed up my nice modeline. Spend hours working it out.
Try to get sound working from TV card. Spend entire weekend screwing with modprobe.conf files and Tvtime wondering WTF. Eventually get sound to work.
Side buttons on mouse don't work. Go through a long guide on how to setup evdev and xbindkeys with xmodmap to map them to alt-left and alt-right. Come on this is 2007 already!

I know which I'd rather setup for someone. Linux is still an academics OS, face it.

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 05:38 PM
Linux is still an academics OS, face it.:KS

Well said my point exactly........

TitanAE
March 8th, 2007, 05:51 PM
FYI, I have 3 XP machines they have been installed for over 4 years, never re-installed. Performance as it was on day 1, how management, you need tools -

Symantec Anti Virus, scan daily, update daily, runtime protection on, email protection on.
SpyBot, scan daily, update daily, immunized.
CCleaner, monitor startup applications.
ShellExView, remove crap shell extensions.

Scan everything you download before installing it or running it.
Windows updates, download only, selectively install.
Hardware drivers, only use original manufacture i.e. Nvidia not Asus or Dell variants etc.
Never run IE, never run Outlook, disable them.

Again its not easy, and beyond the average home user, I agree here today Ubuntu wins on that front.

But hey Windows is the victim, people love to hack it, they want to infect it, thats just life, Linux will suffer the same problems eventually.

fuscia
March 8th, 2007, 05:53 PM
i'm just an end user. i do like to fiddle, but i'm never all that sure what i'm doing. when i got my system76 laptop, with dapper already installed. i turned it on, booted into gnome, created a new user and started using my laptop. took about five minutes (getting the f***in' box open took longer). it took me about an hour each getting my neighbors' two dells, with xp, going. i had to get rid of all the promotional crap that popped up anytime anyone sneezed, install anti-viral stuff, ad-aware, opera and then go through all the wizards to get their wireless going (mine was already going when i opened my system76). in the past, i've compared linux to going through toilet training and that it is indeed worth the effort, but when linux comes already installed, you can just go ahead and crap your pants just like you got something with windows installed on it.

bonzodog
March 8th, 2007, 06:04 PM
heh...I come from the *other* side of the fence. My first OS (it was at work, late 80's) was a Distro of Unix, and my first home PC came with win 98se installed, but I couldn't work out the interface, it wasn't intuitive enough for me, so I installed LiteStep, which has always been the way I like my desks, but then the damned machine GPF'd after I accidentally removed shell.exe. Suffice to say, I had bought a book on Linux only a couple of days before, so I Installed Caldera 1.3. That was in 1999.

I went from Caldera to Redhat to Slackware, and stayed there for 5 years.
I then built my own PC, a 64 bit machine about 18 months ago. I thought "I know, I'll give this MS windows thingy a try." I got a corporate edition of Xp off my bro (he was working tech for a large company that was a real MS suck ***).

It took me 5 HOURS to get it to what I would call "working". The install itself was only about an hour, but the system was unusable.

No GPU drivers, and windows own drivers certainly didn't like my card (an Nvidia Ge Force 6200GT).

I then realised that I had to download a ton of updates-- another hour gone. It was *just* after the sp2 update, so I had to install that. Another hour. *sigh*. This was getting....tiring, and I was VERY annoyed.

THEN I managed to download some GPU drivers, and mobo/network drivers, and monitor drivers. Another hour. *ARGHHH*

It was 10PM at night at this point. I had work in the morning, and certainly didn't have enough time for this. That Slackware CD was looking damned attractive.

So, I went to bed, leaving my system as close to unusable as it got. Following evening, I went back to it. I then had to get Anti-Virus (AVG had been recommended by a friend), and get the firewall up. This took *another* hour. WTF???? The majority of that was spent downloading AVG definition updates.

oh, well, at least I can play a couple of Windows games I have. Yeah....RIGHT. NOT. They wouldn't install. HUH? My games were "too old". Simcity 3000, and an admittedly win 95 game. !%^&*&^! THIS!!

Slackware CD in drive. Reboot machine, alter BIOS. Reboot, Linux boot and install comes up. Select default install, knock out KDE, select Gnome. (it was 10.2). Go make a cup of coffee. It detected my GPU, installed 2D nv driver, didn't need a monitor driver. It set-up my network for me, I was good to go. 30 minutes later, It was asking me for my login at a console. This IS slackware after all. I logged in as root, then proceeded to run the xorg setup script. 10 minutes later, I had X. I changed /etc/inittab to boot to runlevel 4, and rebooted, just to test that it was working ok.
I got a gdm login. COOL.
I had the net, and downloaded the Nvidia Xorg driver for 3D. That, including install, took half an hour. So far, just under an hour and a half. Now...what else? heh. Go on net, muck about. Computer is ready.

Why do people use windows again? I don't understand it myself.

gigaferz
March 8th, 2007, 06:07 PM
This person is Just trying to say::

Linux is for people who know about computers, and want to learn something new.
It is not for the average person who doesnt know what "right click, open with" means.

Windows is developed with the purpose that anybody can use a computer.
It might be the worst Os for many, but for millions it just work.
Do you think a bussiness owner, keeping track of customers, projects, money,
Or a home user just to play a game or two, and some internet, that just got out of work....
Are going to bother to troubleshoot,research, try to understand why?? how?? things are supposed to work ??,, no they just want to click and its over.

OK.. just put it simple.
windows is a car with all them features, it works.
Linux is a car, only the body,engine,and (maybe) the transmission.It works but everything else is missing.. Basically , either you are a machanic or a Do it yourself guy with the will to learn.

Hopefully people can understand that.

*** bonzodogg***

People that use windows do not install it. It comes with the computer already

Tomosaur
March 8th, 2007, 06:21 PM
In your experience it is more difficult.

In my mother's own experience, Ubuntu is far more intuitive and easier to use than Windows XP. It performs better, looks nicer, and has more software for her to use. My mother is far from tech savvy, and has not needed to use the command line at all. She wouldn't even know where to begin with the command line.

It's all just opinion and pointless debate. Many, many people get Ubuntu up and running perfectly on the first try, whereas many also have trouble. WinXP is exactly the same - with the simple exception that most people do not install XP anyway - it's already done for them when they buy their computer. Installing XP is no easy job. Takes around 4 hours, two restarts, a bunch of questions, and then you have an operating system with very little software which will more than likely crash within the first few hours of use. I have yet to see a brand new install of XP not crash fairly quickly after install. It doesn't do half as much as Ubuntu can, out of the proverbial box, and hardware either refuses to work, or you have to go digging around for 'that old CD' to install the drivers.

Post-install XP is absolutely useless. It takes much, much more setting up than a post-install Ubuntu, and now you need to update to SP2 if you're not fortunate enough to have it on CD. Yes, Ubuntu also requires lots of updating post install, but at least it doesn't take twelve hours of biting your fingernails hoping it won't crash.

Both operating systems have problems - the main thing holding Ubuntu back is lack of OEMs willing to pre-install it. I am absolutely confident that Ubuntu is ready for prime time.

yaztromo
March 8th, 2007, 06:24 PM
heh...I come from the *other* side of the fence. My first OS (it was at work, late 80's) was a Distro of Unix, and my first home PC came with win 98se installed, but I couldn't work out the interface, it wasn't intuitive enough for me, so I installed LiteStep, which has always been the way I like my desks, but then the damned machine GPF'd after I accidentally removed shell.exe. Suffice to say, I had bought a book on Linux only a couple of days before, so I Installed Caldera 1.3. That was in 1999.

I went from Caldera to Redhat to Slackware, and stayed there for 5 years.
I then built my own PC, a 64 bit machine about 18 months ago. I thought "I know, I'll give this MS windows thingy a try." I got a corporate edition of Xp off my bro (he was working tech for a large company that was a real MS suck ***).

It took me 5 HOURS to get it to what I would call "working". The install itself was only about an hour, but the system was unusable.

No GPU drivers, and windows own drivers certainly didn't like my card (an Nvidia Ge Force 6200GT).

I then realised that I had to download a ton of updates-- another hour gone. It was *just* after the sp2 update, so I had to install that. Another hour. *sigh*. This was getting....tiring, and I was VERY annoyed.

THEN I managed to download some GPU drivers, and mobo/network drivers, and monitor drivers. Another hour. *ARGHHH*

It was 10PM at night at this point. I had work in the morning, and certainly didn't have enough time for this. That Slackware CD was looking damned attractive.

So, I went to bed, leaving my system as close to unusable as it got. Following evening, I went back to it. I then had to get Anti-Virus (AVG had been recommended by a friend), and get the firewall up. This took *another* hour. WTF???? The majority of that was spent downloading AVG definition updates.

oh, well, at least I can play a couple of Windows games I have. Yeah....RIGHT. NOT. They wouldn't install. HUH? My games were "too old". Simcity 3000, and an admittedly win 95 game. !%^&*&^! THIS!!

Slackware CD in drive. Reboot machine, alter BIOS. Reboot, Linux boot and install comes up. Select default install, knock out KDE, select Gnome. (it was 10.2). Go make a cup of coffee. It detected my GPU, installed 2D nv driver, didn't need a monitor driver. It set-up my network for me, I was good to go. 30 minutes later, It was asking me for my login at a console. This IS slackware after all. I logged in as root, then proceeded to run the xorg setup script. 10 minutes later, I had X. I changed /etc/inittab to boot to runlevel 4, and rebooted, just to test that it was working ok.
I got a gdm login. COOL.
I had the net, and downloaded the Nvidia Xorg driver for 3D. That, including install, took half an hour. So far, just under an hour and a half. Now...what else? heh. Go on net, muck about. Computer is ready.

Why do people use windows again? I don't understand it myself.

I think your caps keys is broke.

All you have shown there is that XP takes a while to set up because of all the updates, not that it's in anyway complicated. I seem to remember ubuntu requiring 200mb of upfates when I first installed it.

You then went on to prove that the only way to install X in slackware is to have some knowledge of which scripts to run and how to understand and utilise runlevels. Great for you, bad for the masses. And you still can't play your two games :rolleyes:

And how in the world did the SP2 update take an hour?! Takes 30mins max on a 7200rpm HDD with a broadband connection.

Pikestaff
March 8th, 2007, 06:34 PM
But it was hard work, believe me, sudo this, sudo that, download this package, update the repositry, apt-get this and that. Man it is way off for the home user. :confused:

I just wanted to say that I find this interesting; I am someone with little to no "real computer" background; I mean yeah I've been using computers (mostly Windows) for a long time and I probably know a little more than the average Windows user, but I am certainly not a power user or a computer-science person or anything.

And yet, I find everything you've mentioned here... the sudo, the packages, the repositories, apt-get... that was all really easy for me to get used to and adapt to. I've only been using Ubuntu for a couple of months (exclusively Ubuntu; I kicked XP off my computer for good a few weeks back) and I feel very much at home using sudo and apt-get and stuff like that. In fact I've come to prefer it over the way Windows does things.

So I'm just suggesting... maybe it depends on the person. Maybe some people will just end up preferring this method, regardless of computer experience, for whatever reason-- personality, whatever. Maybe it's even easier for a lot of "non-computer people" to get used to this because they have less stuff to "un-learn"? I don't know, just throwing out some ideas. But I wanted to say that I mostly consider myself to be a "home user" but Ubuntu doesn't confuse me at all.

I'd be really curious to observe others of various levels of computer experience and see how well they adapt to Ubuntu, maybe I'm wrong and I'm just unique, but I'm inclined to think that a lot of people would transition into Linux better than we expect them to...

Just my two cents :popcorn:

Dragonbite
March 8th, 2007, 06:49 PM
5 Days vs. up to 5 years? Sounds equal to me. Tried a Mac?

Don't know what you're trying to do but in my experience

I had to hunt down the drivers for my DELL computer when I went to install Windows 2000, and some of them were not even supported for anything after Windows 98!
Since I'm on dial-up you can imagine how many updates I had to download for Windows 2000! I think the estimate they had was at least 7 hours (just to download) and that isn't including Visual Studio Express SP2!
Except for trying to get my Cisco vpnclient installed (which I only got working on the Windows 2000 machine this week (after 1 1/2 years of trying) from a suggestion from a co-worker of mine and not from any Cisco or elsewhere support ) I have had no need to go into the command line prompt to do or install anything else.
My kids have been using Edubuntu for a while now and figured out the desktop environment quicker then they did on the Windoes 2000 machine.
These kids also have been enjoying gCompris, ChildsPlay and tuxPaint for a while (and we'd have 100's of printout I could send if they got their way at printing everything!)


Yes, I may be labeled as an IT Professional, but my programming experience is in VB, .NET, SQL Server, VBA, ASP and ASP.NET all of which have been the least supported languages in Linux. It was only 2 weeks ago the Mono project announced they have a good VB.NET compiler!

(oh, and this is on a P3 500Mhz machine that works at acceptible speeds instead of the P3 1GHz machine for the Windows 2000)

Ozor Mox
March 8th, 2007, 07:10 PM
I think how well someone gets on with Ubuntu is largely down to how compatible it is with their hardware. If it detects and supports all your hardware, brilliant! No problem to get used to the differences between the operating systems and get going with it. If it doesn't though, the procedures to get it to work are hardly straightforward. I've found this out with my BCM4309 wireless chipset which Broadcom have kindly decided not to support for Linux.

karellen
March 8th, 2007, 07:12 PM
after reading all this....I can conclude that I'm happy not being average joe user :)

Almighty
March 8th, 2007, 07:45 PM
after reading all this....I can conclude that I'm happy not being average joe user :)

Looks like we are on the same track.

I normally don't get into these discussions because I know it's a losing battle. No one can debate opinion or feelings. They can't be wrong no matter how great either sides points are. All that I know is, I am more happy now using ANY distro of Linux than I have been through the days of OS/2 Win95,98,NT,2000,XP and even Vista. Since I am an aspiring computer geek, I forced myself to use Vista and I just couldn't do it.

karellen
March 8th, 2007, 07:47 PM
Looks like we are on the same track.

I normally don't get into these discussions because I know it's a losing battle. No one can debate opinion or feelings. They can't be wrong no matter how great either sides points are. All that I know is, I am more happy now using ANY distro of Linux than I have been through the days of OS/2 Win95,98,NT,2000,XP and even Vista. Since I am an aspiring computer geek, I forced myself to use Vista and I just couldn't do it.

join the club ;)

Yfrwlf
March 8th, 2007, 07:54 PM
But installing other applications in Windows is just plain easy, a download package normally comes with everything, no external dependencies for libX or libY version 1999.929.2.2.2, its just simple.
I'm sure others have said it already but this is one place where Ubuntu really shines. On Windows I have to go out, download all the drivers for all my different hardware, install them, reboot several times, then install all my programs, sometimes needing to reboot afterward, install DirectX, click next through all the different installation programs... Ubuntu: Applications > Add/Remove > Click on what you want and click Done. It does all the work for you. That is BETTER than Windows and Mac. You don't have to worry about dependencies under this system.

However, as for getting applications from *external* sources, that IS a problem, when a program is offered for some other package manager that you don't have. This does need to change, there needs to be one format, and there are many people working on making that a reality. I wish them luck. We'll see how successful CNR is. Sometimes I suspect the major distros keep it that way to keep Linux from spreading by being paid off. I mean come on, if you both wanted Linux to spread, which would *include* your Linux distro, if it was a good one, then you should want to patch this problem and upgrade your packaging technology to whichever format is superior, and if that's not possible then make some universal one which can use all of the underlying systems. I know it's much more complex than that, but I think that's one of the solutions that's being attempted now.

Fortunately, so many things are in the repositories already that I've rarely needed to get external software. The only thing I've had to install was Skype, and Skype provides a deb package that works fine. So, to put things into perspective, it'd be like you went to a Mac software site and complained that there were no Windows executables. But what matters is that the format isn't unified, which would make things easier for software developers, which would mean more Linux software, which would mean more widespread adoption.

SunnyRabbiera
March 8th, 2007, 07:54 PM
Obvious that the crreator of this topic doesnt have the frist clue that Linux is NOT a windows replacement...
It is a windows alternative.
Really all his complaining gets him nowhere, of course Linux is not going to do every blasted thing that XP does... ITS NOT WINDOWS!
Now if you are having so many issues with linux and think XP is so high and mighty, go back to XP already... Hey Vista is a replacement for XP, go and buy that piece of junk if you want a "replacement" for XP...
Either that or go buy a mac.

Sunflower1970
March 8th, 2007, 08:21 PM
I consider myself an average user, and have found Ubuntu much easier to deal with than XP. I've had to reinstall XP a few different times due to BSOD-type errors, and the first time it happened I had to call to get a new code..And I felt like a criminal, even though my copy is legit. Took me over a week to get the system up & running like I like it again.

Ubuntu, although I have reinstalled it a few different times due to me breaking it on purpose and not knowing how to just fix it (yet), at least I knew how easy the reinstallation woudl be, and I have a place to come to find the answer. XP, I do a google search and I'm lucky to track down the answer within a day--if that

My husband doesn't know much about computers. As long as he can turn it on, surf the web, check his email, play/burn a CD, print & scan stuff he's a happy camper. Doesn't matter if it's Windows or Ubuntu. Since I've switched all our computers over, they do exactly the same thing as in XP so he's content.

Amusingly, my TV-tuner card works out of the box with Ubuntu, but doesn't with XP. The drivers it came with are too old, and this will require me to scour the web to find the correct drivers for it.

Just about everything for me worked perfectly in Ubuntu. I did have to find the drivers for my nVidia card, but I had to do that for XP too (and I had to go through I don't know how many different CD's to find everything to make it work correctly--and that takes time, too)

I still dual boot--mainly because since I paid for XP when I bought my computer, I don't want that investment to go to waste, and also just in case I need it for something.

If Linux, whether Ubuntu, or any other flavor is preinstalled, IMHO, the end user will not have a problem.

As has been talked about before in other threadsf, there's always, ALWAYS a learning curve. No one learned how to use Windows over night. It shouldn't be expected of Linux either. If I had gone from Windows to a Mac, I'd have just as big a learning curve as going from Windows to Linux.

srt4play
March 8th, 2007, 10:52 PM
we all agree Linux is still in the domain of the accedemic who wants to prove they don't need Microsoft.

That's rediculous. I couldn't possibly use Linux because I want to or more importantly because it does what I need? I'm not out to prove anything to anyone about my computer usage.

seijuro
March 8th, 2007, 11:38 PM
I am not expecting Ubuntu to be a Windows replacement, I am just asking it to work as well as my current desktop OS, [...]



Also is it even possible to exist entirely outside the "sudo command prompt" world, note my wife has been running WinXP since the day it was release she has never opened a command shell, and she fully maintains here system, installs software, devices etc.


Actually you are asking it to work like windows. My wife was much like your wife, actually she was a little less skilled since she relied on me heavily to help maintain her windows system. However after the initial conversion she is now maintaining her Ubuntu system entirely on her own. Familiar is/can be a part of easy but is not the only definition. Linux works just as well as windows and in many cases better than. However, it does things the Linux way not the Windows way this does not intrinsically make it harder but detaches the familiarness. The sooner people stop trying to use Linux the windows way and learn the Linux way they will realize the difference between familiar and ease of use. Although I will not deny that there could be more gui config tools for people who prefer that method.

Sui Nim Tao
March 8th, 2007, 11:56 PM
OK, new load on my media box, Kubuntu 6.10

took about 15 min, once loaded installed updates adept brought up in the system tray 30 min, choose correct drivers for graphics card using the detect click button in system manager.

Opened up apt sources list file cut paste repo's into it, use package manager to search for w32 and libdvdcss2, used software installer to select gxine and a tv viewing package.

Job done about an hour in total.

It views my pics through all the usb sticks and card reader slots, connects to the web, plays dvd's, vcd's, TV, music, MP3 WMA anything you like.

No looking for those cd's i lost years ago or anything.

If thats harder than windows then i guess i'll just have to do things the hard way in future.

My 3 year old daughter can even start it up pop in a DVD double click the image to make it full screen and select her episode of scooby doo.

It even powers down correctly by clicking the off botton, logging out and shutting off.

Enough said roll on feisty

Paul

AndyCooll
March 9th, 2007, 12:20 AM
Has Aysiu added this thread to his list yet?

:cool:

yaztromo
March 9th, 2007, 01:05 AM
Actually you are asking it to work like windows

No he's asking it to be as easy as Windows. It can work totally different for all he cares, just be as easy as. Any right minded individual that doesn't worship the ground linux stands on knows it's a bit more technical to maintain than Windows. Stop telling him what he already knows.

Yfrwlf
March 9th, 2007, 03:15 AM
No he's asking it to be as easy as Windows. It can work totally different for all he cares, just be as easy as. Any right minded individual that doesn't worship the ground linux stands on knows it's a bit more technical to maintain than Windows. Stop telling him what he already knows.

