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

hellomeow
June 28th, 2007, 07:34 AM
Linux is not Windows

Yes, and it took me a while to understand this. I can sympathize, actually, with the new users that don't quite get it. Why would we not want to pick a fight with Windows in a race to become the most popular operating system? But most Linux users would agree that this is not the point.

Fenryr
June 28th, 2007, 07:36 AM
Linux is not Windows, :)

Yep, and a FORD ain't a BENTLEY, either...But they're BOTH designed for basically the same JOB...

Gnub_Daemon
June 28th, 2007, 07:37 AM
Yeah...the only reason it isn't desktop ready for me is because my desktop isn't ready for it. And do you know why? It's an '02 Dell with 256mb ram and 18gig HD...and get this...it's full of Windows. Perhaps I should upgrade to a better desktop and then install Ubuntu. Heck, I already made the complete conversion from Vista to Feisty on my new laptop. I love it. The only thing that doesn't work is the on-board card reader, and I'm not the only one having issues with it. All in all, though, I prefer the Ubuntu experience to the Windows experience. There is still a lot I have yet to learn, but it gets easier every time.

karellen
June 28th, 2007, 07:45 AM
Yes, and it took me a while to understand this. I can sympathize, actually, with the new users that don't quite get it. Why would we not want to pick a fight with Windows in a race to become the most popular operating system? But most Linux users would agree that this is not the point.

point or no point, the fact is that without a decent desktop market share Linux will remain a hobbist business (with its fans) but without hardware makers support (the magical word - drivers). and this support comes with market share. and here the vicious circle ends. hardware makers don't bother to release linux drivers because it has an insignificant market share (on desktops at least) and linux has that small market share because (in 80% of cases) of the lack of original drivers designed specifically for it. the rest, 20%, I would assign to its software ecosystem
solutions for breaking the circle?

karellen
June 28th, 2007, 07:47 AM
Yep, and a FORD ain't a BENTLEY, either...But they're BOTH designed for basically the same JOB...

well....it wasn't exactly a benign thing what I wrote, there is a high degree of irony among those lines...;)

bapoumba
June 28th, 2007, 09:45 AM
We used to have Testimonials section but I guess it works better this way. I say that you should pitch that idea in the forum discussion section where the mods hang out :)


I must say that I don-t like the fact all threads that somehow relate to this get merged to this thread.

We still have Ubuntu Testimonials and Experiences (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=103) which has been renamed some time ago to include both positive and negative feedback regarding Ubuntu as a whole.

As far as this super-mega-Desktop Readiness-thread, staff usually talk before merging a thread there. The idea being that we do not have 10+ threads all discussing the same subject. It gets difficult (for staff and members alike) to follow a discussion when scattered in different places.
If anyone considers that a merging was inappropriate, please open a thread in "Forum Feedback and Help (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=48)".

bapoumba
June 28th, 2007, 10:05 AM
One additional thread merged: "There is only one reason why people think Ubuntu isn't desktop ready".

dbee
June 28th, 2007, 10:31 AM
So I was trying to logon to the wireless network at a local mall. I switched the networking widget to roaming and tried to change interfaces.

Now my system is completely kaput. All I get is ...


Could not find information on interface eth1:avahi in /proc/net/dev

I've been using linux ubuntu for a number of years now, and I work professionally as a web dev. I've been through the /etc/network/interfaces, I've brought down the interface and back up again, and I've tried to reconnect to dhcp. I've also tried to get some help on #ubuntu on three different occassions and I've have a post on the wireless and networking section of this forum that has so far gone unanswered.

My question is this ... if a reasonably experienced linux user like myself, is capable of completely TOTALLING my system by simply switching a value on a GNOME widget to such an extent that multiple IRC posts and an ubuntuforums post isn't capable of even receiving an intelligible answer. Then how is it exactly that Linux is supposed to be ready for general rollout ?

Does Dell know what they've let themselves in for ?

ukripper
June 28th, 2007, 10:51 AM
And it is Windows. It is that simple.

Why do people make this so complicated? Why do have a 700+ page thread with pointless debates? The answer is clear: it is Windows, and only it.

When a user won't use the command line, who do we have to blame? Windows, naturally one of the only operating systems with use of such an interface seemingly discouraged. You know, its almost as if Microsoft wants to make users use an operating system just like theirs.