I'm sure you didn't mean it in that way, but um Linux is far easier to *maintain* than XP. In XP, to maintain it you really do need virus protection, firewalls, spyware and adware removal, etc. In Ubuntu, installing programs is faster, and you don't need to have those things I just listed, so it actually is easier to maintain. I work in IT, and THE biggest need by far is people's XP systems going to hell and you having to reformat and reinstall to remove all the crap that's on them. I'm not saying this won't happen to Linux in the future when it gets more popular, but it will be less, because it's open source software, and because I think it definitely is more secure by default. Actually I suspect that MS purposefully leaves backdoors open so that users will continue to rely on them for updates, but that's just a conspiracy theory. ^^

Windows is "easier" than XP in a few ways though due to two things that I can think of off the top of my head: hardware support, and universal package management. The first reason isn't Linux's fault at all, it's the fact that it's not popular enough yet so not supported enough yet. On the same note though, it has more driver support *built-in* than any other OS, but less overall than Windows. To be fair, you need to compare hardware that is Linux compatible. The end result though is most users don't know about this, so they run into problems sometimes. On my friends Macbook Pro, *everything* worked out of the box, including wifi, on Feisty Herd 4. I found that pretty damn cool. ^^

Polygon
March 9th, 2007, 03:17 AM
linux is not for everyone.

DoctorMO
March 9th, 2007, 03:31 AM
To OP:

And WHAT may I ask are you so called mighty programmer doing about all these so called problems?

Oh that's right, whining like a spoilt child in a user forum; I'm sorry Linux isn't for you, you don't deserve it.

bgochnauer
March 9th, 2007, 06:15 AM
An example, real world case, actually happened last week.

So I have test machine at work, dual boot Ubuntu Edgy, Vista Ultimate. Basic config, dual P4 2.4Ghz, 2Gb ram, 120 Gb HD (split 60,60 for each OS).

I have Beryl running under Ubuntu and Aero under Vista, using GeForce 4 MX 256 Mb card. Note Vista worked out of the box, Ubuntu I had to install Nvidia legacy drivers and GLX, re-compile them for the kernel etc, update X11 config, then install Beryl, no big deal for me anyway.

So last week the graphics card went pop! Drove to PC world, got a new GeForce 6 256 Mb card, installed it.

Vista, ohh nice, Windows has detected new hardware and installed the latest driver, Aero works better than ever.

Ubuntu, X failed to start dead, no time, can't be bothered to fix it yet.

See my point, home user desktop OS, not yet.

That has more to do with vendor (NVidia) support for Linux than anything else.
Dual P4s and you put a GeForce 4 in it... splurge a little :)
Try Vista Ultimate on a P4 1 GHz with 512MB memory, see what you get.
Kubuntu 6.1.0 works great!

PS. I agree with most of your points but Vista just obsoleted 18,000 out of the 23,000 machines I have to support at work. Geesh what a pig.
And broke hundreds of applications, of the 1,500 or so we have to support because of the 'new security features'. Ahh but job security is Great!!!

bgochnauer
March 9th, 2007, 06:38 AM
This is how it goes for me:

Ubuntu Edgy Desktop CD:

Bang it in. Click Install, go with the defaults for partitioning.
Choose country and similar stuff
Ok ubuntu is up
So far things have gone well. BUT
Discover ubuntu has no idea how to get my monitor to use 1280x960 like windows does. Spend entire evening learning about modelines and getting one to work in xorg.conf

I know which I'd rather setup for someone. Linux is still an academics OS, face it.

Had a similar problem;
Try System Settings;Monitor & Display; Click 'Admin mode'; click Monitor Configure; click 'Generic Monitor' ... I chose 'Flat Panel 1280x1024' ; then Apply;
Logout; choose 'Restart X-Server' from session menu;
Bam! works, set screen to 1280x1024.
No nVidia driver install, no xorg.conf edits required.!!
nv driver installs by default works fine unless you really need to push performance.
Just a learning curve!

eXcentra
March 9th, 2007, 07:02 AM
Maybe I'm one of the "lucky" ones but I've been using Ubuntu since Hoary Hedgehog and all of my hardware has worked out-of-the-box; ethernet, wireless, etc etc. I've admired Ubuntu ever since.
I've also got Beryl working easily enough through a repos (although getting compiz to work on dapper was a nightmare.. :))
When I first started I was somewhat intimidated by shifting over to linux but ubuntu was much much more than i asked for. the only reason i use Windows (dual boot) is for windows-specific programs (just two of them) and some games.

Ubuntu has been very good to me; sorry that it hasn't been good to you. :(

Duke

aysiu
March 9th, 2007, 07:28 AM
read http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=113874 , it's in this threads future.)
You're a regular fortune-teller :)

Sui Nim Tao
March 9th, 2007, 01:21 PM
The most common misconception I find today with all the people about using computers, is that the term computer litterate or user friendly means to them that they can use windows.

I am newish to the Linux scene, but not to programming and computers in general, so i'll adapt as I believe VISTA is the final straw, MS are getting to big for their boots, getting a tighter grip on our freedom of choice, and there software isn't all that great, it just looks nice and i know how to use it, I just put up with all the annoyances with it's operation and the countless viruses and glitches as there is no alternative. Well there IS.

Since when did microsoft ever invent the PC, why do they teach the vast majority of people around to use windows only environments, you send someone on a computers for the terrified course and they learn MS, most schools use MS, it's everywhere and normally your first introduction to computers is MS, so to most MS is a computer, not that box thingy with the blinking lamps and letterbox holes in it.

MS didn't invent computers, and being able to use windows is purely windows literate. Being able to use windows comfortably is not being able to use a computer comfortably.

Computers are not consumer items it's as simple as that, a kettle is, a toaster is but not a computer. Try running a car without maintaining it, when you run out of oil your screwed bang goes your engine. They are work machines, adopted by the consumer mainly due to microsfts efforts to make them easy to use, this doesn't make it the best option for the job though, WOW look what it can do but don't bother yourself with keeping it maintained.

How many of the older generation out there couldn't set the VCR, does that mean that they stopped selling them, no, they got there kids to teach them how to use it, but stil ended up with the wrong show.

More and more try Apple everyday, i considered it, (then thought let's give linux another bash)

I will teach my children Linux, if they grow up with Linux, they will easily switch to MS or Apple if need be and will learn more about what it is to use a computer, not be glossed over with you don't need to learn that just be thankfull it works. if they learn MS they will find it harder to adopt a different environment, as there aim is to lock you into there way, it's not good business sense to let them make their own decisions, if you tell them your using this, this and this then they will not feel comfortable changing, giving you control over them.

Just because you pass your car test does not mean you can drive anything, you are profecient in one thing, what happens if you have a lot of stuff to shift, you can't just grab a lorry and do it, no you have to do lots of little runs as you have no lorry licence, but you'll find all those who drive lorries can drive cars................

I think it's time people who want to use computers effeciently, and who complain about there functionality should take it apon themselves to learn how to use a computer not MS.

The problem is that some people don't want to know how to use a computer, they just want to click and there it is, forgetting about the 10000 tasks that just happened to make it possible, it just needs to go and thats it. Linux is not for these people and never will be, but I for one don't want to sit by the road waiting for the RAC because I don't want to learn how to change a tyre.

There will allways be a place for MS, Apple, linux or whatever, but as MS or getting to the point where you need to take out a morgage on a new pc just to run vista and purchase the OS, then people are going to look for alternatives, unfurtunatle free software comes at a price too, that being knowledge.

I think you'll find that alot will be happy to do this due to vista, I know alot of my usual customers are very intersted in UBUNTU, KUBUNTU, SUSE and what BERYL will have to offer soon. Due to the public being more and more concerned about how much stuff costs, prices keep going up but not wages.

I think this could be the dawn of the economic computer user having to adapt or face losing there computer, XP will not be updated forever, and viruses still lurk round every corner, they can't live without there little box of tricks but don't want to pay over the odds to get it, this is where LINUX will shine. It will just take some effort on there part or enlist the services of Linux users to help them (which i already do for XP so whats the difference)

I do not feel happy to switch people I know just yet, they trust my judgement and i don't want to betray that, it's not beacuase linux isn't ready, i'm not, as soon as i'm happy and know what they need then that will be the time, which is becoming very soon.....

Paul
A computer is not just for christmas.............

Tomosaur
March 9th, 2007, 01:37 PM
@Sui Nim Tao - good post :)

I agree with virtually everything you said. Although I'm not a 'support guy' by trade - I do help out friends and family when they're having diffiiculties with their Windows machines. I try to keep out of OS discussions with them because, for the most part - they're either just completely uninterested, or they simply don't care very much. Most use their computers for menial tasks like word processing etc, and as this is related to 'work', they don't want to invest their time in it because it's not something they use a lot outside of the work arena. However, those that do ask me always say "How do you know to do that?", or "Can you show me again how to do that in case it breaks again?". These are the people who Linux would suit very well. For the most part, I can just say "I didn't know how to do it before I came, but it's pretty easy to figure out". Linux has taught me a great deal about how computers work. For the most part, the underlying principles are pretty much uniform, the only REAL differences are the interfaces and the tools available. Linux is a system where configuring things can seem daunting - but once it's done, it's unlikely you're going to have a repeat problem. Windows is one where configuring things can seem very confusing, but it LOOKS easy, and once it's done, you don't know what you just did, and it's pretty likely you're going to need to repeat it. Windows is more about remembering a sequence of clicks, rather than (as on Linux) remembering how to do something, and why it worked. I am no Linux guru, far from it - but learning how Linux works has allowed me to diagnose and solve problems on a wider range of systems than Windows would ever do. Windows is pretty much just muscle memory - you very rarely know what you just did - you just remember which options you needed to click, and what a menu looked like. The user feedback in Windows is terrible, whereas in Linux I know what is happening to the underlying system when I change something.

Sui Nim Tao
March 9th, 2007, 02:51 PM
Thats it exactly,

For my mum, windows is perfect, for my dad well he might be better off with ubuntu, he's generally interested like i started out.

People need to be educated about PC's, where they came from, where they stand today, and what options there are. Knowledege is power, if you don't want to learn then hey no problem not everyone does. This is why windows is not best, one thing dosn't fit all, not why ubuntu is best.

Paul

darrenm
March 9th, 2007, 09:13 PM
I'm going to have another bite :)


Graphics cards and monitors, so complex to stops most people dead Where? I've had an ATi card and now on Intel. The most complex thing I have been forced to do is to add another repo for the ATi binary driver. Intel just works. Perhaps NVidia is hideously complicated?

Installing software, too complex, too many systems, not straight foward, DLL hell to N-th degree Again, where? Everything I need is in the repos. So I just either use add/remove programs or Synaptic. I think we're all agreed that Ubuntus way of installing software via .debs or the repositories is vastly superior to manually downloading a .exe from a website.

Printers nightmare, not Ubuntu's fault just hardware vendors and Linux My Epson C20UX USB GDI Winprinter just works. Every printer I've installed at work just works. Apparently Canons aren't great? Can't really see how thats a nightmare?

Scanners nightmare, not Ubuntu's fault just hardware vendors and Linux
Another nightmare? Any scanner I've tried just works. Perhaps I'm just really lucky.

Networks, smb great but hello command prompt again Not here. Click places, Connect to server and type the name of the SMB server or just browse the network. It then gets added to places. This works about 10 times better than WinXP's SMB support too. It works with encrypted and non-encrypted passwords, if the remote SMB server is responding to NetBIOS then it will pick it up. Generally SMB without the command line tends to work perfectly in Ubuntu using Gnome-VFS

Software not working across smb shares Uh?


Note, the average windows users has never heard of regedit, regsvr32, .ini files, etc,
Pretty much any bug on the Microsoft knowledgebase involves using regedit, backing up keys, editing keys. I agree that average Windows users generally haven't seen the backend tools like this because they don't know where to start and live with the bugs. Most Windows XP machines which are connected to the internet and used are compromised in some way and have various bugs affecting the useage. Either the user pays for a tech or lives with them. I showed my brother-in-law Ubuntu on my laptop the other day. He was really interested in it and said he wanted to put it on his laptop because "I don't like all the pop-ups I get in Windows" which just shows he accepts that pop-ups are a part of Windows like it or not.

all Ubuntu & Linux users have used sudo, vi, gedit, init.d, .conf files, see the difference. Yep. The difference is that the current demographic of Linux and Ubuntu users is slanted towards the more computer-literate. Also you tend to find the newer users don't ever use any of those and don't know what they are but use their computer perfectly happily. sudo of course because its the main security 'switch' for Ubuntu.


If Ubuntu wants to fight in the home desktop market it needs to improve significantly to even measure upto WinXP, let alone Vista. Conversely I think both Windows XP and Vista need to improve significantly to even measure up to Ubuntu (as of Feisty).

darrenm
March 9th, 2007, 09:33 PM
I knew this would start some debate, let me give you some history about myself, I have developed applications and used the following OS's -

Sun Solaris
IBM AIX
SGI Irix
HP-UX
Linux (gentoo, suse, redhat, debian, ubuntu, etc)
Windows (3.0,3.1, 95, 98, NT3.51, NT4.0, 2K, 2003, XP, Vista)
We can all list our experience to justify that we know what we are talking about so "if it doesn't work for me, the consummate I.T. professional then everyone else must find it incredibly difficult" but it kind of just makes you look like you don't really know what you're talking about.


The best all round desktop OS is XP, beyond a shadow of a doubt. In what way? I think Windows XP is rubbish. I think the worldwide vendor support for Windows is brilliant, the software itself is buggy and insecure and doesn't work in exactly the way it should. It doesn't do the same thing over and over again, everything is very random.

I have a large community of IT professional friends and colleuge, we all agree Linux is still in the domain of the accedemic who wants to prove they don't need Microsoft. Interesting. I disagree with you and a large community of IT professionals then. But I suppose I have a large community of IT professionals who completely disagree with your statement. I use Ubuntu because I don't have time to fart about with the problems Windows brings me. I've got 2 young kids and 0 spare time. I need an OS that works in exactly the same way every day until I tell it to do something different. Not just refuse to boot one day with \CONFIG\SYSTEM missing or corrupted.


Lets be honest its a challenge, its not easy, you have to read forums, write scripts, cut and paste commands into the shell, its still years away from a desktop replacement.
To do what? I don't have to do any of that. I can if I wanted to but for all my tasks everything just works fine.

marcle
March 10th, 2007, 12:33 AM
OK, that's a bit of a troll. But still, I got hung up on the initial install due to incomplete documentation about the partitioning. And I'm a very experienced user of DOS and Windows, with a little Linux and Unix background as well.

Download, burning of .iso to CD, reboot with CD, all went (almost) fine, except for some very weird screen displays while my hardware was being detected. Soon, I was up and running from the CD, something that Knoppix hadn't accomplished on my system.

So then I thought, well, why not install? That was when I got out of my depth, and there didn't seem to be any documentation, either on the CD or on the website.

I wanted to install on the same hard drive Windows is on, and there's plenty of room. However, your partition utility has a brief message line in it about a swap partition. Do I need to create two partitions to install Linux? Can I install two primary partitions on one drive to boot either Windows or Ubuntu (and a third "swap" partition)? Is there some sort of boot manager that the disk installs for me, or do I need to figure that out myself from scratch?

Not finding any information either in the included help on the CD or on your website (just about all the help I could find assumes that Ubuntu is already installed!), and definitely not wanting to corrupt my stable Windows install, I aborted, and probably won't get around to hassling this thing for another long while, since I already get my work done in Windows just fine.

If you're trying to encourage Windows users to switch, you're close, but no cigar. Until you carefully document the partitioning procedures in such a way that a first time ignorant installer can easily understand, you're still geekware.

Bachstelze
March 10th, 2007, 12:36 AM
Linux is not, does not aim to be, and never will be Windows !


How many times will I have to repeat that ?

overdrank
March 10th, 2007, 12:37 AM
Hi well call me a geek. I was able to figure it out.:lolflag:

mikewhatever
March 10th, 2007, 12:45 AM
Don't know how you missed all that stuff. I think there is to much documentation, starting with websites and ending with google videos showing you how to install.
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/installing
https://help.ubuntu.com/6.10/ubuntu/installation-guide/i386/index.html
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/GraphicalInstall?highlight=%28install%29
http://www.google.co.il/search?q=google+videos+ubuntu+install&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6104490811311898236

mrmonday
March 10th, 2007, 12:49 AM
First, Linux won't harm your windows installation. Just follow the instructions and you will be fine. The swap partition is the equivalent to Microsoft's page file. It will also install Grub, so you can choose to boot Ubuntu or windows. Secondly, there are lots of install guides on the net... Aquick google search gives loads of results.

Good Luck:D


Linux is not, does not aim to be, and never will be Windows !

Couldn't have said it better myself!

melancholeric
March 10th, 2007, 12:52 AM
Don't know how you missed all that stuff. I think there is to much documentation, starting with websites and ending with google videos showing you how to install.
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/installing
https://help.ubuntu.com/6.10/ubuntu/installation-guide/i386/index.html
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/GraphicalInstall?highlight=%28install%29
http://www.google.co.il/search?q=google+videos+ubuntu+install&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6104490811311898236



... On the web.

It might be a good idea to add an "installation howto" html file to the livecd desktop.

Tomosaur
March 10th, 2007, 12:52 AM
Well, you're either blind, or using some mickey mouse browser. There's tons of how-tos about installing and partitioning online.

http://www.pcmech.com/show/os/903/

RomeReactor
March 10th, 2007, 12:53 AM
Hi. If i remember correctly, the installer walks you through the installation procedure in a very straightforward manner, including resizing partitions. I installed Ubuntu (dual booting with wondows) for the first time after trying it out for about a week on the live cd; after that, it took me three months to remove windows and keep Ubuntu only, and i'm not really knowledgeable about computers. If you're having trouble with the installation, please post it here and we'll try to help you figure it out.

EDIT: Also, please people, calm down. If he has an issue with the installation procedure, let him post his doubts...

m.musashi
March 10th, 2007, 12:54 AM
No he's asking it to be as easy as Windows. It can work totally different for all he cares, just be as easy as. Any right minded individual that doesn't worship the ground linux stands on knows it's a bit more technical to maintain than Windows. Stop telling him what he already knows.
Huh? Give me two relatively modern computers with blank HDs and one XP CD and one Ubuntu CD. I guarantee that in 30 minutes or so I'll have a working Ubuntu box and XP will still be formatting the damn drive. Likewise, give a new computer user one of each (preinstalled) and see what they think is easiest. I bet they go for the one with the most glitz because they will both be "hard" for someone who doesn't know either. "As easy as..." is a dumb comment. Windows is easy if it's all you've ever used. Linux i easy too if you are used to it. Macs are supposed to be the easiest. Give a Windows user a Mac and they will freak. It's not about easy, it's about familiarity.

Not a WinXP replacement yet?.
Yes it is. I replaced WinXP. Works just fine. I'm surprised with all your qualifications you had so much trouble. I don't have a fraction of your background but I'm working happily day in and day out on my Ubuntu box. Did you check the MD5 sum? I bet you didn't. Many newbies miss that one.

*goes back to being productive on his WinXP replacement*

shaft350x
March 10th, 2007, 12:57 AM
You may want to run a scandisk via Windows as well, that kind threw some kinks into my installation.

Just an aside, most people don't install Windows themselves, since it comes pre-loaded, as someone who has installed Win98, Win98SE, Win2000, WinXP SP2, several times each. Ubuntu is quite a bit easier to install.

Also the spirit of Ubuntu is alive and well on this forum, so if you run into a snag, just ask, there are a lot of knowledgeable people who can explain and walk you through things. (And help you fix them if something goes wrong!)

Hope your next try goes a little more smoothly.

neighborlee
March 10th, 2007, 12:59 AM
First, Linux won't harm your windows installation. Just follow the instructions and you will be fine. The swap partition is the equivalent to Microsoft's page file. It will also install Grub, so you can choose to boot Ubuntu or windows. Secondly, there are lots of install guides on the net... Aquick google search gives loads of results.

Good Luck:D



Couldn't have said it better myself!

I dont care how much documentation exists for any given task..you all just showed what a geeky, narcissistic OS linux is, by your willingness to treat him this way; I dont care if he was a troll, - two wrongs dont make a right.

bravo, what a amazing showing of concern for anyone not caught in the linux loop.

I dont know why he missed the documentation, but he definitely did not deserve the bashing, and that is in part why linux will never make it on the desktop, because people talk and Im sure what he has to say to his friends wont be pretty.

cheers
nl

lamalex
March 10th, 2007, 01:01 AM
I think hymn said it best :) Ubuntu is not nor will never -- thankfully -- be windows. Ubuntu is ubuntu. It is not debian, it is not fedora, it is not osx. If everyone weren't conditioned to windows, using ubuntu would be as natural as using windows, and once you learn something new, Ububtu is MUCH more intuitive than windows because windows by design is meant to hide things from you and be for non-computer users. you can configure windows to work nicer with you, but you still have to configure it. people just arn't as critical of it because theyve used it for so long that those negative aspects have just become part of it. Ubuntu is new to you, so its quirks are too. Take a minute to learn how to do things in it and soon they will be as natural as windows.

Tomosaur
March 10th, 2007, 01:04 AM
I dont care how much documentation exists for any given task..you all just showed what a geeky, narcissistic OS linux is, by your willingness to treat him this way; I dont care if he was a troll, - two wrongs dont make a right.

bravo, what a amazing showing of concern for anyone not caught in the linux loop.

I dont know why he missed the documentation, but he definitely did not deserve the bashing, and that is in part why linux will never make it on the desktop, because people talk and Im sure what he has to say to his friends wont be pretty.

cheers
nl
The OP called Linux users geeky, so what's the big deal? Nobody is taking harsh offence over this - he wanted documentation (well actually, he didn't, he just wanted to rant), and that's what he got.

mikewhatever
March 10th, 2007, 01:05 AM
... On the web.

It might be a good idea to add an "installation howto" html file to the livecd desktop.

I am not sure it would be a good time to go over the installation howto during the actual installation. An 'experienced' user should know how to do his homework.

aysiu
March 10th, 2007, 01:10 AM
OK, that's a bit of a troll. But still, I got hung up on the initial install due to incomplete documentation about the partitioning. And I'm a very experienced user of DOS and Windows, with a little Linux and Unix background as well.
If you're trying to encourage Windows users to switch, you're close, but no cigar. Until you carefully document the partitioning procedures in such a way that a first time ignorant installer can easily understand, you're still geekware. I've merged your thread into the perfect place to discuss your contentions.

If you want real help, ask for it nicely in a new thread.

If you want a little back-and-forth discussion/argument, continue on here...

melancholeric
March 10th, 2007, 01:20 AM
I am not sure it would be a good time to go over the installation howto during the actual installation. An 'experienced' user should know how to do his homework.

And I thought the point was that not everyone is an experienced user.

Besides, it's not like you have to read the doc anyway, but if you think you need it it'd be nice if it was easily available.

And let's face it, we're talking about repartitioning the hard drive here. That's something you really can't be too careful with, so having some extra pointers along the way can't hurt.

Now, I started with ubuntu, and generally I was impressed with the documentation that came with it. I later switched to debian. Let's just say that there's a difference between the two.

Since the ubuntu documentation is generally very good, and most of it is easily available (like browser start pages), why not this too?

darrenm
March 10th, 2007, 09:01 AM
OK, that's a bit of a troll. But still, I got hung up on the initial install due to incomplete documentation about the partitioning. And I'm a very experienced user of DOS and Windows, with a little Linux and Unix background as well.

Download, burning of .iso to CD, reboot with CD, all went (almost) fine, except for some very weird screen displays while my hardware was being detected. Soon, I was up and running from the CD, something that Knoppix hadn't accomplished on my system.

So then I thought, well, why not install? That was when I got out of my depth, and there didn't seem to be any documentation, either on the CD or on the website.

The CD should tell you exactly whats going on and what needs to be done. I found it explains everything in depth. There should be an option in System called Help and Support and http://wiki.ubuntu.com should tell you everything else you need to know.


I wanted to install on the same hard drive Windows is on, and there's plenty of room. However, your partition utility has a brief message line in it about a swap partition. Do I need to create two partitions to install Linux? Can I install two primary partitions on one drive to boot either Windows or Ubuntu (and a third "swap" partition)? Is there some sort of boot manager that the disk installs for me, or do I need to figure that out myself from scratch?

You say 'your partition utility' but you don't say who you are directing the comment at. If you don't mind I'll try and field some of your questions.
Yes, the message about the swap partition should tell you what it is and why you need it. All your other questions are more general Linux questions and are things that, if you aren't familiar with Linux based operating systems, you don't need to know to proceed with the install, it will take care of everything for you. The installer tells you it can resize your Windows partition and create the necessary partitions for Ubuntu. You don't need to be a Linux expert, it is built that way. If you want to get more involved in the theory you can do that afterwards.


Not finding any information either in the included help on the CD or on your website (just about all the help I could find assumes that Ubuntu is already installed!), and definitely not wanting to corrupt my stable Windows install, I aborted, and probably won't get around to hassling this thing for another long while, since I already get my work done in Windows just fine. I can only imagine you didn't look at all on the Ubuntu website or somehow went past the wealth of information available. Others have posted links in this thread so I'll not do it again.
If you work well in Windows and are happy with it then there is nothing wrong with staying with what works best for you. I find Ubuntu works best for me.


If you're trying to encourage Windows users to switch, you're close, but no cigar. Until you carefully document the partitioning procedures in such a way that a first time ignorant installer can easily understand, you're still geekware.

I try to encourage users to switch who I think will benefit, but I only ever show them the red pill, they have to eat it. Some people definitely would not be happy with Ubuntu and they unfortunately have to live with the problems that Windows gives them.

nailzs
March 10th, 2007, 02:37 PM
Ok, my story.
I installed the Linux Quake 3 Arena 1.32 .RPM update using "sudo alien -i <file name>" to change it to a .deb file, and installed it on my old computer that runs Edgy, and it runs fine.

I've installed the same on my new computer running Feisty build 3, and it ran fine. Since then I reformatted the drive and reinstalled Feisty. After the latest updates to the latest build (5 ?) trying the same "sudo alien -i <file name>", I'm getting a file unknown error. I seem to be able to click directly on the .RPM file and a box pops up that allows me to run the file directly by clicking on it. Fine, the install starts and seems to put the files in my home folder, but when I try to run the program I get "PERMISSION DENIED".

Just too many hoops to jump through to get a program going.

Delvien
March 10th, 2007, 02:39 PM
Ok, my story.
I installed the Linux Quake 3 Arena 1.32 .RPM update using "sudo alien -i <file name>" to change it to a .deb file, and installed it on my old computer that runs Edgy, and it runs fine.

I've installed the same on my new computer running Feisty build 3, and it ran fine. Since then I reformatted the drive and reinstalled Feisty. After the latest updates to the latest build (5 ?) trying the same "sudo alien -i <file name>", I'm getting a file unknown error. I seem to be able to click directly on the .RPM file and a box pops up that allows me to run the file directly by clicking on it. Fine, the install starts and seems to put the files in my home folder, but when I try to run the program I get "PERMISSION DENIED".

Just too many hoops to jump through to get a program going.

Well rather hoops than security flaws.

Try running the game with sudo. I would normally not suggest this, but it looks like somehow it was installed as root, it happens, do not fret my ubuntu brethren.

teaker1s
March 10th, 2007, 02:41 PM
CHOWN
http://www.computerhope.com/unix/uchown.htm
chmod 755
http://www.zzee.com/solutions/chmod-755.shtml

nailzs
March 10th, 2007, 04:34 PM
After installing the original Quake 3 Arena under Wine and trying to run it I got an error message saying the color depth was incorrect and promptly locked the computer.
The resolution and refresh rate are correct. Where do I set the color depth?
I'm wondering if this is the same problem as the Linux Q3 install..
Again this is a new problem I didn't have with earlier Feisty builds.. I think I just need to wait until the final release, maybe.

AlexC_
March 10th, 2007, 04:42 PM
Ok .... so you're new to Linux, trying to install a file that isn't a specific Ubuntu .deb package, using Feisty which is under heavy development, and then complain when it doesn't work? Cos that makes sense.

If you are new to Ubuntu/Linux, then you really shouldn't be using Feisty until it is released, unless you want to help by report bugs and you know that it will break. If you want a stable system, then use Edgy or the LTS release, Dapper.

cmost
March 10th, 2007, 04:46 PM
Ok, last time I checked my calendar, it wasn't April yet. Ubuntu Feisty is BETA SOFTWARE! Experiencing problems with pre-release code isn't grounds to be bellyaching about stuff not working properly or complaining about how "sick of Linux" you are. Wait until the official release or go back to a stable release (Edgy or Dapper.)

Delvien
March 10th, 2007, 05:46 PM
Guys, please refrain from attacking the noobies. They are new, they do not know.

aysiu
March 10th, 2007, 06:13 PM
Ok, my story.
I installed the Linux Quake 3 Arena 1.32 .RPM update using "sudo alien -i <file name>" to change it to a .deb file, and installed it on my old computer that runs Edgy, and it runs fine.

I've installed the same on my new computer running Feisty build 3, and it ran fine. Since then I reformatted the drive and reinstalled Feisty. After the latest updates to the latest build (5 ?) trying the same "sudo alien -i <file name>", I'm getting a file unknown error. I seem to be able to click directly on the .RPM file and a box pops up that allows me to run the file directly by clicking on it. Fine, the install starts and seems to put the files in my home folder, but when I try to run the program I get "PERMISSION DENIED".

Just too many hoops to jump through to get a program going.
Edgy's been officially released. Feisty hasn't. Feisty is still in testing.

If you want to use Feisty, give something back--file some bug reports. Get things fixed. Complaining here doesn't make Feisty better.

If you need support for a question, create a support thread and ask for help. If you want to just complain, I've merged you into a thread that's the perfect place to do that.

Sui Nim Tao
March 11th, 2007, 02:32 AM
I think that discussions can get heated at times, this means that there is a real desire in what people are saying, I get the whole I dont think it's ready because of this and it's ready because of that. But generally if you come to Ubuntu to put it down the result is going to be negative HERE. That is quite realistic. These people are trying to help people out of there FREE time, to learn and change.

The Big discussion is weather it is ready for the desktop or not.

IT IS

I'm a complete noob to Linux, with ample experience with people, computers, and Know that people will take to this. Disagree if you wish, it is your right and you may well give some kind of reason behind it, Keep an open mind and look at the future, things never last. windows will never stay dominant forever monolithic design cannot last, it's a fact of nature. People are getting more SAVVY everyday, meaning wanting more for there money, and wanting to learn more, they will not get that with windows full stop. Windows keeps the user behind closed doors, making them think they know what there doing, taking control and freedom away from them.

Ubuntu is childsplay, i've been messing for 2 weeks nearly, and it's easy, i can either take the option to use the console which people dread or use the graphical (novice) approach of synaptec or yast or whatever. You have a choice.

learning microsoft is not learning computers, when will people learn this, if they don't then great, thats why i'm here, the amount of people that can't run windows from day to day is immense, it dosn't matter if this is replaced by linux, it will still be the same, otherwise i wouldn't be able to pay my mortgage.

Please for the love of god,

Just because you learnt to use Windows when you where young does not mean you know how to use a computer, if you don,t want to change and evolve like man, leave these helpfull people alone, I NEED THEM. if you don't like the price of M$, then moan at them, they forced you into using there software, and made it difficult to change not linux, they keep putting the prices up not linux, and they keep track of you not linux.

I am thankfull for the help i get, why do i care if you don't like linux?, I get free OS's with 24/7 support, with the latest upgrades, ample software, freedome of choice when i want, I get the choice of a virus free OS, the freedom of GUI, the choice of 3D Beryl, anf FREE SUPPORT.

Why sit here and say it is not ready, if it wasn't i would not be typing this now, as to weather it's windows complient, NO, it's linux, windows is not linux. if people do not learn linux it will never be windows complient........................

Now is the time, i forget the last person that actually purchased winxp, do you really think that these people are going to start paying for there operating systems, when they have just as many problems as an open OS (if not more). I do not condone piracy or illegal activities in any way, but come on lets get real, I live in a real world, pigs don't fly, and beer has to be payed for.

Paul

Soarer
March 11th, 2007, 01:06 PM
There are times when I wish that one could give kudos on this forum for excellent posts. This is one of those times.

Good points, well made, Sui Nim Tao :)

beefcurry
March 11th, 2007, 01:32 PM
Sim Nim Tao, you have my respect. Very well spoken :).

But I believe sensible debate is not bad as it allows us to understand the limitations and allow us to make ubuntu better so you would need less support.

but yet again i doubt the canonical dudes really bother reading our talk here :P

d3br074
March 11th, 2007, 06:34 PM
Ok...so I have a grandma who is completely computer illiterate (aren't they all?), and I'm not talking linux illiterate, im talking like windows illiterate. If people can't even figure out windows what hope have they of figuring out linux? In order to make linux more popular, it needs to be even easier than windows to use and set up. Just a thought.

chickengirl
March 11th, 2007, 06:43 PM
Ok...so I have a grandma who is completely computer illiterate (aren't they all?), and I'm not talking linux illiterate, im talking like windows illiterate. If people can't even figure out windows what hope have they of figuring out linux? In order to make linux more popular, it needs to be even easier than windows to use and set up. Just a thought.

Actually, one of the main reasons people have trouble with Linux after moving from Windows is that they expect everything to work exactly the same as in Windows -- if there's even the slightest difference, even if it's a good one, they will loudly complain about how Linux "isn't ready!!!" if Grandma doesn't know how Windows works, she may actually have an advantage, because she isn't coming in with a bunch of baggage and Microsoftian expectations. See the link in my sig (Linux isn't Windows).

Ric95
March 11th, 2007, 06:45 PM
Grandma has a computer....
I just set up my mothers computer with ubuntu in dual boot. All she knows if if windows crashes, she can try the second boot option.... and then she'll phone me.
At least its there.

RandomJoe
March 11th, 2007, 06:49 PM
The truly computer illiterate are never going to be able to install and setup their own system, regardless what OS they use. Windows gets a free pass on this much of the time because it has already been set up for the most part when the end user opens the box, and the disk images mean even if they have to reload it isn't as painful as a true reinstall. (Thus why many are pushing for Dell or other vendors to sell preloaded Linux.)

If you put an already-configured Windows system and an already-configured Linux system in front of a computer illiterate user I'd say they have about equal difficulty in learning how to use the thing. Again, Windows gets a bit of a pass here overall because most people who are considered "computer illiterate" have actually used - or at least seen - Windows in the past so have some small kernel of familiarity.

I do still qualify this slightly. Both are perfectly equal for a bog-standard setup like a typical desktop system. Start adding extras, or especially getting to a laptop with a wireless connection, and things are more likely to get squirrely on Linux than on Windows (but BOTH will have a higher likelihood of things happening) and the new user is probably going to have NO IDEA what to do about them on either system.

And, of course, a computer-phobic user probably has no chance whatsoever. Part of my job involves training people (usually maintenance people for the building we install in) and I still run across people who not only don't use a computer, they don't WANT to use one! Nothing would be simple enough for them.

My grandmother was in the same position yours is. I wound up giving her a Windows system simply because she was 900 miles away, on dialup, and the family around her only knew Windows. Had she been close enough or had the computer been on a broadband connection for remote support, I would have given her Linux instead since I could support her. Even with Windows, it was a rather tedious task to get her just to the point she could open and check her email. Writing one and sending was yet another challenging task! She never opened a browser window in her life - all she wanted was to keep in touch with all the grand/great-grandkids. And that email program was ALL she ever learned about the OS!

rsambuca
March 11th, 2007, 06:52 PM
If you think about it, most people just get a computer with Windows pre-installed, and never have to really install anything themselves. If you pre-install everything for your grandmother (I have done so for a few of my "elderly" family members - Mom, Aunt, etc.), then just turn off the update-notifier, and pretty much everything works as it should.

The only time I ever have problems with my system is when I am adding another distro, updating video drivers, trying beta software (ie. Beryl), etc. There is no need for casual users to do this stuff, so in that sense linux is more stable than windows.

My mom hasn't turned off her machine for a few months now. Running smoooooth.

hanzomon4
March 11th, 2007, 07:01 PM
She'll never be able to set it up but she can use it if you set it up for her....

I my case my family all share a computer. I setup a dualboot that I used to learn ubuntu and test it out on my family. Once I became proficient in the use and configuration of ubuntu me and my family started to use it on a daily bases. When I needed to replace the hard drive I got rid of xp.

My mom is not at all a techy computer person same thing with my brother(mild autistic), however they use ubuntu with ease. I set it up and installed the codecs, cd/dvd burning and ripping/shrinking software, flash/java, and some music players (banshee, Listen, Exaile, Audacious) and that's all that was needed.

If grandma don't need windows specific software and ubuntu will play good with her hardware she should be fine provided you install it for her and set it up to her likings.

But yeah, my point is that Ubuntu(other distros too) is easy to use. The initial setup my be a difficult for some and partitioning is the hardest part of an install for new users(if dual booting), but using it after being setup is easy. Linux needs some major OEM support for people to stop saying that it's to hard to use because what they really mean is that it's hard to setup.

aysiu
March 11th, 2007, 07:08 PM
I've merged this with the Linux Desktop Readiness thread, since it seems more about general discussion (is Linux realistic?) than about the specific situation (help me get my grandma set up).

I agree with most of the responses.

Won't work:
Hand her a disc and say, "Here, grandma. You'll love Ubuntu. All you have to is boot up the CD, repartition your drive, select the proper root partition, answer all the installation questions, troubleshoot any video or sound issues, and download a bunch of codecs with Automatix."

Will work:
Hand her a computer you've already set up and say, "Here, grandma. Click here if you want to go on the web. Click here if you want to check your email. Click here to shut down."

prizrak
March 11th, 2007, 11:08 PM
and download a bunch of codecs with Automatix."
Won't even be necessary with Feisty. Herd5 (I think that's what's current been using it for a while) has all the gstreamer plugins in the repos and they work with pretty much everything I have tried. The only site they don't work with, RealPlayer does and it's a very quick and easy process to get it to run. Of course it's CLI so maybe a bit too much for Gramma ;)

Solicitous
March 12th, 2007, 05:24 AM
Might be a bit late to voice my opinion, but anyway here goes;

In terms of being a desktop operating system to provide users the functionality of watching and playing of music and dvds, word processing, spreadsheet, email, websurfung etc.....any functionality that is basically required for most people to utilise a computer as a tool...I will say that Linux is desktop ready.

I think by saying "but after installing I need to configure XYZ hardware component...it just doesn't work out of the box so it's not ready" is a poor argument. Be honest and look at other operating systems you've installed and tell me how many times you've installed it and it's just worked without configuring of some description?? (Exclude OSX please, it is built to run of their hardware so of course it will work out of the box).

Two areas where Linux desktop readiness I think does lack, and this is completely personal opinion and am by no means complaining about the current situation....is 3rd party (commercial software) and laptops.

I personally feel that there will never be a huge demand for commercial software (well the demand maybe there, but the software developers will never develop) for Linux is because of alot of the mindset of "I'm not going to buy that program when I can write my own for free or look for a free alternative". This is what freedom is however, giving people choice to do as they please. But at some point if people are wanting 3rd party commercial software they will have to pay for it instead of saying "We want xyz software and we want it now...and we're not going to pay for it so make it free". Where is the incentive for commercial business to supply this when they get nothing in return??

And with the laptops, this is more due to manufacturers rather than developers. Hardware support for desktop and server systems using Linux in my view and experience is at equal par with alternative operating systems. However when it comes to laptops, I think it is behind the pack. How many people with laptops can't get all their hardware working (screen brightness adjustment is a frequent one that I see)? But if manufacturers gave the same resources to Linux as they do other OS companies, I feel this issue will be resolved rather quickly.

Anyway my 2 cents.

Frak
March 12th, 2007, 05:28 AM
Might be a bit late to voice my opinion, but anyway here goes;

In terms of being a desktop operating system to provide users the functionality of watching and playing of music and dvds, word processing, spreadsheet, email, websurfung etc.....any functionality that is basically required for most people to utilise a computer as a tool...I will say that Linux is desktop ready.

I think by saying "but after installing I need to configure XYZ hardware component...it just doesn't work out of the box so it's not ready" is a poor argument. Be honest and look at other operating systems you've installed and tell me how many times you've installed it and it's just worked without configuring of some description?? (Exclude OSX please, it is built to run of their hardware so of course it will work out of the box).

Two areas where Linux desktop readiness I think does lack, and this is completely personal opinion and am by no means complaining about the current situation....is 3rd party (commercial software) and laptops.

I personally feel that there will never be a huge demand for commercial software (well the demand maybe there, but the software developers will never develop) for Linux is because of alot of the mindset of "I'm not going to buy that program when I can write my own for free or look for a free alternative". This is what freedom is however, giving people choice to do as they please. But at some point if people are wanting 3rd party commercial software they will have to pay for it instead of saying "We want xyz software and we want it now...and we're not going to pay for it so make it free". Where is the incentive for commercial business to supply this when they get nothing in return??

And with the laptops, this is more due to manufacturers rather than developers. Hardware support for desktop and server systems using Linux in my view and experience is at equal par with alternative operating systems. However when it comes to laptops, I think it is behind the pack. How many people with laptops can't get all their hardware working (screen brightness adjustment is a frequent one that I see)? But if manufacturers gave the same resources to Linux as they do other OS companies, I feel this issue will be resolved rather quickly.

Anyway my 2 cents.
Great argument, I fully support your idea, kudos.

Sui Nim Tao
March 12th, 2007, 01:38 PM
I personally feel that there will never be a huge demand for commercial software (well the demand maybe there, but the software developers will never develop) for Linux is because of alot of the mindset of "I'm not going to buy that program when I can write my own for free or look for a free alternative". This is what freedom is however, giving people choice to do as they please. But at some point if people are wanting 3rd party commercial software they will have to pay for it instead of saying "We want xyz software and we want it now...and we're not going to pay for it so make it free". Where is the incentive for commercial business to supply this when they get nothing in return??