"I want to play Counter Strike!" exclaims a hopeless new Ubuntu user. "Ubuntu doesn't have something exactly like it, so I will run away and cry!!!!!"

Some drivers aren't available for Ubuntu. Why? Because companies don't care to release them, not, at least, when 90% of their market is using Windows!

"Ggharfjxljfkl;jgl;djsf;ajklaj!!" cries Mr. Office Professional, after finding out that (insert minor feature here) is not available for OpenOffice. Judging by the ensuing reckless head-pounding and office property smashing, it does not appear that Ubuntu would be quite ideal. Where did Mr. O. Professional find (insert minor feature here)? He found it in Windows, silly.

"I must have (insert media player or multimedia codecs here) so that I can listen to Senses Fail!!" asserts the typical high-schooler. He can't listen to Senses Fail (or He Is Legend, for that matter) because all of the songs he downloaded off Lime Wire weren't in Ogg format. And why would he downloaded them in any formats besides the quality options available, such as WMA? Windows doesn't play Ogg by default....

"Even worse," the high-schooler continues, "my pink and black Myspace profile looks so horrible! It looked fine in IE after I dumped those 250 lines of CSS or whatever that is I copied from freecoolmyspacelayouts.free.fr into my About Me section!!!"

When an unfortunate new user gets ready to vent his frustrations on the Ubuntu message boards to let everyone know about all of Ubuntu's problems (which are there because he or she says they are, darn it!), he will take the word "Windows" and complexify it to create numerous paragraphs. Let's take a look at the the-reasons-why-you-think-you-hate-Ubuntu-and-the-reasons-why-you-REALLY-hate-Ubuntu table:

______________

Reason: "The command line is too hard! T_T"
Real reason: "In Windows, I am used to not using the command line."

Reason: "My hardware isn't detected!!"
Real reason: "I decided to buy hardware only for Windows. Silly me."

Reason: "I don't wanna edit text files!!"
Real reason: "I have not learned to use text editors or edit text files, because I have used Windows."

Reason: "I want to play games."
Real reason: "I want to play games on Ubuntu, but I can't because some overwhelming percentage of the Earth's population uses Windows. So I will get a Wii and get over myself now, if I want to continue to use Linux, that is."
______________


It is clear. Every reason you don't like Ubuntu can be drawn back to that essential obstacle, Windows. All posts about this matter which don't simply contain the word "Windows" are redundant.

I am the same way. Because there are these small, little things that are missing in Linux, I continue to use the very operating system I grew up with and have banished Debian to my server, where it awaits faithfully for my Filezilla sftp connection request.

So please, stop wasting valuable disk space on the Ubuntu servers by keeping the Linux Desktop Readiness Thread. Delete, and subsequently shred it, to ensure that it can never be recovered somehow. Then make a sticky containing EXACTLY these words:

______________

Here is the reason why you don't like Ubuntu

windows
______________


and end it there. As a matter of fact, it is time to deprecate even the concept of messing around. From now on, the Ubuntu mods must screen all comments being made right as they are being typed. Upon the slightest evidence that post might involve criticism of Ubuntu, forcefully redirect the newly enlightened user's browser to the post above. "OOOOHHHH!!!" the newly enlightened user will exclaim as he drops to his knees. "Now, I finally understand."


Grow up mate, if you are still growing I don't blame you.

Enverex
June 28th, 2007, 10:53 AM
Actually I think he completely hit the nail on the head.

DC@DR
June 28th, 2007, 11:00 AM
For me, with the arrival of Feisty, Ubuntu is MORE READY for the desktop than ever. Everything works almost out of the box for my laptop, and with just a little tweaking, it's just got perfect. I don't need much of commercial apps, I just need development tools which FOSS community provides plenty of, such as Java, Eclipse, Blender, Code::Blocks...In short, Ubuntu rocks, just works, and I'm happy/ feeling lucky :-D

wjp.reg
June 28th, 2007, 12:58 PM
sounds like this thread should be moved to "Testimonials and Experiences", as there was no technical question declared.

If this happened to me I would do a fresh reinstall, but without rewriting my /home partition and being content to reinstall whatever software I needed. Otherwise you could restore from a previous backup. You do make backups?

good luck!

ukripper
June 28th, 2007, 01:01 PM
Actually I think he completely hit the nail on the head.