Completely right, there is however the option for both to exhist in the open source arena, one example for me would be my web design work. I only write in raw text so dreamweaver which i used to use is not an issue. I used to use it and now my skills have matured, i prefer to use raw text editors, and browsers for viewing.

However I can not get by without firefox, I have tried many options, the vector drawing is ok on opensource but general image manipulation, animation etc that fireworks provides is in a league of it's own. I would be happy to purchase this for linux.

Therefore there is no issue with making software for linux that people have to pay for. This in turn means that the software they produce has to be of a lot higher caliber to make poeple buy it, which can only be a good thing.

I can't see the issue with 3rd party drivers either, why do they not offer support, you still have to buy the hardware, so why not supply them. I know that this may be due to not wanting to supply the source, but I paid for the hardware why shouldn't i see the source. Are they affraid people will see issues with there code and they don't want egg on their faces, or do they think people will steal it. In my opinion you don't buy the hardware because it's drivers are written well, you buy it because you know the hardware is top notch, so theft is no option. This has now changed for me, as I have to make sure it's compatible with linux now.

Good point though.

One more thing, I just finally did a full re-install of edgy ubuntu, and tried for the 3rd time to get beryl working (used suse before, hmm painfull to say the least), and wow is all i have to say, I know something good when i see it.

I gaurentee anybody i show my current setup to, would be very very interested in Linux. Once this is a stable platform, there is going to be some serious competition out there for microsoft. Im not just say this because of all the I hate M$ rants, I like my technology, and this is leaps and bounds beyound XP, how it compares to VISTA a can't comment never had and probably never will get the chance to try it. But it beats XP hands down, and works on older machines so you don't need a re-mortgage to use it. This is a big area i believe as the only way i can really see VISTA being sold is through new PC's, everyone I know doesn't want to risk an upgrade and are looking for alternatives, due to upgrades and problems with software support on VISTA for older software.



The scope is immense, it truelly is a completely new concept, this is what linux needs to steal some limelight I think, yes it needs to work well but why the hell shouldn't we have a bit of flashyness too. Some of the tools available are just very very good and can be put to good use like see through windows, and the elasticity, like pulling a corner of a window down to see whats behind it.

If M$ wants me to switch back to there software it's got it's work cut out, and in my opinion, people go with majority, if enough people switch to make 3rd party suppliers sit back for a moment, they will have no choice but to go with the majority. That is M$ at the present, but think of this, if the OS market was more equal who do you think they would write software for........erm all 3 (windows, linux, mac) as they will sell more of there product, it may not be good business sense to do things for free, but it's not good business sense to write software for an OS that nobody uses, this is the only reason Linux struggles with 3rd party software and drivers. But I see this changing it may be slow but it is happening, 5 years ago Linux was nothing like it is now, thats why i never considered it.

The best thing for linux would be for people to change to it's OS (yes i know it's a simple idea) but that will be the only time suppliers will change the way they work and start helping Linux users out, it's a big chicken and egg debate really.

But with Beryl on the horizon, hopefully there will be enough flash to grab attention for a while, and then all that needs to be done is act on that attention and ride the wave.

Paul

darrenm
March 12th, 2007, 01:43 PM
If you're impressed with Edgy, give Feisty a try. Wow is all I keep saying.

beefcurry
March 12th, 2007, 02:00 PM
It will be LONG time before I would say Linux for Desktop is anywhere near ready. Until Beryl stops crashing on me every 10 min then I would say its better then XP. However support for hardware is horrible at best. Sure it supports my LAN/Motherboard/Sound out of the box where XP does not, however installing a few drivers take no time at all on XP. But to try and get something like my tablet/photo printer/monitor resolution was a nightmare. It was this hard for my 4 year old Desktop (I tried Breezy once.........then didnt try Ubuntu again till Edgy) then what if I need a new Laptop? I am seriously considering System76 but unfortunately they do not ship to where I live. I know a few laptops that work pretty well but none that works fully. Support for Chinese input for Edgy right now is similar to the win 98, roughly 10 years behind Vista. The Chinese support in Vista is amazing (sorry, but this is one point they have done well on).

What I need is GNU/Linux Desktop systems to go BIG, start getting them pre-loaded onto laptops/desktops. I want a revolution not small steps forward. I am a supporter of FOSS (thats why I use Linux) but I believe cooperation is more important than competition. If Apple can take a FreeBSD kernel and make into something as easy to use as OSX then I would be in love right now. The bugs and problems of Ubuntu and Linux alike are endless, and they are almost always because of HARDWARE problems. OSX dosnt have this problem because they make the Hardware as well, but if the Linux community work with driver developers in big companies then maybe it would be one step closer to wards being Desktop ready. Sure if there was a FOSS one I would go for that over the propertory one, but a non free propertory one is still better then non at all.

In my eyes, the Linux Desktop world still has a long way to go to get anywhere near Vista. OSX in my opinion is not much better, the just have less to worry about.

Tomosaur
March 12th, 2007, 03:28 PM
It will be LONG time before I would say Linux for Desktop is anywhere near ready. Until Beryl stops crashing on me every 10 min then I would say its better then XP. However support for hardware is horrible at best. Sure it supports my LAN/Motherboard/Sound out of the box where XP does not, however installing a few drivers take no time at all on XP. But to try and get something like my tablet/photo printer/monitor resolution was a nightmare. It was this hard for my 4 year old Desktop (I tried Breezy once.........then didnt try Ubuntu again till Edgy) then what if I need a new Laptop? I am seriously considering System76 but unfortunately they do not ship to where I live. I know a few laptops that work pretty well but none that works fully. Support for Chinese input for Edgy right now is similar to the win 98, roughly 10 years behind Vista. The Chinese support in Vista is amazing (sorry, but this is one point they have done well on).

What I need is GNU/Linux Desktop systems to go BIG, start getting them pre-loaded onto laptops/desktops. I want a revolution not small steps forward. I am a supporter of FOSS (thats why I use Linux) but I believe cooperation is more important than competition. If Apple can take a FreeBSD kernel and make into something as easy to use as OSX then I would be in love right now. The bugs and problems of Ubuntu and Linux alike are endless, and they are almost always because of HARDWARE problems. OSX dosnt have this problem because they make the Hardware as well, but if the Linux community work with driver developers in big companies then maybe it would be one step closer to wards being Desktop ready. Sure if there was a FOSS one I would go for that over the propertory one, but a non free propertory one is still better then non at all.

In my eyes, the Linux Desktop world still has a long way to go to get anywhere near Vista. OSX in my opinion is not much better, the just have less to worry about.

The hardware situation is kinda sketchy at times. You're right somewhat - OEMs need to certify hardware as Linux compatible, not just Windows compatible. However - the onus is more on hardware manufacturers to stop being so damn stingy with their documentation. It all stems from a fear of competition - but driver developers only need to know how to communicate with the hardware - what protocols are used, etc etc. They don't need to know the design of the hardware, or anything like that. Many manufacturers realise this, and thus those pieces of hardware get open-source drivers fairly quickly. For other things, it takes a lot more time, because the developers need to work off assumptions and trial and error. Best thing you can do is to check whether your hardware is known to work on Linux before you buy it (or install Linux, whichever comes first). If people stop buying hardware from crappy manufacturers, this problem will go away.

That being said - Linux still has better hardware support than Windows out-of-the box (That is, hardware works immediately, without you having to install drivers). Sure, Windows almost definitely WILL work with your hardware, provided you have drivers, but if you can't find the CD, or can't get online, you're pretty much screwed, unless Windows has the drivers built in (which is increasingly rare). I'd take Linux over Windows any day for hardware compatibility.

euler_fan
March 12th, 2007, 03:43 PM
I just read yesterday in the help forums about making a new computer "desktop ready" for an older woman who refuses to learn new software.

My point is that desktop ready has as much to do with the attitudes and expectations of the individual user--for the woman above, no modern distro will be desktop ready unless it will work exactly like Win95/98 (her former OS).

I agree, once we get all the major hardware vendors certifying hardware as "linux compatible" (or at least offering quality linux drivers), then we will have made a huge jump forward.

Let's just be careful. I consider 6.10 completely desktop ready FOR ME, who is willing to go and learn how to do what I want to do, even if it means CLI and installing from source and hacking some conf files. (None of which I need to do much of, fortunately). For those of us less motivated to make it happen, maybe 6.10 is not desktop ready.

I consider this analogous to owning and maintaining a 2007 Toyota (for example) versus a 1967 mustang. Not everyone is willing to put in the time and money and effort to keep the second on the road.

skywalker___
March 12th, 2007, 03:45 PM
I think the remote servers need not to be installed with the OS the user needs to pick and choose what they want installed I dont use file shareing
over the network I dont need a HTTP boadcast no password server I dont use VNC or vino. ect.. but then I think to myself thieir is alot of sick people out their and thies tools come in handy if used in the right way... I also see their is alot of kiddy's useing this distribution of linux who think they know it all you can tell who is a adult and who is a collage moron they tell you to uninstall >bash < and see what happens so stupied.. as for me Iam a army journalist not the collage type.... :guitar:

TDK800
March 13th, 2007, 08:28 PM
I have 17 years of total computer use experience in every imaginable area on windows and around 4-5 years of linux server management experience through SSH.

But due to the "complexity" of Ubuntu GUI design and every little thing needing a custom setup/config and still having problems, Linux for now will remain only on our servers and we have decided to unfortunately having to buy Windows Vistas for a LOT of money :( for personal and corporate notebooks, because switching to Ubuntu would by my estimates decrease our company's productivity by 10 times (1000%) over the next 6 months costing us even more money.

Here are my TOP problems/annoyances with Ubuntu, though most would be solvable, the effort for us is just not worth it. These are currently all areas in which I feel Ubuntu and Linux for Dektop in general is behind Windows XP and Windows Vista. Hopefully atleast some of these get fixed/added in the next release of Ubuntu and I would be happy to give it a try again.

VERY IMPORTANT THINGS TO ADD/FIX IMHO
===========================

- Simple theme installer, where KDE/Gnome theme packages are in one file (all setting files, fonts, background images, etc.). And clicking on such file automatically adds them to theme selector and opens up the theme selector. Some theme sites which I've had trouble installing themes from to Gnome (I know many said "just drag and drop", but that gave errors):
http://art.gnome.org/

http://www.gnome-look.org/

http://www.kde-look.org/


- Simple fonts installer where clicking on a font, or selecting many fonts and right-clicking opens an option to add those fonts to system and opens up fonts manager. With Courier Newfx, Regular, Size 9 as the default font for text editor - it just rocks imho! CTRL+L and typing "fonts:///" - I have no idea where that directory is when looking for my fonts using Krusader. And why the heck are all fonts in separate directories? And why not include the OpenType fonts people have gotten used to on Windows like Arial and Verdana? Good fonts are one of the most important things, I was making a lot of typos with the default fonts installed. It would greatly improve the time people switching fom win would need for getting used to Linux.

- Krusader - I can't imagine my life without Total Commander on Windows and accordingly Krusader on Linux. They increase productivity 50x compared to the default file browsing with Windows and Linux.

- Graphical firewall interface included (FireStarter), maybe possibly collaborating with snort, to see content of the packages that have been blocked by the firewall? 35 million people use zonealarm GUI firewall on windows, plus all the other GUI firewalls coming with AV software. This is a big feature! Probably 50-60% of PC users have a graphical firewall installed.
http://firestarter.sourceforge.net

- Full Disk Encryption, like Windows Vista has BitLocker, Ubuntu could come with Loop-AES capable kernel:
http://wiki.suspend2.net/EncryptedSwapAndRoot

http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Disk-Encryption-HOWTO/procedure.html

http://www.sdc.org/~leila/usb-dongle/readme.html


Based on my research Loop-AES is superior to TrueCrypt/LUKS/dm-crypt/Cryptoloop
This is one of the main reasons I'm switching to Vista - employees travel a lot with notebooks and need to have everything encrypted incase corporate notebooks gets lost/stolen.

- Disk Sanitizer included by default, so instead of emptying trashcan users can easily sanitize it and the whole harddisk with multiple overwrites:
http://freshmeat.net/projects/disksanitizer

- Simple Package installer, e.g. merging "Add/Remove..." , "Synaptic Package Manager", and "Software Sources" into one menu item/app. And how about adding a text input for the search keyword into the Synaptic's Toolbar, where currently there is only a Search button, with plenty of room left, which opens the search area in a separate window. Why 2 clicks, when search could be done with 1 click?

- Adding a Terminal's shortcut to the quick launch bar - currently it's still in use a lot, until the GUI's get more mature and bugs less frequent.... probably not before a year.

- Beryl included by default. Beryl kicks Vista's ***, but without Beryl, Vista's GUI kicks Ubuntu's ***, even XP does. Installing it screwed up my Ubuntu system, and with all those Beryl videos floating around on Youtube, I bet most home users coming to Ubuntu will install it too, probably screwing up their systems and going back to Win like me.

- Flash plugin installed by default. I tried to installl the flash plugin needed by firefox, the link on official page doesn't work: "Totem could not play 'fd://0'" Could not determine type of stream.
http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/flash-plugin-9.0.31.0-release.i386.rpm
Important apps should be installed by default cuz if there's a chance there could be a problem installing them, there likely will be.

- a simple way to login as root instead of doing sudo everywhere and a simple way to drop root privileges, like in old Gnome GUI's

- GAIM - Possibility to make the buddy icons smaller in Gaim messenger (e.g. MSN Messenger size) - heck of a lot of scrolling to go through 100+ contacts to see who's online. Also, feature that allows to block/unblock contacts through right-click menu. Also message encryption option would be very cool - as Linux mostly still relates to security!

- OpenOffice support for all MS office file formats, or converters for these formats, e.g. .MDI files, can't open them with office atm. but need to!

- Default support in players for all the popular video and music formats - quicktime, mp3, wav, wmf, wmv, swf, etc.

- making webpage, contribution and bug reporting easier - couldn't find forum areas for bug reporting. Lesst text on webpage - people want to use/do, not read and read and read.
========================================




A recent series of studies, titled "When Choice Is Demotivating", provides the evidence. One

study was set in a gourmet food store in an upscale community where, on weekends, the

owners commonly set up sample tables of new items. When researchers set up a display featuring
a line of exotic, high-quality jams, customers who came by could taste samples, and

they were given a coupon for a dollar off if they bought a jar. In one condition of the study,

six varieties of the jam were available for tasting. In another, 24 varieties were available. In

either case, the entire set of 24 varieties was available for purchase. The large array of jams

attracted more people to the table than the small array, though in both cases people tasted

about the same number of jams on average. When it came to buying, however, a huge difference
became evident. Thirty percent of people exposed to the small array of jams actually

bought a jar; only 3% of those exposed to the large array of jams did so.

chavo
March 13th, 2007, 08:34 PM
So what you're looking for basically is TDK800buntu?

dannyboy79
March 13th, 2007, 08:43 PM
WOW, this sure looks exactly like this post here (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=379305)

no, i believe that tdk800 is simply looking for an off the shelf experience and when something doesn't work off the shelf, he wants a .exe he can double click on and have the non-off the shelf thing work. he want's a windows envirnoment. HE HE
i seriously don't blame him though, when you're talking about productivity and a business desktop environment, there can't be little issues here and there, it has to just work for the most part.

P_Badger
March 13th, 2007, 08:47 PM
though most would be solvable, the effort for us is just not worth it.

Ubuntu is probably one of the easiest to use Linux distros out there. Maybe you should make the effort to customize it to suit your needs. It'll be much better than what you'll get from vista.

Bigbluecat
March 13th, 2007, 08:49 PM
Hard for me to understand that a top 10 concern for a business is a theme installer. Still even for Vista I would wait 9 to 12 months. Too many stories of drivers not working and software incompatibilities for now.

dannyboy79
March 13th, 2007, 08:51 PM
yes, also, once you got 1 of the laptops setup or even desktop setup the way you think the business wanted it, you could use ghosting software or even partimage to create duplicate machines.

P_Badger
March 13th, 2007, 08:55 PM
yes, also, once you got 1 of the laptops setup or even desktop setup the way you think the business wanted it, you could use ghosting software or even partimage to create duplicate machines.

Exactly!

I'm guessing the poor dear thinks he has to setup up EACH computer individually or something.

Zac Dai
March 13th, 2007, 08:57 PM
I'm pretty new to Ubuntu and am now a big fan, I really like the GUI design. I personally find it suits me more then windows does. Its not complicated its just different and naturally not everyone will find it suits them.

Something I find very strange about you post is that are you saying productivity will decrease by a "1000%" due to the theme installer not being simple. So will all your employees lose you money because instead of working they are too busy figuring out how to install the newest eye-candy theme from Gnome-look?

Not meant as a flame but you seem to be complaining about Ubuntu not being designed for Office work etc. Yet most of your problems appear to be issues I would of thought would only concern a home user?

lahook
March 13th, 2007, 09:14 PM
Why not stick with xp? XP will be supported for a few more years. (maybe) You'll have all kinds of problems with vista unless you buy all new computers.
I use linux because I enjoy it. XP and 98 at work because I have to.

modestmelody
March 13th, 2007, 09:37 PM
Many of these things are simply not issues if you take very little time. For instance, enabling Extended Preferences plugin in GAIM allows you to change the font size of contacts and makes the icons smaller in accordance. If you actually download a full theme package you can just install straight from the tar without even having to extract. There is support for all of the non-free formats he listed, but since Ubuntu is sticking to Debian's mentality of being completely free and not installing anything that cannot be offered for free legally in the US by default, you're going to have to spend about 5 seconds typing "codecs in Ubuntu" into Google and typing one line into the terminal.

Terminal shortcut by default? Yeah, I do that first thing when I setup my system and it takes 2 seconds. Are you not ghosting as someone else suggested? I can't believe that any network manager wouldnt be using an imager to load up on his machines...

In the business world, Beryl should be completely unimportant and irrevelevant. It'll be default probably in less than a years time for the 7.10 release (maybe compiz instead) but it really shouldn't matter in a business environment. In fact, businesses typically like to keep computers as long as possible and not having something like Beryl running will allow for older and cheaper computers to run as fast as newer computers do for many years.

Basically, I'm calling ******** on half this post, if not 75%.

koenn
March 13th, 2007, 11:04 PM
Basically, I'm calling ******** on half this post, if not 75%.
yep, 75%
It's hard to believe this is a post from a sysadmin in a corporate environment.
Theme installer ? Corporate desktops are for productivity - at best the corporation develops its own "style" and puts it on all the desktops.
Beryl ? Beta software, and rather unstable still. No sysadmin would want it anywhere near a production system. Especially since it's mainly about eye candy.
GUI firewall on every desktop ? It could provide an additional layer of security on top of the corporate firewall that protects the LAN, but why does it have to be GUI ? so that users can tweak it themselves ? And that should pass for a corporate security policy ?
One extra shorcut here, remove a menu item there ... ? Has been answered : sensible sysadmins design an baseline image for the corporate desktop, then roll it out to all of them.
a simple way to login as root instead of doing sudo everywhere and a simple way to drop root privileges - like "sudo su" maybe ? how much simpler can it be ?
MDI files ? - isn't that a user interface (Multiple Document Interface" : multiple documents in 1 parent 'application' window) rather than a file format ? Microsoft used it for a while - in the 1990s versions of msOffice i believe.

mandragor
March 13th, 2007, 11:50 PM
And GAIM does have encryption, via gaim-encrypt. Few of those notes hold up.

qamelian
March 13th, 2007, 11:57 PM
Mmmm, I love the smell of troll in the evening.

Josey
March 14th, 2007, 12:05 AM
Hard for me to understand that a top 10 concern for a business is a theme installer.

lol... what I thought too.
Not having a good enough theme installer & IM icons is going to decrease productivity by 10x?

MetalMusicAddict
March 14th, 2007, 12:09 AM
lol. Oh well. Have fun with Vista.

andrew.46
March 14th, 2007, 12:13 AM
Hi,

I have my suspicions about this post. Try:

http://people.aapt.net.au/~adjlstrong/troll.html

My apologies if this post is legitimate:)

Andrew

peabody
March 14th, 2007, 12:38 AM
I have 17 years of total computer use experience in every imaginable area on windows and around 4-5 years of linux server management experience through SSH.

But due to the "complexity" of Ubuntu GUI design and every little thing needing a custom setup/config and still having problems, Linux for now will remain only on our servers and we have decided to unfortunately having to buy Windows Vistas for a LOT of money :( for personal and corporate notebooks, because switching to Ubuntu would by my estimates decrease our company's productivity by 10 times (1000%) over the next 6 months costing us even more money.


What'dya use for that fairly specific and scientific estimate? How did you quantify the time you'd lose?



Here are my TOP problems/annoyances with Ubuntu, though most would be solvable, the effort for us is just not worth it. These are currently all areas in which I feel Ubuntu and Linux for Dektop in general is behind Windows XP and Windows Vista. Hopefully atleast some of these get fixed/added in the next release of Ubuntu and I would be happy to give it a try again.

VERY IMPORTANT THINGS TO ADD/FIX IMHO
===========================

- Simple theme installer,



*blink?* this is a business requirement? Most houses I know don't even let users change desktop settings. I can understand this being a home user's concern. You've got to be kidding me about this being a business concern.



- Simple fonts installer where clicking on a font, or selecting many fonts and right-clicking opens an option to add those fonts to system and opens up fonts manager. With Courier Newfx, Regular, Size 9 as the default font for text editor - it just rocks imho! CTRL+L and typing "fonts:///" - I have no idea where that directory is when looking for my fonts using Krusader. And why the heck are all fonts in separate directories? And why not include the OpenType fonts people have gotten used to on Windows like Arial and Verdana? Good fonts are one of the most important things, I was making a lot of typos with the default fonts installed. It would greatly improve the time people switching fom win would need for getting used to Linux.


Good fonts are also copyrighted and can't be distributed freely. Complain to the copyright holders. Fonts really aren't that bad to install, users can simply add them to their .fonts folder. And again...this is a business requirement? *blink*



- Krusader - I can't imagine my life without Total Commander on Windows and accordingly Krusader on Linux. They increase productivity 50x compared to the default file browsing with Windows and Linux.


Uhm...this is a reason you can't use Linux? It sounds like you've found your Linux alternative to me...



- Graphical firewall interface included (FireStarter), maybe possibly collaborating with snort, to see content of the packages that have been blocked by the firewall? 35 million people use zonealarm GUI firewall on windows, plus all the other GUI firewalls coming with AV software. This is a big feature! Probably 50-60% of PC users have a graphical firewall installed.


And you've the data to back that claim I assume? Frankly, yes, a better gui interface to the firewall would be nice, to that extent this is a legitamate complaint. But a lot of gui firewall stuff for XP is crap too. Most of it is extremely hand-wavy "Look at all this stuff we protected you from!!! Wohooo!" when most of the crap is just stupid stuff like netbios broadcasts.



Based on my research Loop-AES is superior to TrueCrypt/LUKS/dm-crypt/Cryptoloop
This is one of the main reasons I'm switching to Vista - employees travel a lot with notebooks and need to have everything encrypted incase corporate notebooks gets lost/stolen.


Very legitimate complaint, I agree. Disk encryption needs to be easier to setup. It wasn't until this part of your post that I stopped thinking you were a troll.



- Disk Sanitizer included by default, so instead of emptying trashcan users can easily sanitize it and the whole harddisk with multiple overwrites:


Very legitimate complaint. Although I've heard concerns about how effective stuff like this is on LVM and different filesystems. Still, something's better than nothing I imagine.



- Simple Package installer, e.g. merging "Add/Remove..." , "Synaptic Package Manager", and "Software Sources" into one menu item/app. And how about adding a text input for the search keyword into the Synaptic's Toolbar, where currently there is only a Search button, with plenty of room left, which opens the search area in a separate window. Why 2 clicks, when search could be done with 1 click?


This is the most legitimate complaint, I agree.



- Adding a Terminal's shortcut to the quick launch bar - currently it's still in use a lot, until the GUI's get more mature and bugs less frequent.... probably not before a year.


Isn't there one? Huh, I don't remember adding mine....



- Beryl included by default. Beryl kicks Vista's ***, but without Beryl, Vista's GUI kicks Ubuntu's ***, even XP does. Installing it screwed up my Ubuntu system, and with all those Beryl videos floating around on Youtube, I bet most home users coming to Ubuntu will install it too, probably screwing up their systems and going back to Win like me.


I'm sure the Ubuntu folks would love to make Beryl work out of the box. The current reality is that it's bleeding-edge, unstable software. That's the reality, and until the development gets the software stable, it'd be foolish to include something that can't be supported.



- Flash plugin installed by default. I tried to installl the flash plugin needed by firefox, the link on official page doesn't work: "Totem could not play 'fd://0'" Could not determine type of stream.
http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/flash-plugin-9.0.31.0-release.i386.rpm
Important apps should be installed by default cuz if there's a chance there could be a problem installing them, there likely will be.


I'm sure Ubuntu would love to include Flash. It's a licensing issue. It's free to use, but not to distribute. Complain to Adobe.



- a simple way to login as root instead of doing sudo everywhere and a simple way to drop root privileges, like in old Gnome GUI's


I dunno, it just doesn't bother me. Mac OS X works the same way.



- GAIM - Possibility to make the buddy icons smaller in Gaim messenger (e.g. MSN Messenger size) - heck of a lot of scrolling to go through 100+ contacts to see who's online. Also, feature that allows to block/unblock contacts through right-click menu. Also message encryption option would be very cool - as Linux mostly still relates to security!


Other people have commented on his, I've nothing to say.



- OpenOffice support for all MS office file formats, or converters for these formats, e.g. .MDI files, can't open them with office atm. but need to!


Well, no one said reverse engineering proprietary formats was supposed to be easy. I doubt any incompatiblities are due to the OOo team just not trying...



- Default support in players for all the popular video and music formats - quicktime, mp3, wav, wmf, wmv, swf, etc.


Serious, serious, serious licensing and patent issues. It's the legal problems that prevent it from happening.



- making webpage, contribution and bug reporting easier - couldn't find forum areas for bug reporting. Lesst text on webpage - people want to use/do, not read and read and read.
========================================


Oh, c'mon now. Ubuntu's got to be the best distro there is at this.



A recent series of studies, titled "When Choice Is Demotivating", provides the evidence. One

study was set in a gourmet food store in an upscale community where, on weekends, the

owners commonly set up sample tables of new items. When researchers set up a display featuring
a line of exotic, high-quality jams, customers who came by could taste samples, and

they were given a coupon for a dollar off if they bought a jar. In one condition of the study,

six varieties of the jam were available for tasting. In another, 24 varieties were available. In

either case, the entire set of 24 varieties was available for purchase. The large array of jams

attracted more people to the table than the small array, though in both cases people tasted

about the same number of jams on average. When it came to buying, however, a huge difference
became evident. Thirty percent of people exposed to the small array of jams actually

bought a jar; only 3% of those exposed to the large array of jams did so.

Is this your sig or is it an anecdote? Anyway, as an IT guy it is kind of up to you to narrow the field for your clientel.

cmost
March 14th, 2007, 01:30 AM
Go ahead and switch to Vista. See if we care. I for one am not going to try to talk you out of it. If you want to be Steve Balmer's little bitch as well as a slave to DRM it's your choice. If you want your OS to work according to the way someone else decides, fine by me. Oh, and enjoy emptying your bank account of $400.00 for Windows Vista and another $400.00 for Office. Bye! (Don't let the door hit you on the way out.)

konungursvia
March 14th, 2007, 01:55 AM
I also think this poster is full of it. For instance he says "a simple way to login as root instead of doing sudo everywhere and a simple way to drop root privileges". Any experienced computer man can type "sudo" easily. But more importantly, I don't think anyone in charge of a network having many inexperienced users would want to see lots of accounts and passwords floating around the office that have admin privileges. Do you sign all your cheques the day the bank sends them to you, then leave them lying around for anyone to fill in and cash? Neither should admin logins be taken lightly.

Oh by the way, if he needs a solution to needing root privileges for a longer while, doesn't he know he can launch the root privilege terminal? Easy. And wanna know an easy way to turn off root privileges? Close it.

peabody
March 14th, 2007, 02:56 AM
Now, now folks. He/she ain't a troll, I've seen other legitimate posts by this user. That's not to say the reasoning isn't flawed, but still.

aysiu
March 14th, 2007, 03:49 AM
I've moved this to a more appropriate place than General Help.

m.musashi
March 14th, 2007, 05:21 AM
Now, now folks. He/she ain't a troll, I've seen other legitimate posts by this user. That's not to say the reasoning isn't flawed, but still.

Well, if ones intention are good then it might be harsh to call them a troll but when you start a negative thread and just leave it, it's kind of hard to say otherwise. In addition, you have a user who has only been a member for 5 days and started with this thread (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=379305).

If you gave a hungry person a loaf of bread that was 95% cooked and they threw it back in your face saying it wasn't edible and why could it be a pizza, would you make them a pizza or tell them to pi** off? I like to think I'm a reasonable and helpful person but I don't think I'd make the pizza.

undertakingyou
March 14th, 2007, 07:41 AM
I also think this poster is full of it. For instance he says "a simple way to login as root instead of doing sudo everywhere and a simple way to drop root privileges". Any experienced computer man can type "sudo" easily. But more importantly, I don't think anyone in charge of a network having many inexperienced users would want to see lots of accounts and passwords floating around the office that have admin privileges. Do you sign all your cheques the day the bank sends them to you, then leave them lying around for anyone to fill in and cash? Neither should admin logins be taken lightly.

Oh by the way, if he needs a solution to needing root privileges for a longer while, doesn't he know he can launch the root privilege terminal? Easy. And wanna know an easy way to turn off root privileges? Close it.

I addition. With Vista's new content manager thing, your having to put in your password and click ok over and over and over. If Vista is to be such a better solution, why does the problem seem worse there?

yigal.weinstein
March 14th, 2007, 07:43 AM
An aspect of the context of the word readiness has to do with how one is willing or interested in approaching one's computer experience. I have seen a lot of threads where the computer user's definition of what makes a good computer experience is being able to play the gamut of games available via Microsoft. This seems to be a rather silly way of viewing what makes an OS superior but to them this is what makes a desktop "ready".

This is not how Macintosh has made its name and it is probably, by many non-linux users, considered the ultimate desktop experience because of its "ease of use" and its capability to produce a "productive" work environment. This usability is probably more to the point of the "usability" that Ubuntu is interested in.

Linux is setup so that there is still a sharp learning curve, relative to the 2 commerical OSs. Ubuntu puts a pretty face on this sharp learning curve - which can irritate people who are used to Macintosh and Microsoft. At the same time the power of the OS is apparent upon a little inspection and this makes staying with Ubuntu more easy to swallow.

There must be reminders about what free software is for Ubuntu users. Instead of you putting $ in you will be using your own time. If this is an enjoyable pursuit - it happens to be for me - then nothing is lost in this decision, but not realizing that time will have to be put in is a shame. Time is a resource and a very precious one.

udha
March 14th, 2007, 03:03 PM
Ok...so I have a grandma who is completely computer illiterate (aren't they all?), and I'm not talking linux illiterate, im talking like windows illiterate. If people can't even figure out windows what hope have they of figuring out linux? In order to make linux more popular, it needs to be even easier than windows to use and set up. Just a thought.

I'm sorry but while your intentions are good you're reasoning makes less sense than a spinning top on the moon. What you are in fact saying here is that your Grandmother can install Windows. That's not what you mean but it's what you've said, because the reality at the moment is that Ubuntu Linux is EASIER to use for someone who's never seen a computer before, than Windows. But not if they have to install it, and even then, ,Ubuntu's installer is easier, and faster, with a simple double-click, next next next next ok done routine to get it installed and running in over 90% of cases out there.

So Linux is actually HARDER to become accustomed to if you've been taught on the Windows system first, you learn bad habits and and that means Windows is wrong, not Linux. But it's free for you to modify, so if enough people want it to do something, it will eventually do it.

And just a friendly FYI: The kernel is the Linux kernel, but the system is actually GNU/Linux.

udha
March 14th, 2007, 03:11 PM
As an addendum to my post above, think of this if you will:

We are assuming now that Windows is "Ready for the desktop" as it were. But then in the same move, many of us have un unrealistic expectation of GNU/Linux saying that because it is too difficult to install, it is not ready for the desktop. What kind of double-standards are we trying to push here? Using this logic, we are saying that we expect every user, at home, in business, buyer of Dell and HP etc, to purchase their computer, and be given a copy of Windows on a CD, and for the manufacturer to say, here you are, enjoy installing that, and then the drivers. And then the updates. Oh and don't forget your anti-virus software, the latest definitions, and remember to install any number of the firewall applications out, and you may also want these applications too, they'll be extra, and you'll also need to install those yourself too.
But they do not, they say, here is your computer, and OS, and various applications and drivers installed and configured out of the box, enjoy, this is called "Ready for the desktop."

So in that light, a computer novice, given a computer with any mainstream flavor of GNU/Linux, preinstalled, drivers taken care off, hardware configured, and ready to go, will have no problems whatsoever in using this for the very same tasks, and, just like with Windows, if something goes wrong or causes problems, they call a tech, just as they do now with Windows, Linux is ready, right now, and it's only getting better.

ShadowVlican
March 14th, 2007, 08:13 PM
As an addendum to my post above, think of this if you will:

We are assuming now that Windows is "Ready for the desktop" as it were. But then in the same move, many of us have un unrealistic expectation of GNU/Linux saying that because it is too difficult to install, it is not ready for the desktop. What kind of double-standards are we trying to push here? Using this logic, we are saying that we expect every user, at home, in business, buyer of Dell and HP etc, to purchase their computer, and be given a copy of Windows on a CD, and for the manufacturer to say, here you are, enjoy installing that, and then the drivers. And then the updates. Oh and don't forget your anti-virus software, the latest definitions, and remember to install any number of the firewall applications out, and you may also want these applications too, they'll be extra, and you'll also need to install those yourself too.
But they do not, they say, here is your computer, and OS, and various applications and drivers installed and configured out of the box, enjoy, this is called "Ready for the desktop."

So in that light, a computer novice, given a computer with any mainstream flavor of GNU/Linux, preinstalled, drivers taken care off, hardware configured, and ready to go, will have no problems whatsoever in using this for the very same tasks, and, just like with Windows, if something goes wrong or causes problems, they call a tech, just as they do now with Windows, Linux is ready, right now, and it's only getting better.
problem here is that installing drivers in windows is equal to clicking "next" like 15 times.... and that's all it takes.... (not to mention there's little need for driver hunting, since every piece of hardware i've bought came with CDs.... not that i use them...)

then there's autoupdate... nothing to worry about there... (same with ubuntu!)

antivirus and firewalls..... same deal... click "next" like 15 times...

for me..... install windows and ubuntu are equally easy... infact, ubuntu was easier! kudos to the programmers behind the installation scheme!

it's when it comes to other peripherals (or unsupported hardware... so blame the manufacturers...) and software equivalents (GIMP != photoshop... Games... etc...) that linux starts to fail

Brunellus
March 14th, 2007, 08:21 PM
problem here is that installing drivers in windows is equal to clicking "next" like 15 times.... and that's all it takes.... (not to mention there's little need for driver hunting, since every piece of hardware i've bought came with CDs.... not that i use them...)

then there's autoupdate... nothing to worry about there... (same with ubuntu!)

antivirus and firewalls..... same deal... click "next" like 15 times...

for me..... install windows and ubuntu are equally easy... infact, ubuntu was easier! kudos to the programmers behind the installation scheme!

it's when it comes to other peripherals (or unsupported hardware... so blame the manufacturers...) and software equivalents (GIMP != photoshop... Games... etc...) that linux starts to fail
it's all about perspective. For me, Gimp > Photoshop--it's more capability than I could afford if I'd actually shelled out on an image editing suite. The learning curve doesn't faze me, since I never really learned Photoshop. And while I understand PS's total superiority in pre-press work. . . well, I don't do pre-press, so it's not an issue.

If you were never attached to proprietary solutions to begin with, you don't feel you've given anything up by using Free Software. My father certainly doesn't feel that way using OpenOffice, Firefox, or XSane. . .

FLPCGuy
March 14th, 2007, 09:09 PM
Much like TDK800 I have over a dozen years of business computing support experience. But I didn't see one legitimate business reason in his entire argument.

Cost-wise, it is hard to justify Vista which adds hundreds to the hardware requirements of each desktop for comparable performance to XP let alone Linux, not to mention the price of Vista Business ($199) and MS-Office. We're talking at least $500 a desktop. You can buy a lot of transition training at those prices and be free of the SpyWare, viruses, adWare, plus all the restrictions and snooping capabilities incorporated into Vista. It cost businesses $Billions to clean up the Code Red Windows mess...add another $50 per desktop for the next Melissa-type virus.

I've supported over 1,000 Office users but can't recall one who relied upon a feature not included in Open Office. AbiWord is far more like the MS Word most users will find familiar than the one in Office 2007 is. Add training costs for Ofc 2007 plus incompatibility issues with it's new default format.

Installing fonts, codecs, drivers, or even applications is NOT something a business desktop end user should be doing. They don't need Admin/root privileges. That's all best reserved for Tech Support.

Real concerns about running Linux on the desktop in all but a small business include:
1. backing up user created files or forcing users to save files remotely. Windows has all the tools for an Admin to insure all user data gets backed up AND can be restored by the user when lost without Admin assistance. See Shadow Copy.

2. Locking down desktops for sw license control and limited use by all is not a design goal of any Linux distro I know. See Local/Active Dir Group Policies.

3. Directory Services administration and software publishing reduces admin costs and insures license compliance while enabling those users who access networks from multiple PCs have the apps and files they need. This still needs work but is about six years ahead of Novell's efforts in this area.

4. Exchange mail server is the clear alternative to Lotus Notes, the only other mail system capable of filtering and supporting mail to over 1,000 users over a period of years without database/performance problems. Meeting coordination and resource scheduling are not yet available to Exchange Linux clients.

5. Rapid deployment and Automatic Update is possible with Linux too but without intermediate testing/control by local admins. See SUS/WUS services.

6. Automatic encryption is available only on the Business and Premium versions of Vista, but are superior to this capability in most Linux distros.

7. Driver rollback and automatic recovery to Last Known Good Configuration can solve some driver problems without tech support intervention.

8. Some of the very best software for business is not Linux compatible (Quick Books, for example).

Fortunately, Linux with MONO 2.0 will eventually be able to utilize all the vital business features of SQL Server databases such as data mining very large databases via sampling tables. That's something even Oracle can't do and well beyond the capability of any open standards database.

These are a few legitimate business concerns with Linux desktop readiness.

aysiu
March 14th, 2007, 09:15 PM
FLPCGuy, thanks for the breakdown.

Those sound like legitimate concerns.

Brunellus
March 14th, 2007, 09:24 PM
Much like TDK800 I have over a dozen years of business computing support experience. But I didn't see one legitimate business reason in his entire argument.

Cost-wise, it is hard to justify Vista which adds hundreds to the hardware requirements of each desktop for comparable performance to XP let alone Linux, not to mention the price of Vista Business ($199) and MS-Office. We're talking at least $500 a desktop. You can buy a lot of transition training at those prices and be free of the SpyWare, viruses, adWare, plus all the restrictions and snooping capabilities incorporated into Vista. It cost businesses $Billions to clean up the Code Red Windows mess...add another $50 per desktop for the next Melissa-type virus.

I've supported over 1,000 Office users but can't recall one who relied upon a feature not included in Open Office. AbiWord is far more like the MS Word most users will find familiar than the one in Office 2007 is. Add training costs for Ofc 2007 plus incompatibility issues with it's new default format.

Installing fonts, codecs, drivers, or even applications is NOT something a business desktop end user should be doing. They don't need Admin/root privileges. That's all best reserved for Tech Support.

Real concerns about running Linux on the desktop in all but a small business include:
1. backing up user created files or forcing users to save files remotely. Windows has all the tools for an Admin to insure all user data gets backed up AND can be restored by the user when lost without Admin assistance. See Shadow Copy.

2. Locking down desktops for sw license control and limited use by all is not a design goal of any Linux distro I know. See Local/Active Dir Group Policies.

3. Directory Services administration and software publishing reduces admin costs and insures license compliance while enabling those users who access networks from multiple PCs have the apps and files they need. This still needs work but is about six years ahead of Novell's efforts in this area.

4. Exchange mail server is the clear alternative to Lotus Notes, the only other mail system capable of filtering and supporting mail to over 1,000 users over a period of years without database/performance problems. Meeting coordination and resource scheduling are not yet available to Exchange Linux clients.

5. Rapid deployment and Automatic Update is possible with Linux too but without intermediate testing/control by local admins. See SUS/WUS services.

6. Automatic encryption is available only on the Business and Premium versions of Vista, but are superior to this capability in most Linux distros.

7. Driver rollback and automatic recovery to Last Known Good Configuration can solve some driver problems without tech support intervention.

8. Some of the very best software for business is not Linux compatible (Quick Books, for example).

Fortunately, Linux with MONO 2.0 will eventually be able to utilize all the vital business features of SQL Server databases such as data mining very large databases via sampling tables. That's something even Oracle can't do and well beyond the capability of any open standards database.