Do you think so ? I think he has lost a plot by being childish.

enopepsoo
June 28th, 2007, 01:07 PM
Clearly the lack of photoshop etc. is all that holds people back.

KrazyPenguin
June 28th, 2007, 01:54 PM
So I was trying to logon to the wireless network at a local mall. I switched the networking widget to roaming and tried to change interfaces.

Now my system is completely kaput. All I get is ...

I've been using linux ubuntu for a number of years now, and I work professionally as a web dev. I've been through the /etc/network/interfaces, I've brought down the interface and back up again, and I've tried to reconnect to dhcp. I've also tried to get some help on #ubuntu on three different occassions and I've have a post on the wireless and networking section of this forum that has so far gone unanswered.

My question is this ... if a reasonably experienced linux user like myself, is capable of completely TOTALLING my system by simply switching a value on a GNOME widget to such an extent that multiple IRC posts and an ubuntuforums post isn't capable of even receiving an intelligible answer. Then how is it exactly that Linux is supposed to be ready for general rollout ?

Does Dell know what they've let themselves in for ?

An experienced computer user would make backups.
Notice I didn't say Linux or Mac or Dose cuz the OS doesn't matter.
Maybe reisntall /proc/net/dev as root.
I don't backup my system files, just my /home files and other stuff, cuz I am a
DISTRO HOPPER :shock:


Does Dell know what they've let themselves in for ?

Apparently the demand was high for Ubuntu Dell computers, it caused a back log and
Dell is going to be offering more computer choices with Ubuntu on them.

;-)

bodhi.zazen
June 28th, 2007, 02:29 PM
So I was trying to logon to the wireless network at a local mall. I switched the networking widget to roaming and tried to change interfaces.

Now my system is completely kaput. All I get is ...

I've been using linux ubuntu for a number of years now, and I work professionally as a web dev. I've been through the /etc/network/interfaces, I've brought down the interface and back up again, and I've tried to reconnect to dhcp. I've also tried to get some help on #ubuntu on three different occassions and I've have a post on the wireless and networking section of this forum that has so far gone unanswered.

My question is this ... if a reasonably experienced linux user like myself, is capable of completely TOTALLING my system by simply switching a value on a GNOME widget to such an extent that multiple IRC posts and an ubuntuforums post isn't capable of even receiving an intelligible answer. Then how is it exactly that Linux is supposed to be ready for general rollout ?

Does Dell know what they've let themselves in for ?

Yea, it is frustrating when these things happen, no doubt !

You have my sympathy, I hope you are able to fix the problem quickly.

If you are interested, you should file a bug report :

https://bugs.launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+bugs

That is the fastest way to a fix :)

vexorian
June 28th, 2007, 04:10 PM
It is not.

Most windows users don't know what photoshop is, and never used it.

vexorian
June 28th, 2007, 04:13 PM
Grow up mate, if you are still growing I don't blame you.
Perhaps he didn't put it in the kindest way possible but he seems to be totally right...

darrenm
June 28th, 2007, 05:29 PM
Big post just basically saying that Microsoft have become a giant through monopolistic and unfair business practices. We all knew that already ;)

Feba
June 28th, 2007, 05:56 PM
Most windows users don't know what photoshop is, and never used it.

Most people that don't even own computers know what photoshop is...

vexorian
June 28th, 2007, 06:35 PM
Most people that don't even own computers know what photoshop is...
But that doesn't really matter market share-wise ...

Seriously I am sick of the premise that every PC user is somekind of professional artist thus they need photoshop.

Fenryr
June 28th, 2007, 07:07 PM
[QUOTESeriously I am sick of the premise that every PC user is somekind of professional artist thus they need photoshop.[/QUOTE]



Actually, I DO use graphics programs quite a bit just as an AMATEUR photographer...I've used tons of'em, and I've found over my years that, even in the computer world, FORM tends to follow FUNCTION...There are certain things we demand of ALL graphics/photoediting software, regardless of WHO wrote it, and learning to use a 'new' one is usually just a matter of learning which drawer they keep the SPOONS in...You KNOW they're gonna be in there SOMEWHERE, after all...To use the 'car' analogy yet again, it's designed to be a CAR...You START with four wheels, a motor, and the ability to STEER the bugger...After THAT, it's anybody's game, one guy makes a Gremlin, one guy makes a Maserati...As long as it gets the job done, the REST is just extraneous noise...
Ya just gotta find a sound ya LIKE, and dance to it...*g*

julian67
June 28th, 2007, 07:45 PM
So I was trying to logon to the wireless network at a local mall. I switched the networking widget to roaming and tried to change interfaces.