These are a few legitimate business concerns with Linux desktop readiness.
To what extent would many of these concerns be addressed by a thin client setup? Take away the headache of maintaniing separate desktops/workstations, and many of the problems simply vanish, in theory. With thin clients, users simply wouldn't be *permitted* to break anything.

koenn
March 14th, 2007, 09:45 PM
To what extent would many of these concerns be addressed by a thin client setup? ...
Brunellus has a point.
'If I replace all these Windows desktops wit Linux desktops, what Linux alternative can I use to replace active directory, Group Policies, WSUS, ... " is the corporate sysadmin's version of the home user's "I want Linux to be Windows but without the visuses, and without the license fee".
All these management tools were invented because Windows was originally a stand-alone single user system, but as it entered the networked business scene, the need for remote management emerged, and was solved with active directory, Group Policies, WSUS etc.
A server-based environment (where the roots of Linux lie) would require much less of such tools so in the Unix / Linux world, they hardly exist. Compair to the lack of filesystem defragmentation tools etc.
( more thoughts : http://users.telenet.be/mydotcom/howto/linux/migration03.htm )

darrenm
March 14th, 2007, 09:52 PM
I'm no Windows sysadmin so I don't profess to know everything you are talking about. But I have to question a few things:


Real concerns about running Linux on the desktop in all but a small business include:
1. backing up user created files or forcing users to save files remotely. Windows has all the tools for an Admin to insure all user data gets backed up AND can be restored by the user when lost without Admin assistance. See Shadow Copy.

2. Locking down desktops for sw license control and limited use by all is not a design goal of any Linux distro I know. See Local/Active Dir Group Policies..

But all of the restrictive stuff is surely far better served in the Nix world with proper permissions, thin client booting of read-only NFS mounts? Limited use by all is built-in to Linux from the very start and Windows is only just catching up. Root can allow users to do as little or as much as they want on any machine.


3. Directory Services administration and software publishing reduces admin costs and insures license compliance while enabling those users who access networks from multiple PCs have the apps and files they need. This still needs work but is about six years ahead of Novell's efforts in this area..

Licenses aren't that much of an issue with mainly open-source software. I don't get how accessing the network from different machines would stop users from accessing apps and files they need in the first place?


4. Exchange mail server is the clear alternative to Lotus Notes, the only other mail system capable of filtering and supporting mail to over 1,000 users over a period of years without database/performance problems. Meeting coordination and resource scheduling are not yet available to Exchange Linux clients..

To myself and everyone I've ever worked with, Exchange is the big joke of the email world. We used to be able to bring the Exchange server down by sending a mass mail to a distribution group with some external users. It would take a few hours before mails started catching up. No-one in their right mind ever operates Exchange on an external connection, it's only ever meant to be a groupware server. It does shared calendaring and shared contacts which are priceless things for the enterprise and something Linux is really lacking.


5. Rapid deployment and Automatic Update is possible with Linux too but without intermediate testing/control by local admins. See SUS/WUS services..

Can you explain what you mean by intermediate testing/control?


6. Automatic encryption is available only on the Business and Premium versions of Vista, but are superior to this capability in most Linux distros.

7. Driver rollback and automatic recovery to Last Known Good Configuration can solve some driver problems without tech support intervention..

Not really an issue for Linux and desktops that are set up so users can't fiddle.


8. Some of the very best software for business is not Linux compatible (Quick Books, for example).

Fortunately, Linux with MONO 2.0 will eventually be able to utilize all the vital business features of SQL Server databases such as data mining very large databases via sampling tables. That's something even Oracle can't do and well beyond the capability of any open standards database.

These are a few legitimate business concerns with Linux desktop readiness.

But also not really very widespread concerns. Businesses will take on Windows servers thinking they will use all the functionality that a salesman has FAB'd to them and only ever end up using group policies incorrectly, then just giving everyone admin privileges anyway.

The only widespread show-stopper is Exchange functionality. And the worrying thing is that there doesn't seem to be anything coming through to solve this. You can share Calendars through Thunderbird using webdav and share contacts via LDAP but its fiddly and scares I.T. managers who think (foolishly) that the Windows servers will be a walk in the park.

koenn
March 14th, 2007, 10:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLPCGuy View Post
5. Rapid deployment and Automatic Update is possible with Linux too but without intermediate testing/control by local admins. See SUS/WUS services..

Can you explain what you mean by intermediate testing/control?
SUS/WUS (or WSUS as it is currently called) is "Windows Update" for a local network.
It's a webserver (on your LAN) that caches patches from Windows Update servers and offers a management console where they system administrator can approve or refuse patches. Common practise is to approve patches for installation to a limited number of computers (preferrably a test lab), to see if there are any side effects, then approve them for all workstations.
It can go further than that, eg apply certain patches to predefined groups, manage how patches get installed, etc.
It's good stuff, since the alternative is to let users do their own patch management of to just accept any patch windows updates offers. patches have been know to break applications or introduce bugs, so some form of control and testing is interesting for system and network administrators

FyreBrand
March 14th, 2007, 10:16 PM
Maybe we'll see some of these issues addressed here: The Linux Foundation (http://www.linux-foundation.org/en/Main_Page).

There is a lot of potential here. I hope it starts gaining momentum. Standards and multiple distribution compliance is what will make the foundation to meet these issues head on. We can't really address them unless we're all on the same page at some level.

m.musashi
March 15th, 2007, 12:09 AM
To what extent would many of these concerns be addressed by a thin client setup? Take away the headache of maintaniing separate desktops/workstations, and many of the problems simply vanish, in theory. With thin clients, users simply wouldn't be *permitted* to break anything.

We have a thin-client lab at school and yes most of these issues have vanished. In fact, it's way more secure than windows. On windows they can boot a live cd and do just about anything including bypassing the content filter (yes that can be fixed with the bios). On the thin-client they can't. All they can do is work.

graywizard
March 15th, 2007, 02:47 AM
I seriously have given ubuntu and another distro a very fair time consuming shake only to say see ya! Bye! Ta ta!!! I wasted so much time struggling to get linux working and my laptop working I could have written part of a book by now! so I am back to my macs and i have gotten more done in the last 5 hours compared to wasting time trying to figure this mess they call linux and ubuntu out!

This is defintely NOT READY FOR PRIMETIME!!!!! Far From It!!!

the stress is already out of me from this horror they call linux and ubuntu!

AAAAAhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

halitech
March 15th, 2007, 02:53 AM
Sorry to hear you had problems with Ubuntu and Linux in general but LInux is not for everyone and every system. If you feel better using your Mac then I say go for it, however, just because you had trouble (does the expression "only a poor workman blames his tools" ring a bell here?) does not mean that Ubuntu is not making great advances and does work for a lot of us. Thats the wonderful thing about Linux, you get to choose what works for you and if that isn't Linux, then that is your choice.

oilchangeguy
March 15th, 2007, 02:56 AM
after looking at a few of your other posts it seems you complain way too much. i've got ubuntu 6.06 running fine on two computers. and one's a laptop that uses a pcmcia card for wireless. the only thing that does not work on both is the internal modem. and since i use highspeed for internet, i don't care. i've not once had to use a command line to do anything. all of the software i've added has come from add/remove, automatix, and synaptic package manager. you'll find there are way too many command line junkies in here. there may be a use for them, but as of yet i've not found one.

aysiu
March 15th, 2007, 02:58 AM
Merged into the appropriate thread.

graywizard, sorry to hear things didn't work out for you and Ubuntu.

If Mac OS X works for you, use it. I'm glad you found something that works for you. I found something that worked for me, too--it's called Ubuntu.

To each her own.

Frak
March 15th, 2007, 02:58 AM
I seriously have given ubuntu and another distro a very fair time consuming shake only to say see ya! Bye! Ta ta!!! I wasted so much time struggling to get linux working and my laptop working I could have written part of a book by now! so I am back to my macs and i have gotten more done in the last 5 hours compared to wasting time trying to figure this mess they call linux and ubuntu out!

This is defintely NOT READY FOR PRIMETIME!!!!! Far From It!!!

the stress is already out of me from this horror they call linux and ubuntu!

AAAAAhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OK, See you in a week. I have experienced it myself, I get mad at Ubuntu, or GNU/Linux in General, but I always come back. Mostly because XP/Vista feels so alien to me after using Ubuntu, where Ubuntu feels warm and home like. XP/Vista feels like a Corperate device. Big difference.

Oh and no problems here, its nearly ready to go.

Eluzion
March 15th, 2007, 03:55 AM
I've been using linux off and on for the past few years. Ubuntu has been, by far, the most user friendly and stable distro I've ever used. I tried a couple times to use linux as my primary distro, but there's always some sort of compatibility issue or software I need that has me turning back to Windows. Currently I'm running Vista Ultimate and just now installing Herd 5 through VMWare to check out what's new (have been away from Ubuntu for a few months).

I don't think Ubuntu, or linux, has reached the point to consider it ready for your average joe user. Sure, it's very easy to setup and not very difficult to navigate around in, but when it comes to installing drivers and software it can be a real headache. I consider myself pretty computer savy (been building and messing with them for quite some time), but installing stuff in linux can really be a pain.

Why? Because there's ten different ways to do it, and you never really know which way is the "best" without reading through fourteen different threads that are 100+ posts long. ;) Apt-get, syn package manager, easybuntu, etc., which way do you install it? I think if Ubuntu was able to create a program that not only installs new software and drivers, but manages currently installed software and drivers (add/remove/repair), in such a way is very user friendly and automated, your average joe user would have a much easier time using linux. Especially with installing video drivers. If we were able to simply download the driver and let it run through an automated process that installs, configures necessary files, and so forth, it would be much easier than trying to find a tutorial on the forums that explains how to install it.

Anyways, just my opinion. Keep up the great work!

darrenm
March 15th, 2007, 09:58 AM
I find you never need anything but Synaptic. I'm more of a power user too so users with simpler needs will find everything they need there which really is just one unified install system. It installs drivers, software, makes changes. Anything else you need.

Brunellus
March 15th, 2007, 03:06 PM
I've been using linux off and on for the past few years. Ubuntu has been, by far, the most user friendly and stable distro I've ever used. I tried a couple times to use linux as my primary distro, but there's always some sort of compatibility issue or software I need that has me turning back to Windows. Currently I'm running Vista Ultimate and just now installing Herd 5 through VMWare to check out what's new (have been away from Ubuntu for a few months).

I don't think Ubuntu, or linux, has reached the point to consider it ready for your average joe user. Sure, it's very easy to setup and not very difficult to navigate around in, but when it comes to installing drivers and software it can be a real headache. I consider myself pretty computer savy (been building and messing with them for quite some time), but installing stuff in linux can really be a pain.

Why? Because there's ten different ways to do it, and you never really know which way is the "best" without reading through fourteen different threads that are 100+ posts long. ;) Apt-get, syn package manager, easybuntu, etc., which way do you install it? I think if Ubuntu was able to create a program that not only installs new software and drivers, but manages currently installed software and drivers (add/remove/repair), in such a way is very user friendly and automated, your average joe user would have a much easier time using linux. Especially with installing video drivers. If we were able to simply download the driver and let it run through an automated process that installs, configures necessary files, and so forth, it would be much easier than trying to find a tutorial on the forums that explains how to install it.

Anyways, just my opinion. Keep up the great work!
average joe doesn't set his computer up by himself any more than he changes his own oil in his car, or rebuilds his bicycle's bottom bracket bearing races.

He either deals with what his corporate sysadmin has given him, or he accepts the hardware the OEM has given him. "Enthusiasts" make up a relatively small proportion of the user population, even if they account for the sale of high-margin aftermarket parts.

Sui Nim Tao
March 16th, 2007, 01:19 PM
Why? Because there's ten different ways to do it, and you never really know which way is the "best" without reading through fourteen different threads that are 100+ posts long. ;) Apt-get, syn package manager, easybuntu, etc., which way do you install it? I think if Ubuntu was able to create a program that not only installs new software and drivers, but manages currently installed software and drivers (add/remove/repair), in such a way is very user friendly and automated, your average joe user would have a much easier time using linux. Especially with installing video drivers. If we were able to simply download the driver and let it run through an automated process that installs, configures necessary files, and so forth, it would be much easier than trying to find a tutorial on the forums that explains how to install it.


So this is different to windows how exactly, if i recall windows has about 5 diferent ways of doing everything,

install programs

1, Start menu, control panel, add or remove programs, add new programs.

2, Start menu, run, browse for setup file.

3, Start menu, my computer, browse for file, double click.

etc.....

drivers are worse, i can think of at least 5 or 6 ways to load a driver using there own install, using windows install, going to device manager and update driver or add new driver, searching for hardware etc....................

the only difference is, and i'll keep saying it, you are familiar to windows so it seems more natural their way, step back and really take a good look, you do things several different ways on windows too and don't even know it, because you have become accustomed to it.

I computer illiterate newbie would find it more difficult to take to windows than to linux having had no previous experience of any desktop environment.

windows isn't by any means a benchmark to aspire to, it lacks alot and fails in alot of areas.

It is only more popular through marketing due to it demanding a profit to continue exhisting, and because it's popular and everyone uses it, they expect it to be the norm and what things should be, anything else must be wrong as this is what i know.

A good example here.....

Trains

Our current track system is flawed in it's usefullness, trains can only travel so fast along it. This is down to the width between the rails, the trains go to fast they tip over round corners limiting there speed.

At the time the rail system came around there was 2 track widths in operation, one got fazed out (which happened to be wider) and the more popular carried on as the norm, (i think the size now came from the distance between wheels on carts, so they didn't roll over horse crap when the horses did one).

Now the problem starts when they want to increase the speed of the trains, they have to make them bank round corners to counter act the forces due to a narrow track.

Had they stayed with the original wider track then there would have been no issue today with regards to speed of trains, they would run faster, be more stable on the tracks and ease congestion. But how much would it cost to change all that track.

My big point,

If you have more than one choice, the popular one isn't allways the right one, as illustrated above.

Windows is not more commun due to it being the correct way to do things, it is more commun due to popularity and clever marketing, the only problem with popularity is that you have to stay on the ball to keep it. Just like the train tracks, all these people have windows skills and to change the skills for millions of people would be hard, even if it's the right way to go.

I'll certainly try to do my bit.

Paul

ZeroWing
March 16th, 2007, 06:43 PM
Well, I have to say that Ubuntu had definately taught me how unstable a free O.S could be.

First, GRUB told me that it couldn't detect Ubuntu's partition(Error 17).

Then, Ubuntu's partition is magically erased.

After that, the Windows XP MBR was scrubbed. Why? I'm guessing Ubuntu.

So, now that I've got Windows back up, can anyone tell me if there is a stable Linux OS somewhere.

Thanks,
Disgruntled ex-ubuntu user.

Najand
March 16th, 2007, 06:59 PM
Hmm, I am so sorry for the disturbance ubuntu might make for you.

But first of all, grub is not an Ubuntu Project. It is a GNU project and almost all new distributions of Linux is using it as their boot loader because of its stability if you compare it with old LILO project.

Secondly, it is obvious if your /boot partition (probably which was inside your ubuntu root partition) has been erased, the grub which is located in "/boot" cannot be reloaded. Try to find the real reason why your Ubuntu partition has been removed. Maybe you did it yourself; who know?

Thirdly, at least grub gives you the opportunity to boot to your windows partition too... Try to recover your windows and see how it erases your grub in your MBR and overwrite its own bootloader in it, without asking anything about your other OSes.

I think you should try some other distributions (like Fedora, Suse, etc) to see how stable/unstable a distribution of Linux can be. Actually, Most of Fedora, Suse, etc are also using Grub too... So it cannot help you... LOL

After all if you didn't like them too, Linux is not for you. Better to stick with some close-source projects like Microsoft Windows/Mac OS/Unix/etc....

ComplexNumber
March 16th, 2007, 07:08 PM
Well, I have to say that Ubuntu had definately taught me how unstable a free O.S could be.

First, GRUB told me that it couldn't detect Ubuntu's partition(Error 17).

Then, Ubuntu's partition is magically erased.

After that, the Windows XP MBR was scrubbed. Why? I'm guessing Ubuntu.

So, now that I've got Windows back up, can anyone tell me if there is a stable Linux OS somewhere.

Thanks,
Disgruntled ex-ubuntu user.
its not ubuntu that is the problem - its probably your hardware.


there is no such thing as an XP MBR. when you install ubuntu, it adds all the operating systems on your harddrive to the boot list and overwrites the MBR on the first sector of your harddrive.

when you installed ubuntu, where did you tell it to place the boot loader?

mahy
March 16th, 2007, 07:11 PM
Look, Ubuntu and GRUB work flawlessly for many people. I do feel sorry for you, coz it's a blocking problem...

You can try other Linux distros if you want to, the simplest are probably Suse, Mepis and Fedora. There are also some distros that don't use GRUB, such as Zenwalk, Slackware and Vector (not sure about the last one). I'd recommend Zenwalk.

May the Force be with you!

Tomosaur
March 16th, 2007, 07:30 PM
Well, I have to say that Ubuntu had definately taught me how unstable a free O.S could be.

First, GRUB told me that it couldn't detect Ubuntu's partition(Error 17).

Then, Ubuntu's partition is magically erased.

After that, the Windows XP MBR was scrubbed. Why? I'm guessing Ubuntu.

So, now that I've got Windows back up, can anyone tell me if there is a stable Linux OS somewhere.

Thanks,
Disgruntled ex-ubuntu user.

Yes, here (http://www.ubuntu.com).

Oh wait...

Zzl1xndd
March 16th, 2007, 07:55 PM
If you are having Grub problems then you are likely gonna have problems with a number of Distro's as they use Grub. But some e suggested Distros that do not but as was pointed out the alternative is no better.

Also comments like "Well, I have to say that Ubuntu had definately taught me how unstable a free O.S could be" are just gonna get you flamed as it did. and Secondly I work as a Tech and I can say the Windows has taught me how unstable an Over priced OS can be.

ZeroWing
March 16th, 2007, 09:58 PM
Also comments like "Well, I have to say that Ubuntu had definately taught me how unstable a free O.S could be" are just gonna get you flamed as it did. and Secondly I work as a Tech and I can say the Windows has taught me how unstable an Over priced OS can be.

Heh... Did I say that Windows was stable? I just reinstalled it because I know how it works.

Just lost my temper. I'll try to reinstall Xubuntu again later.

And it's not a hardware problem. I think it might have been a power outage that caused the problem.

Sorry for the outburst all. :oops:

peabody
March 17th, 2007, 02:32 AM
Well, I have to say that Ubuntu had definately taught me how unstable a free O.S could be.

First, GRUB told me that it couldn't detect Ubuntu's partition(Error 17).

Then, Ubuntu's partition is magically erased.

After that, the Windows XP MBR was scrubbed. Why? I'm guessing Ubuntu.

So, now that I've got Windows back up, can anyone tell me if there is a stable Linux OS somewhere.

Thanks,
Disgruntled ex-ubuntu user.

I hate to say dual-booting is a bad idea, because so many people do it, but the vast majority of people I've seen have problems, especially related to grub, are under dual-boot setups.

I know for some people there isn't any other option, but I've found that for real stability, mixing Win and Nix is always a bad idea.

Skia_42
March 17th, 2007, 02:42 AM
It takes more work but in the end a stable dual-boot is a great option for those who still need windows.

rsambuca
March 17th, 2007, 03:15 AM
...but I've found that for real stability, mixing Win and Nix is always a bad idea.
I disagree completely. Why is dual booting synonymous with instability? Many people have difficulties setting it up (although most do not have any difficulties), but once set up, both systems are as stable or unstable as they normally would be.

euler_fan
March 17th, 2007, 05:27 AM
I will admit I messed up my first attempt at dual boot, but after that it has gone flawlessly on two different machines. The older of the two did crash and is now cannot boot from the hard drive, but I suspect drive failure not OS or grub failure (something about a grinding noise when the disk is spinning . . . )

In terms of it being handy, just today I had to give a presentation, and of course there was a projector involved, so I booted over to windows just to ensure that my lappy could talk to the projector. I think that might be the first time it came in handy. I guess once every couple of months isn't so bad ;)

steven8
March 17th, 2007, 05:44 AM
Okay, I will talk of 'readiness', for what that means. I just recently received the new parts for my new computer, and I put it together. New everything. Biostar Motherboard, AMD 64bit Sempron, SB Sound card Geforce FX 5200, new DVD-RW, and floppy all in a new mATX case. All went together nice and smooth. The motherboard has a VIA chipset, and said in the user manual that it is compatibile with Windows 98se, ME, 2000, NT, XP.

So, I put it all together and swapped my HDD from my old computer to this new one. It 'had' an XP / Ubuntu Dapper dual boot. Dapper started just fine. Handled the new hardware thrown at it without flinching. Sound, video, Mobo, CPU. Runs like a dream.

Windows crashed horribly without starting. I guess it wasn't ready, so I wiped it. I no longer have a dual boot.

:)

FLPCGuy
March 17th, 2007, 05:46 PM
I'm no Windows sysadmin so I don't profess to know everything you are talking about. But I have to question a few things:


But all of the restrictive stuff is surely far better served in the Nix world with proper permissions, thin client booting of read-only NFS mounts? Limited use by all is built-in to Linux from the very start and Windows is only just catching up. Root can allow users to do as little or as much as they want on any machine.


Licenses aren't that much of an issue with mainly open-source software. I don't get how accessing the network from different machines would stop users from accessing apps and files they need in the first place?


To myself and everyone I've ever worked with, Exchange is the big joke of the email world. We used to be able to bring the Exchange server down by sending a mass mail to a distribution group with some external users. It would take a few hours before mails started catching up. No-one in their right mind ever operates Exchange on an external connection, it's only ever meant to be a groupware server. It does shared calendaring and shared contacts which are priceless things for the enterprise and something Linux is really lacking.

Can you explain what you mean by intermediate testing/control?


Not really an issue for Linux and desktops that are set up so users can't fiddle.


But also not really very widespread concerns. Businesses will take on Windows servers thinking they will use all the functionality that a salesman has FAB'd to them and only ever end up using group policies incorrectly, then just giving everyone admin privileges anyway.

The only widespread show-stopper is Exchange functionality. And the worrying thing is that there doesn't seem to be anything coming through to solve this. You can share Calendars through Thunderbird using webdav and share contacts via LDAP but its fiddly and scares I.T. managers who think (foolishly) that the Windows servers will be a walk in the park.

Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. As pointed out by others, the Thin Client approach solves many of the issues I mentioned. But I've always been a proponent of giving users as much power and control on their desktop as they can handle or as I can afford to give them. The whole point of the PC over dumb terminals was to take computing out of the glass room and put it in the hands of the minimally trained end user. Granted, modern corporate Windows desktops don't leave users much control and many just run Terminal Services to server-based computing shells taking us full circle back to the 60's.

In the early days of Windows the end user gained power and control of his/her own computing. Eventually, millions more computer users were added to the mix, lowering the 'average' skill level dramatically. The resulting necessary Windows design changes made us all Menu Slaves. Corporate computing faced the challenges of managing all that desktop capability. Corporate software licensing is a very big deal with hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees or fines at stake (not to mention my job). Just the time and cost of deploying software is an issue in large networks with limited support staffs. Windows has far more granular permission capabilities (thanks to NTFS) than Linux and Group Policies add an extra two levels of policy management (local and network) that can implement widespread or overriding changes.

For over a decade Windows has slowly provided solutions to most of the issues I listed previously further separating it from the Thin Client experience. Eventually, Linux may have to cover this same ground to provide a comparable computing environment.

Backing up and restoring user files is a time consuming but essential admin. function. Even networked Windows users typically have local storage capability which causes concerns about data backup. Redirecting local directories to server shares helps, but the best solution is the 30-year-old DEC technology acquired by M$ called Shadow Copy. It periodically copies user files to alternate storage (Linux can do that) plus it gives users an easy dialog to restore previous versions of their files without administrator assistance.

Intermediate testing was explained well. It is amazing how some combinations of Windows software just aren't compatible (probably because of the various inconsistent changes to the MS Foundation Class Libraries over the years). Patches and driver updates are pretty solid these days, but can still cause problems. Because Windows has a registry, configurations and drivers can be backed up and restored automatically. This can be crucial in a large networked business when a driver update suddenly brings down most of your computers. Windows is currently a lot better at recovering from this scenario than Linux.

I hope this explains some of my listed concerns. Network admin priorities and goals are quite different from the end users'. Windows still has a long way to go before it optimizes both the end user and administrator's experience. But it does have over a decade of improvements that are largely outside the scope of Linux development.

FLPCGuy
March 17th, 2007, 06:01 PM
Okay, I will talk of 'readiness', for what that means. I just recently received the new parts for my new computer, and I put it together. New everything. Biostar Motherboard, AMD 64bit Sempron, SB Sound card Geforce FX 5200, new DVD-RW, and floppy all in a new mATX case. All went together nice and smooth. The motherboard has a VIA chipset, and said in the user manual that it is compatibile with Windows 98se, ME, 2000, NT, XP.

So, I put it all together and swapped my HDD from my old computer to this new one. It 'had' an XP / Ubuntu Dapper dual boot. Dapper started just fine. Handled the new hardware thrown at it without flinching. Sound, video, Mobo, CPU. Runs like a dream.

Windows crashed horribly without starting. I guess it wasn't ready, so I wiped it. I no longer have a dual boot.

:)
Probably just as well. Unless you are one of those RARE users who purchased a Full Retail [boxed] Version of XP ($199) you are not allowed to move XP to a new motherboard, at least not without permission from M$ tech support. OEM installs of XP never qualify for the level of hardware change you made. I doubt even an upgrade license would qualify under these conditions either (only the HD remains). Vista Upgrade licenses are treated like XP OEM licenses and cannot be moved to a new base system.

While you could have re-run the XP install CD replacing video and other key drivers while maintaining your personal XP settings and software installed, you can't do so legally without buying another XP license. Stick with Open Source software that is freely distributable if you can.

koenn
March 17th, 2007, 06:41 PM
[QUOTE=FLPCGuy;2312371 ... [/QUOTE]
Your reasoning is logical but builds on wrong assumptions. You view the features of a windows environment as assets. Seen from a different angle, they're just fixes and workarounds for design flaws in Windows.
Granted, for a home user, "to take computing out of the glass room and put it in the hands of the minimally trained end user" is a step forward. It's there that Windows comes from. For use in a corporate environment, networking needed to be added, then file sharing, then user authentication, then file system security and other security related policies, then tools to limit users' capabilities to overcome security, and in the end a nice user-friendly GUI all-encompassing framework for the network admin to manage it all : Active Directory.

Some examples :
create sollutions to deal with backups of local data and user-initiated restore without admin intervention -- or simply store all data remotely and mount remote filesystems locally ?

ceate sollutions for software deployement to 1000 pc's all over the place -- or install an application once and run it of the server in a terminal session ?

"Windows has far more granular permission capabilities (thanks to NTFS) than Linux and Group Policies add an extra two levels of policy management (local and network) that can implement widespread or overriding changes." ; in other words, additional complexity to the environment -- or cover all of that with a unified mechanism : read/write/execute permissions to cover file/folder access as well as the rights to run applications.

The purpose of a 'business" computing environment is not to empower (or even please) the end-user. It's to provide a computing environment for the employees to be productive in. Microsoft introdusing serverbased compuing ("terminal server") could, in that perspective, be seen as trying to catch up with the Unix world - especially for those cases where the pletora of remote management sollutions - active directory as well as the shiploads of third party tools and management frameworks, just prove to much of a headache - or to expensive in terms of TCO.

FLPCGuy
March 17th, 2007, 07:19 PM
Your reasoning is logical but builds on wrong assumptions. You view the features of a windows environment as assets. Seen from a different angle, they're just fixes and workarounds for design flaws in Windows.
Granted, for a home user, "to take computing out of the glass room and put it in the hands of the minimally trained end user" is a step forward. It's there that Windows comes from. For use in a corporate environment, networking needed to be added, then file sharing, then user authentication, then file system security and other security related policies, then tools to limit users' capabilities to overcome security, and in the end a nice user-friendly GUI all-encompassing framework for the network admin to manage it all : Active Directory.

Some examples :
create sollutions to deal with backups of local data and user-initiated restore without admin intervention -- or simply store all data remotely and mount remote filesystems locally ?

ceate sollutions for software deployement to 1000 pc's all over the place -- or install an application once and run it of the server in a terminal session ?

"Windows has far more granular permission capabilities (thanks to NTFS) than Linux and Group Policies add an extra two levels of policy management (local and network) that can implement widespread or overriding changes." ; in other words, additional complexity to the environment -- or cover all of that with a unified mechanism : read/write/execute permissions to cover file/folder access as well as the rights to run applications.

The purpose of a 'business" computing environment is not to empower (or even please) the end-user. It's to provide a computing environment for the employees to be productive in. Microsoft introdusing serverbased compuing ("terminal server") could, in that perspective, be seen as trying to catch up with the Unix world - especially for those cases where the pletora of remote management sollutions - active directory as well as the shiploads of third party tools and management frameworks, just prove to much of a headache - or to expensive in terms of TCO.

I can't argue with a system that has worked well in corporate networks for over 40 years. Windows is not Thin Client just as Linux is not Windows. They each have different priorities and approaches to particular challenges. I don't know that Windows will ever be as efficient, secure, or simple as Linux/UNIX. But the sheer number of networked Windows desktops in operation attest to some feeling of personal power or flexibility that is still missing from the dumb terminal experience. Both approaches are valid and both still need improvement to meet everyones expectations.

I guess I'm just trying to say that the powerful, personal Linux desktop experience won't fit well in a corporate network environment without years of improvements dealing with the same sorts of issues corporate Windows has faced and at least partially resolved. Perhaps, by the time desktop Linux adds all that capability it will be just as hopelessly complex as Windows.

darrenm
March 17th, 2007, 09:06 PM
I can't argue with a system that has worked well in corporate networks for over 40 years. Windows is not Thin Client just as Linux is not Windows. They each have different priorities and approaches to particular challenges. I don't know that Windows will ever be as efficient, secure, or simple as Linux/UNIX. But the sheer number of networked Windows desktops in operation attest to some feeling of personal power or flexibility that is still missing from the dumb terminal experience. Both approaches are valid and both still need improvement to meet everyones expectations.

I guess I'm just trying to say that the powerful, personal Linux desktop experience won't fit well in a corporate network environment without years of improvements dealing with the same sorts of issues corporate Windows has faced and at least partially resolved. Perhaps, by the time desktop Linux adds all that capability it will be just as hopelessly complex as Windows.

I respect your obvious knowledge of Windows enterprise related stuff but I do think you are underestimating just what is achievable in a thin-client set-up. There are loads of ways to do it using things like VNC, standard X, etc. which will give as much or as little of a functional desktop as the administrator would like. As you say the Windows solutions are just that - solutions to problems that have arisen due to the way Windows works. Just because there aren't direct replacements in the *nix world doesn't mean they should be there.

m.musashi
March 17th, 2007, 10:30 PM
I respect your obvious knowledge of Windows enterprise related stuff but I do think you are underestimating just what is achievable in a thin-client set-up. There are loads of ways to do it using things like VNC, standard X, etc. which will give as much or as little of a functional desktop as the administrator would like. As you say the Windows solutions are just that - solutions to problems that have arisen due to the way Windows works. Just because there aren't direct replacements in the *nix world doesn't mean they should be there.

Allow me to repeat myself. We have a thin-client lab. It works great. Users can do everything they need to and then some. The only glitch so far is that shockwave is not available for Linux. From an admin perspective it is the least troublesome lab. Only one computer (the server) ever needs to be worked on. All maintenance can be done remotely. There is good separation between users and admin. Users can't do anything (that we are aware of) to muck up the system. And it saves us a ton of money. Personally, I think the thin-client model is the future. Perhaps not in the corporate world but even there I think it has a place. How many office workers really need a stand alone fat-client? Yes, if you run high end apps but most (or at least a great many) don't do that. I work in education so for us this is an even better solution. The hard part is transitioning users and it is turning out to not be all that hard :).

cowlip
March 18th, 2007, 02:57 AM
http://www.osnews.com/story.php/17505/Ubuntu-Feisty-Fawn-Desktop-Linux-Matured/
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=386871


During my 8 years of Linux on and off usage I have tried more distros than I have chocolate bars. Each one of my previous encounters meant that I had to spend at least 2 days configuring before I have a desktop that I was somewhat comfortable with. With Ubuntu Feisty Fawn's latest test beta --for the first time ever-- this was not the case. I was up and running with all the niceties I wanted within 2 hours.

I received my brand new laptop this past Monday with Vista Home Basic in it. I spent 2 hours with Vista, I decided that I didn't like much of its usability, and I immediately burned an Ubuntu preview ISO and installed it on my shiny new DELL Inspiron 640m. There was a problem though and X11 would crash on load -- and the graphical safe mode would not work either (confirmed bug). The 915resolution hack was not needed for my Intel graphics card, but I needed to have more information for my laptop's LCD. By manually entering the vertical and horizontal sync in the xorg.conf file it fixed the problem for my 1440x900 screen and I was able to load the LiveCD and finally install Feisty on the hard drive.
...

This was on OSNews.
A lot of the comments focus on incorrect widescreen resolution ( https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg/+bug/67369 ) and X crashing, but overall she seemed to think that the other good stuff made up for the manual config drawbacks.

Still I have to say, I knind of have to agree with this person's comment (http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=17505&comment_id=222337) from OSNews, of course considering it's an alpha. It's just that a lot of this stuff seems to depend on upstream projects:
"I needed to have more information for my laptop's LCD. By manually entering the vertical and horizontal sync in the xorg.conf file it fixed the problem for my 1440x900 screen and I was able to load the LiveCD and finally install Feisty on the hard drive."

"Compiz is now part of Ubuntu although turned off by default because it still has major problems."

"installing new apps is now a breeze. Although Ubuntu has 5 GUI applications that are package-related and that can create some confusion..."

"I manually installed libdvdcss because this is not included in the restricted list and Totem now refuses to playback any DVD if you try to load it via Totem's menu"

"Please note that Ubuntu mistakenly loads the BCM43xx driver for my Broadcomm/Dell 1390 WiFi card and that resulted in a lot of errors in the terminal by the system (missing firmware?). I had to blacklist the BCM43xx driver before I could successfully install ndiswrapper and finally get WiFi support. [Update: I installed the bcm43xx-cutter package and installed the required firmware and WiFi now works with the open source driver which unfortunately is not stable (I lose connection after a minute or so)"

"Another fine moment is that Ubuntu supports suspend-to-RAM (sleep) on my laptop out of the box, although I noticed that once every 5-6 wake ups some stuff can get screwy (e.g. X dying, network card not responding etc)"

"There were very few the times that I had to pop to the terminal to carry out an important action."

"Some of these problems include: the i810 driver would not playback HD video (Xv crashing) if I would not add the Cachelines option in the Xorg.conf, copy/paste from Firefox does not work if Firefox is then closed down (this was fixed last year for Gnome apps, time to fix Firefox too), Gossip does not connect to anything else but jabber.org (e.g. no gtalk), digicam's RAW files open by default with the wrong applications (only Cinepaint and UFRaw can handle these but they are not set as defaults for the RAW mime types), I have bad AC97 "scratchy" sound with most SDL games (e.g. Neverball, LTris etc), Bluetooth would not work at all here if you don't run "hcitool hci0 reset" before loading the service, there is no option in the gnome-mouse pref panel to disable tap-to-click on touchpads (gsynaptics is really buggy so I prefer to not mess with it), HAL is not built with libsmbios and so the new Gnome "brightness applet" does not support any DELL laptop, FFmpeg is built without AAC (so it's not possible to encode videos for my cellphone) etc. However, these are not problems that I can't live with or not find workarounds."


Excuse me, folks, but this is a litany of screwed up stuff nobody should have to tolerate on ANY OS - even Windows.

Why is it that the distros STILL do not have a database of every commonly used monitor with an effective method of detecting - or EVEN ASKING THE USER - to identify the monitor and installing the correct horizontal and vertical sync? I mean, I can understand it that my old ViewSonic 6 isn't detected properly in every distro, but the latest monitors? NOBODY can get the proper HV sync figures into the hardware database? C'mon!

Why does Ubuntu need FIVE package management programs? That is just ridiculous...I thought Fedora Core 5 was braindead for having TWO! What, we can't get ONE program to function properly, so we cover that up by installing FOUR MORE?

WHY is Totem, the least competent media player, the default? Why is Kaffeine demoted when it obviously can play encrypted DVDs without hosing itself just because libdvdcss is installed?

Why are so many obviously crippled and not ready for primetime packages being included in so many distros - like Compiz? Is it just because of "featuritis" inherited from Microsoft?

And we see that Wi-Fi and laptop hibernation STILL do not work properly? What is this, rocket science? Linux finally got the printer problem licked so that now you just select the printer and everything works with CUPS. Why can't the distros get a straightforward, automated way of installing WiFi support? It's not even a driver issue, since the drivers (if only through NDISWrapper) are there. It's the setup problem again - nothing is detected, the user isn't asked, so nothing works! This is ridiculous!

Copy/Paste from Firefox doesn't work if Firefox is closed down? Is there something about the notion of a CLIPBOARD that people at Ubuntu or GNOME or KDE just don't GET?

This is not a positive review. This is a litany of incompetence that demonstrates why xBuntu is not a competent distro. Sure, there are bugs in ALL the distros - and for the same reasons - lack of manpower or the will to do adequate testing as opposed to slapping in new "features" because they're "cool", like 3D eye candy - while allowing basics like installation and software update to be loaded with bugs.

I definitely will not be upgrading my Kubuntu to the next release. Instead, I will make the relatively painful effort to switch back to Mandriva 2007 or perhaps PCLinuxOS - whose developers apparently spend more time testing and tweaking to make sure things work than they do eye candy - and yet, look, PCLinuxOS even LOOKS COOL!

FyreBrand
March 18th, 2007, 07:40 AM
Ubuntu has one package management system. It just has different front ends.

Here's a silly analogy:
Why is there more than one graphic application? I have Picasa and it can organize my photos and graphcis and touch them up, but then there's Fireworks, GIMP, Photoshop, Adobe PhotoAlbum, Digikam, and oh it's just ridiculous that there are so many. It just confuses the end user.

The author does have valid criticisms. It would be nice if monitor detection worked better. Linux is a different world and if someone doesn't come in with that perspective it's just not going to work right for them. On all the systems I see at work each hardware configuration has it's own quirks whether I install Linux on it or Windows.

I'm not going to argue every little point that author wrote, but what you have here is a Windows user that wants things to work just like Windows. If you don't see it read through it again. This is someone who has tinkered with Linux for 8 years but wasn't interested enough to learn it and use it. They didn't like what Vista had to offer so they tried Ubuntu looking for a more feature rich Vista replacement. This brings us back to the beginning. It's just not Windows.

beefcurry
March 18th, 2007, 02:10 PM
COLOUR MANAGEMENT?! HELLO?!

Artists, Photographers, the WORLD has been crying out for some decent colour management on Linux! Mac has it, Windows has it, We dont Therefore we can not solve Bug #1 without this! (personal opinion as normal users dont really care, but professionals do). Distro's has always left Colour management back down for the programs such as digikam. However that dosnt solve anything. Ubuntu should have a standardized, built in colour management system! maybe that will attract more artists, designers, photographers to use linux since they are nearly all use Mac or Windows. Linux is MORE then something for CODE. We can also make it for artists, but without colour management it will make the world alot harder for everyone.

FLPCGuy
March 18th, 2007, 02:24 PM
Allow me to repeat myself. We have a thin-client lab. It works great. Users can do everything they need to and then some. The only glitch so far is that shockwave is not available for Linux. From an admin perspective it is the least troublesome lab. Only one computer (the server) ever needs to be worked on. All maintenance can be done remotely. There is good separation between users and admin. Users can't do anything (that we are aware of) to muck up the system. And it saves us a ton of money. Personally, I think the thin-client model is the future. Perhaps not in the corporate world but even there I think it has a place. How many office workers really need a stand alone fat-client? Yes, if you run high end apps but most (or at least a great many) don't do that. I work in education so for us this is an even better solution. The hard part is transitioning users and it is turning out to not be all that hard :).
It is interesting that you see thin client as more applicable to education. Traditionally, the thin client environment has been mostly used in the corporate world. I've worked with thin client systems in both and had more success in the corporate world where data entry was the primary function.

I helped setup a school using Citrix thin clients but was disappointed with the results. Bandwidth was always the bottleneck in the university and public school environments where I have worked which made thin client use very frustrating. I was also surprised at how much load just 25 GUI client desktops put on a server. In the corporate world, I was used to 400 or more minimal terminals running from a UNIX server that compared poorly to my current PC. With the increasing demand for more high resolution graphics in computing, the thin client design seems ill suited to the high def, full-motion future. I've heard the predictions about the return of thin clients for years, but I just haven't seen it happen.

Sure, web-based email and even office apps may be the way to go for convenience and access from multiple locations, but there is a lot of computing (HD, 3D) that still works better on a fat client and always will. I don't see Vista adding any new capability to the fat-client, but I don't see a lot of new bandwidth being added anymore either. Until we have a surplus of cheap high bandwidth, I believe the thin client advantage will be limited to simple applications and lab-like environments.

BLTicklemonster
March 18th, 2007, 02:45 PM
Heh... Did I say that Windows was stable? I just reinstalled it because I know how it works.

Just lost my temper. I'll try to reinstall Xubuntu again later.

And it's not a hardware problem. I think it might have been a power outage that caused the problem.

Sorry for the outburst all. :oops:

So you reinstall, then sit and wait for.....


MAIN SCREEN TURN ON


right?


tell me you do, or you'll simply have to change your name, that's all there is to it. lol

m.musashi
March 18th, 2007, 04:38 PM
It is interesting that you see thin client as more applicable to education. Traditionally, the thin client environment has been mostly used in the corporate world. I've worked with thin client systems in both and had more success in the corporate world where data entry was the primary function.

I helped setup a school using Citrix thin clients but was disappointed with the results. Bandwidth was always the bottleneck in the university and public school environments where I have worked which made thin client use very frustrating. I was also surprised at how much load just 25 GUI client desktops put on a server. In the corporate world, I was used to 400 or more minimal terminals running from a UNIX server that compared poorly to my current PC. With the increasing demand for more high resolution graphics in computing, the thin client design seems ill suited to the high def, full-motion future. I've heard the predictions about the return of thin clients for years, but I just haven't seen it happen.