Now my system is completely kaput. All I get is ...

I've been using linux ubuntu for a number of years now, and I work professionally as a web dev. I've been through the /etc/network/interfaces, I've brought down the interface and back up again, and I've tried to reconnect to dhcp. I've also tried to get some help on #ubuntu on three different occassions and I've have a post on the wireless and networking section of this forum that has so far gone unanswered.

My question is this ... if a reasonably experienced linux user like myself, is capable of completely TOTALLING my system by simply switching a value on a GNOME widget to such an extent that multiple IRC posts and an ubuntuforums post isn't capable of even receiving an intelligible answer. Then how is it exactly that Linux is supposed to be ready for general rollout ?

Does Dell know what they've let themselves in for ?

when I used Windows XP I was once forced to re-install the OS because the tcp stack was corrupted beyond repair for reasons I never found out. I couldn't find any solution. I have had a few problems using openSuse and then Ubuntu but I have never been forced to re-install the entire OS, though once I had to remove Gnome DE and all config and re-install the desktop, but that was my own fault for installing unstable development release Gnome stuff, and anyway in the meantime I could just carry on by using KDE which was unaffected :D I think you can encounter a terrible bug (or do something dumb like I did) using any OS but at least with GNU/Linux you are allowed to know how it works, you can modify almost any part of it even with a simple text editor, and you are more likely to find informed people who can help. And if you are forced to re-install it will only take a couple of hours to have a fully functional OS and all your apps and configs as before, compared to most of a day to get XP or 2000 installed with drivers and a reasonable selection of apps. Of course being an experienced user you will be able to restore from a recent back up and this whole situation will only have cost you maybe an hour of your time and some frustration ;)

Fenryr
June 28th, 2007, 07:53 PM
BUGGER! That damn THREAD FOLDING gremlin's been here again! *l*

julian67
June 28th, 2007, 07:54 PM
re: photoshop

it was a big one for me too, but I don't miss it any more...kind of ironic as now that I have a PC with dual core and 1.5GB of high speed RAM I finally have a system powerful enough to run Adobe Bridge and Photoshop at the same time :lolflag: But anyone who needs graphics apps for photo manipulation has everything they need in Gimp combined either with Gthumb or F-Spot (Gimp for real editing, the others for thumbnailing and collection managing). There may well be other areas of graphics where commercial applications are technically better, I don't know, but for photos Gnu/Linux is an completely viable alternative to Mac and Windows.

PatrickMay16
June 28th, 2007, 08:03 PM
Read this immediately!

Linux will not be user friendly until you can run out of free space in your home folder and still be able to log in to GNOME or KDE. I can't stress that enough. I've come across many new users left high and dry when they've run out of space in their home folder, can't log in to gnome or KDE, and don't know enough to log in at a tty and free up space by deleting stuff using the command line.

Yarnosh
June 28th, 2007, 08:11 PM
I've shown my Ubuntu laptop to a number of Apple users and they've expressed no desire to change or even try it. Why? B/c they don't want to deal with command line, or search for workarounds to support their peripherals. This isn't a Windows thing. It's a "who has the broadest range of support" thing. And before you begin to harp on how many Linux users there are in the Linux community that can offer help, it pales in comparison to the MS user base. Furthermore, walk into any computer store and randomly pick 20 items (e.g., printers, video cards, NIC's, digital cameras, etc) and see how many of those install with Linux and MS that "DON'T" require some workaround or jury-rigging. MS will come out ahead. That's the issue. Why does computing have to be some arduous task?

But this is still a problem (compared to a Mac) even on Windows. Random devices do not necessarily Just Work on Windows. I've experienced any number of problems with "random" hardware in Windows. Most recently, Windows started booting into generic, unaccelerated VGA mode because it thinks there is some resource conflict between the AGP driver and the NVIDIA driver. There isn't. Linux/X runs the video card just fine. I can "fix" it sometimes by reinstalling the NVIDIA driver and reboot.. but if I have to reboot again after i've got it working, there is a good chance that the resource conflict will come back.