Sure, web-based email and even office apps may be the way to go for convenience and access from multiple locations, but there is a lot of computing (HD, 3D) that still works better on a fat client and always will. I don't see Vista adding any new capability to the fat-client, but I don't see a lot of new bandwidth being added anymore either. Until we have a surplus of cheap high bandwidth, I believe the thin client advantage will be limited to simple applications and lab-like environments.
I see it as a solution in k-12 because there is so little power needed for 95% of what students use a computer for: internet and word processing. In fact, with sites like Google Docs, the web is fast becoming the only tool students need. A good browser and a fat pipe and all is well. We have a pretty small pipe in our district but the thin-clients really aren't any slower for most sites. Sure, high graphic content does slow down a bit but I'd rather see us save 30 grand on a typical lab and invest that money in a fatter pipe or additional labs. Plus it's hard to ignore the environmental impact - or lack there of. Be reclaiming computers destined for the dumpster we are at least prolonging the useful life of computer as well as the consumption of new resources. I think the thin client is also applicable to the corporate world but I don't have much experience there. However, if workers are doing primarily simple tasks - like office apps - then they too could benefit.

FLPCGuy
March 18th, 2007, 04:58 PM
I see it as a solution in k-12 because there is so little power needed for 95% of what students use a computer for: internet and word processing. In fact, with sites like Google Docs, the web is fast becoming the only tool students need. A good browser and a fat pipe and all is well. We have a pretty small pipe in our district but the thin-clients really aren't any slower for most sites. Sure, high graphic content does slow down a bit but I'd rather see us save 30 grand on a typical lab and invest that money in a fatter pipe or additional labs. Plus it's hard to ignore the environmental impact - or lack there of. Be reclaiming computers destined for the dumpster we are at least prolonging the useful life of computer as well as the consumption of new resources. I think the thin client is also applicable to the corporate world but I don't have much experience there. However, if workers are doing primarily simple tasks - like office apps - then they too could benefit.
The last school I worked for had severely limited Internet bandwidth due to eRate only funding a single T-1 for the entire district (17 schools). That made web-based computing a truly painful experience.

m.musashi
March 18th, 2007, 07:08 PM
The last school I worked for had severely limited Internet bandwidth due to eRate only funding a single T-1 for the entire district (17 schools). That made web-based computing a truly painful experience.

We have 3 T1 and half as many schools. It can still be slow even with fat-clients. It's not so much the LAN speed as it is the WAN that is the problem.

TDK800
March 18th, 2007, 10:25 PM
hey, just checking back on the responses and lol guys, take it easy on the coffee :)

I was just posting my honest opinions and calling them BS through a corporate environment argument is just.... BS :)

heh, I couldn't even start imagining anyone would counter my firewall GUI suggestion with a corporate firewall policy argument. I was just saying things can be better, and instead of getting defensive and hostile and calling me a troll, how about doing something about making them better?

I'd gladly contribute coders into the effort of e.g. having the gaim-encryption plugin included with GAIM by default or the add-on that lets one change font size and icon size, etc.
Just point me at the right direction, instead of calling me a BS'er.

I've been managing RHEL 4 servers mostly and using "su" instead of sudo and it let me log in as root. Just saying it's annoying to learn/change all the small things.

Firewall GUI interface because as I said we'd like to install Ubuntu into notebooks, which during lunch may not stay behind corporate firewall, if we'd have one for personell - I couldn't even imagine limiting people with a firewall policy, they can surf whatever they want.

The theme installer IS important, hell if I couldn't get a theme installed in the first four drag'n'drop attempts... I concluded it just didn't work.

Camoon guys, You have to admit, atleast some of my suggestions were good, and you'd like to see them in Ubuntu too ;)

Just point me to a page where it lists people I can work together with to improve GAIM, Theme Installer, Package Updater, Firewall GUI, etc. RHEL4 had bugzilla.redhat.com where you could select the product you're having a problem with and submit the bug and it would also give you the e-mails of people managing that product/app... does ubuntu have something like that too?

Thanks

Frak
March 18th, 2007, 10:52 PM
hey, just checking back on the responses and lol guys, take it easy on the coffee :)

I don't know what your talking about ;)


I was just posting my honest opinions and calling them BS through a corporate environment argument is just.... BS :)

Sorry, its just that some of your opinions, well, you just wouldn't find in a corporate, "Uptime and Productivity is most important" enviroment.


heh, I couldn't even start imagining anyone would counter my firewall GUI suggestion with a corporate firewall policy argument. I was just saying things can be better, and instead of getting defensive and hostile and calling me a troll, how about doing something about making them better?

How about a dedicated firewall, running Firestarter, see, best of both worlds :lolflag:


I'd gladly contribute coders into the effort of e.g. having the gaim-encryption plugin included with GAIM by default or the add-on that lets one change font size and icon size, etc.
Just point me at the right direction, instead of calling me a BS'er.

I like the the encryption already built in to GAIM, its sturdy, and for the fonts and what-not, I thought those were already part of GAIM?


I've been managing RHEL 4 servers mostly and using "su" instead of sudo and it let me log in as root. Just saying it's annoying to learn/change all the small things.

Applications->Terminal->sudo su and as long as you don't close the terminal, you'll have super user powers.


Firewall GUI interface because as I said we'd like to install Ubuntu into notebooks, which during lunch may not stay behind corporate firewall, if we'd have one for personell - I couldn't even imagine limiting people with a firewall policy, they can surf whatever they want.

Install Firestarter

sudo aptitude install firestarter
And IPTables is already built into the kernel.


The theme installer IS important, hell if I couldn't get a theme installed in the first four drag'n'drop attempts... I concluded it just didn't work.

System->Preferences->Theme


Camoon guys, You have to admit, atleast some of my suggestions were good, and you'd like to see them in Ubuntu too ;)

Yes they are good, but their also already built into Ubuntu.


Just point me to a page where it lists people I can work together with to improve GAIM, Theme Installer, Package Updater, Firewall GUI, etc. RHEL4 had bugzilla.redhat.com where you could select the product you're having a problem with and submit the bug and it would also give you the e-mails of people managing that product/app... does ubuntu have something like that too?

https://bugs.launchpad.net/

koenn
March 18th, 2007, 11:44 PM
I haven't actually called you or your opinions BS, byt you seem to be asking for it :

... and we have decided to unfortunately having to buy Windows Vistas for a LOT of money :( for personal and corporate notebooks, because switching to Ubuntu would by my estimates decrease our company's productivity by 10 times (1000%) ... .


I was just posting my honest opinions and calling them BS through a corporate environment argument is just.... BS :)
So, you enumerate some flaws in Ubuntu from a corporate point of view, yet when others take that same corporate perspective to illustrate the flaws in your arguments, that's just ... BS :) ? Cheap.




Just point me to a page where it lists people I can work together with to improve - Oh, so you are interested in sollutions ! Your OP said
Here are my TOP problems/annoyances with Ubuntu, though most would be solvable, the effort for us is just not worth it.


And then, slightly nit-picking on my part :

I have 17 years of total computer use experience in every imaginable area on windows and around 4-5 years of linux server management experience through SSH.

Firewall GUI interface because as I said we'd like to install Ubuntu into notebooks, which during lunch may not stay behind corporate firewall, if we'd have one for personell
All that experience and you're not able to set up a firewall (iptables or one of the GUI frontends that exist for it) on a notebook ? hm.
Or is that because you want end-users to to be able to turn of the firewall during their lunch break, when all crackers, skriptkiddies and malicious web sites should to be on a break as well ?
This is where the words B S came to mind.

cowlip
March 19th, 2007, 01:30 AM
hey, just checking back on the responses and lol guys, take it easy on the coffee :)

I was just posting my honest opinions and calling them BS through a corporate environment argument is just.... BS :)

heh, I couldn't even start imagining anyone would counter my firewall GUI suggestion with a corporate firewall policy argument. I was just saying things can be better, and instead of getting defensive and hostile and calling me a troll, how about doing something about making them better?

I'd gladly contribute coders into the effort of e.g. having the gaim-encryption plugin included with GAIM by default or the add-on that lets one change font size and icon size, etc.
Just point me at the right direction, instead of calling me a BS'er.

I've been managing RHEL 4 servers mostly and using "su" instead of sudo and it let me log in as root. Just saying it's annoying to learn/change all the small things.

Firewall GUI interface because as I said we'd like to install Ubuntu into notebooks, which during lunch may not stay behind corporate firewall, if we'd have one for personell - I couldn't even imagine limiting people with a firewall policy, they can surf whatever they want.

The theme installer IS important, hell if I couldn't get a theme installed in the first four drag'n'drop attempts... I concluded it just didn't work.


Just point me to a page where it lists people I can work together with to improve GAIM, Theme Installer, Package Updater, Firewall GUI, etc. RHEL4 had bugzilla.redhat.com where you could select the product you're having a problem with and submit the bug and it would also give you the e-mails of people managing that product/app... does ubuntu have something like that too?

Thanks

you can add packages like a firewall GUI (eg firestarter), gaim encryption etc. to the live cd, just copy it to your hard drive, apt-get, and burn the CD again. There's an art.gnome.org theme installer built in Ruby that seems to work better than downloading files individually too, which I think is called gnome-art. Or Ubuntu supports kickstart or pre-seeding...

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/LiveCDCustomization http://reconstructor.aperantis.com/ (for a gui to do it)

As for a bugzilla, Ubuntu moved to Launchpad/malone (launchpad.net) a while ago, in Breezy Badger IIRC.

beefcurry
March 19th, 2007, 10:12 AM
You know, Ubuntu does have alot of flaws, as well as alot of good points. People like TDK800 are problely too .........erm, inept with computers he couldnt get it to work the way he wanted. The only problems I ever had was driver problems and that is universal to nearly all linux distro's.

Its a free product, you can use it if you want. No one is forcing you (im talking to you TDK800 :D). This is not Linux Elitism, it just, what I would call replying to someone with a windows elitist slant.

TheBigJimbrowski
March 19th, 2007, 07:26 PM
PLEASE LISTEN TO ROGER!!!

:D

He speaks the voice of wisdom, and I wholeheartedly agree with him.

As a user, (i.e. not a programmer) I hate the CLI, I don't see why I should have to do it at all, its a hangover, it only appeals to nerds, get rid of it. Would it seem reasonable to you to ask people to learn a new language to use their car or toaster? No, of course not, but that's effectively what you're asking when you suggest using the 'CLI' to a noob.

Some people have said, "its best to teach people to do things the right way"; errrm, what's the right way? If it works for you, then that's the right way, surely? If you spend several unsuccessful hours with the CLI typing in various combinations of typos from the forums, then I would tend to think that's the WRONG way.

What's so wrong with point and click anyway? It isn't that which is wrong with Windows, in fact, is it exactly that which is right with Windows, i.e. why it is so popular; not marketing, usability. Do you really believe that something for free is not competing with something which is 300+bucks simply because of marketing? If Linux was useable we would all be using it.

Beware of Linux fanboys and girls' attitude of 'use the CLI or be damned because its better' snobbery, as this is the second most hateful thing in Linux, which will definitely scare people away, and indeed has already done that to me.

So, this, I am afraid, is why I have given up with Ubuntu/Linux (for now - after 3 months of not having a stable PC to use at all, I am now back to my nice clean install of Windows, which just works the way it should, and I didn't have to write a single piece of abstract code or open up Command Line even once to get it there). I simply do not have time for it; remember, not everyone considers their PC as their hobby, for the vast majority it is a TOOL and no more than that. Most of us aren't bored of life once our computer is working properly, and we find editing config files incredibly boring and confusing.

Sorry to go on, but this is important, I am a great fan of the IDEA of Linux, the Ubuntu philosophy and open Source in general, and I would love to use a different operating system than Windows, but I tried this one that's supposed to be for Human Beings and I can't. Yes, it (kind of) does the basic stuff straight from install (sometimes), occasionally it will even keep its settings between reboots, and sometimes the sound will work, and you can just get on and use it. After setting the necessary user permissions and making accounts and editing configuration files manually and......do you get my point? And I'm no computer noob either, just never seen Linux before.

Nobody uses a vanilla system for ever, so you have to make expansion and installation easy and above all reliable, and the 'Synaptic Package Manager' goes some way to achieving that, but this is another abstract name which means nothing to a noob... it should really be called the 'software installation manager' or something else which actually describes what it does - why make things even harder for us?.

BUT-The straw that broke the camels back for me was when I had just set it up the way I wanted after months of hair pulling, I noticed the little update icon was there, so i clicked it, it downloaded the updates as normal - i had no idea what they were as the descriptions were typically Linuxy and unrecognisable as anything human - I just trusted the updating system, the system rebooted, I had yet another thingy in my GRUB loader list and then the X failed to load and I was right back to square one, with the prospect of manually rewriting my xorg.conf AGAIN. Shhhessh, no way Jose, not again, I'm uninstalling.

Its this which keeps Linux for the Nerds, and more specifically, not human beings, and until you realise it Linux will always remain to have niche appeal, and Windows will continue to dominate the OS market, and that's a terrible shame because it is entirely unnecessary.

aysiu
March 19th, 2007, 08:43 PM
It isn't that which is wrong with Windows, in fact, is it exactly that which is right with Windows, i.e. why it is so popular; not marketing, usability. Do you really believe that something for free is not competing with something which is 300+bucks simply because of marketing? If Linux was useable we would all be using it. Care to back up that claim?

Why don't you interview ten random people off the street, ask them what OS they use, and ask them why they don't use Linux?

How many do you think will answer...

A) What's an operating system?
B) Windows. What's Linux?
C) Windows. Can I use Linux? I thought that was just for servers
D) Windows. I've tried Linux, but it just lacks usability. When I went to Dell's website, they gave me an easy choice on my new computer to put Windows or Linux on it, and I naturally chose Windows, since it's easier to use.

If you were right, most people would answer D)

As we all know, D) isn't possible, as almost all computers sold by Dell are preinstalled with Windows and only "nerds" know about the ones that aren't. And almost all Windows users who've tried Linux have had to download, install, and configure Linux themselves. They did not buy Linux preinstalled and preconfigured. And almost all Windows users do not install and configure Windows.


the 'Synaptic Package Manager' goes some way to achieving that, but this is another abstract name which means nothing to a noob... it should really be called the 'software installation manager' or something else which actually describes what it does - why make things even harder for us?. First of all, there's Add/Remove Programs. I don't know how the name can get any clearer than that. Once you go to Add/Remove Programs, you can add or remove whatever you want, and then you click on Advanced, which will take you to Synaptic. Is this any worse than Windows? Where you can go to Control Panel > Add or Remove Applications > Add New Programs and then be told
To add a program from a CD-ROM or floppy disk, click CD or Floppy and
To add new Windows features, device drivers, and system updates over the Internet, click Windows Update You don't really use Add or Remove Programs in Windows to add programs--only to remove them. Windows users somehow know (Does Windows tell you to do this? No) the easiest way to get software is to Google around for a file to download, double-click the file, and then click Next a bunch of times? How did they know to do this?

Windows isn't easier than Linux. The other day at work, I heard a co-worker complaining to technology that her computer just randomly froze. The tech support guy played around with her computer a bit, forced a reboot, and then just wrote it off as "Just one of those Windows quirks, I guess." That's what it always boils down to. Doesn't work in Windows? "Just a quirk." "Just an annoyance I have to deal with." Doesn't work in Linux? "Oh, Linux is just for nerds." "Linux is too hard to use."

bodhi.zazen
March 19th, 2007, 08:51 PM
PLEASE LISTEN TO ROGER!!!

:D

He speaks the voice of wisdom, and I wholeheartedly agree with him.

<clipped>



Moved from the Beginners Team Forum

Who is Roger anyway ?

TheBigJimbrowski: No one is forcing you to use the command line. If you are happy with an anlternate OS so be it. Many new users feel as you do, but IMO, you should expect to learn a few things when you try a new OS.

You need to evaluate the whole process. If you boot a new OS you should get a feel for it and as youself ~ Do I like this OS enough to spend some time learning how to use it ? If the answer is yes, expect to spend a few weeks/months/years learning ... If not, stay with the old one. Either way no big deal. go with your preference.

Ranting, however, only makes you seem unreasonable.

As (if) you gain as much experience with Ubuntu as you have with an alternate OS I am sure you will become more comfortable, and appreciative of the CLI .

If you would like assistance with Ubuntu we are happy to help.

Next time, however, please read the sticky. It is clearly stated NO OS BASHING in the Beginners Team Forum and that includes Ubuntu.

Note to mods ~ Not sure if this is the best place to have moved this post ? If not, let me know your preference for such things in the future.

aysiu
March 19th, 2007, 08:59 PM
Note to mods ~ Not sure if this is the best place to have moved this post ? If not, let me know your preference for such things in the future. This is the perfect place. Thanks for moving the post, bodhi.zazen.

DoctorMO
March 19th, 2007, 09:14 PM
As a user, (i.e. not a programmer) I hate the CLI, I don't see why I should have to do it at all, its a hangover, it only appeals to nerds, get rid of it. Would it seem reasonable to you to ask people to learn a new language to use their car or toaster? No, of course not, but that's effectively what you're asking when you suggest using the 'CLI' to a noob.

No! don't get rid of the CLI! I use it all the time and it's much better than a GUI for tasks that require thought as opposed to mindless button bashing. Besides a toaster makes toast a computer does a bzillion things. I happen to know people who program up their toaster to linux scripts (cli) because they find the controls on the toaster to be too hard to use.

aysiu
March 19th, 2007, 09:20 PM
I don't really see the point in arguing about CLI v. GUI. (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=167547&highlight=cli+gui)

In the ideal world, we have both for every task, and we pretty much do (with a handful of exceptions (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1840857#post1840857)).

If you prefer the GUI, use the GUI. If you prefer CLI, use CLI. You can switch back and forth between the two also, as suits your fancy.

Lord Illidan
March 19th, 2007, 09:26 PM
As we all know, D) isn't possible, as almost all computers sold by Dell are preinstalled with Windows and only "nerds" know about the ones that aren't. And almost all Windows users who've tried Linux have had to download, install, and configure Linux themselves. They did not buy Linux preinstalled and preconfigured. And almost all Windows users do not install and configure Windows.

First of all, there's Add/Remove Programs. I don't know how the name can get any clearer than that. Once you go to Add/Remove Programs, you can add or remove whatever you want, and then you click on Advanced, which will take you to Synaptic. Is this any worse than Windows? Where you can go to Control Panel > Add or Remove Applications > Add New Programs and then be told and You don't really use Add or Remove Programs in Windows to add programs--only to remove them. Windows users somehow know (Does Windows tell you to do this? No) the easiest way to get software is to Google around for a file to download, double-click the file, and then click Next a bunch of times? How did they know to do this?


But what if I need to get software which isn't on the repositories? When I downloaded my first .tar.gz file, I stared at it for hours. I couldn't understand what all the files were. I was like, WTF does CONFIGURE mean? And even though the repos are vast, there are always files which aren't on the repos nor in .deb format.


Windows isn't easier than Linux. The other day at work, I heard a co-worker complaining to technology that her computer just randomly froze. The tech support guy played around with her computer a bit, forced a reboot, and then just wrote it off as "Just one of those Windows quirks, I guess." That's what it always boils down to. Doesn't work in Windows? "Just a quirk." "Just an annoyance I have to deal with." Doesn't work in Linux? "Oh, Linux is just for nerds." "Linux is too hard to use."

That's true. I now have a wireless mouse which worked in XP but stopped working for no reason whatsoever..but it works like a charm in Linux...who knows?

Frak
March 19th, 2007, 09:30 PM
Its this which keeps Linux for the Nerds, and more specifically, not human beings, and until you realise it Linux will always remain to have niche appeal, and Windows will continue to dominate the OS market, and that's a terrible shame because it is entirely unnecessary.

Yes of course, I'm not human, I'm a Deer.
I should have known :rolleyes:

How long did it take you to fully understand how to use Windows, no time, I beg to differ. From when you were born till just when you started using Linux, you probably either used Mac or Windows, or probably something else.

But you must respect, LINUX IS NOT WINDOWS, AND WILL NEVER BE WINDOWS, DEAL WITH IT!!!

And I would hold my tongue on the "Windows will always dominate the OS market", Apple Macs and Linux Manufacturers are gaining use every day. Especially since Vista came out. In fact one of the top manufacturers of Cement, Holcim, down here in Ada, OK, just installed Xandros Business edition on client computers, Ubuntu on Laptops, and Novel on the Servers. :guitar:

I've been using Linux for a couple of years now, and alot of things come naturally now
Just takes time and effort :guitar:

aysiu
March 19th, 2007, 09:31 PM
But what if I need to get software which isn't on the repositories? When I downloaded my first .tar.gz file, I stared at it for hours. I couldn't understand what all the files were. I was like, WTF does CONFIGURE mean? And even though the repos are vast, there are always files which aren't on the repos nor in .deb format. Let's put it more precisely then:

For the vast majority of software that ordinary users need, software installation is easier and more intuitive in Ubuntu than in Windows.

For some relatively obscure software, software installation is easier and more intuitive in Windows than in Ubuntu.

Personally, I don't use any software outside the repos, but I know different users have different needs.