I'm a PC user of nearly 20 years. A Linux user for about 12 of those. But I recently bought a MacBook Pro.. and I'm never going back. That PC with the video problems in Windows (but not LInux) just sits idle now. And if I never have to look at another BIOS POST screen or choose from shelves and shelves of "random" hardware again, I'll be a happy man.

In my opinion, Linux has nothign to offer a Mac user. With OS X I get the full unix commandline suite (with macports, fink, etc) plus a vastly superior GUI. Face it, Linux desktops are geared towards wooing Windows users... people who already have a PC and arn't willing to invest in Apple hardware. People who are are tired of malware and viruses.

If anything, I see more people like me converting from Linux to OS X.. not the other way around.

-yarnosh

julian67
June 28th, 2007, 08:21 PM
In my opinion, Linux has nothign to offer a Mac user.

Freedom and spellcheckers. That would be the big one, then there is the fact you don't have to pay for the OS or upgrades (or a premium for the intel PC based hardware). Also you can consider the vast range of software and the choice of many different desktop environments. People seem to miss this point but not everybody actually is enamoured with the Mac style, or their proprietary ethos, or the need to wear GAP polo necks or blue denim shirts over white t shirts. Also plenty of people are happy to keep using their existing hardware in preference to handing their money to yet another company that couldn't care less about them.

PatrickMay16
June 28th, 2007, 08:25 PM
In my opinion, Linux has nothign to offer a Mac user.

That's pretty true... Linux as a desktop OS can't hold a candle to Mac OS X.

ukripper
June 28th, 2007, 08:34 PM
Mac has GUI no doubt but it is sluggish no doubt of that either. If I were ever choose anything other than linux I would choose XP over Mac. Mac is a rip off

Yarnosh
June 28th, 2007, 08:57 PM
Freedom and spellcheckers.

Do you mean freedom from spellcheckers? Because last I checked the Mac apps I use have spellchecking built in. Apparently "spellcheckers" isn't in my spellchecker, BTW. :-)


That would be the big one, then there is the fact you don't have to pay for the OS or upgrades (or a premium for the intel PC based hardware).

Oh, i'd never actually BUY OS X. As for the premium for the hardware... well I'd say you get what you pay for. The $1800 i plopped down on this MacBook Pro was well spent. You'd have to spend about the same to get a comparable PC laptop.


Also you can consider the vast range of software and the choice of many different desktop environments.

After 20 years on the PC, I say all that choice is overrated.. and is actually the source of a lot of frustrations and incompatabilities. As well as a lot of legacy crap.


People seem to miss this point but not everybody actually is enamoured with the Mac style, or their proprietary ethos, or the need to wear GAP polo necks or blue denim shirts over white t shirts.

Ok, well you just lost any credibility with me with that last comment. What a thoughtless and baseless stereotype.


Also plenty of people are happy to keep using their existing hardware in preference to handing their money to yet another company that couldn't care less about them.

Look, I never said Macs were for everyone. My point is that if you've already decided to invest in a Mac, you've probably done so for a reason and are very unlikely to want to switch to PC (or run Linux on the Mac, tho some do). Whereas PCs are more of a "default" platform you don't so much choose as sort of fall into. I never really chose to use the PC for 20 years. It is just what was readily available and relatively inexpensive. This goes double for Windows. Windows is just the default. Few people explicitly choose it unless they must run Windows software for some reason. And very many actually find it extremely frustrating. Most Mac users, on the other hand, actually enjoy using their computer.

10 years ago I would made many of the same arguments against the Mac. In fact, I did. But the gap is closing. Macs are a LOT less expensive these days compared to PCs than they finally use a real OS with the full unix "experience" behind the scenes.

Yeah, I drank the Apple kool-aid, but I did so by choice, not by default.

-yarnosh

fyllekajan
June 28th, 2007, 09:02 PM
If one size fits all then maybe mac has a superior GUI. In Linux at least you have flexibility and customizability. There are however some nice apps available for mac with no Linux equivalent yet. If every user and their grandma needs to be a sysadmin, then perhaps Linux has nothing to offer a Mac user. And yes, there are many great artists using mac for sure, but most of them users are just wannabes who would use anything they think makes them look cool. That's where Linux really has nothing to offer Mac users ;)

Yarnosh
June 28th, 2007, 09:35 PM
If one size fits all then maybe mac has a superior GUI. In Linux at least you have flexibility and customizability. There are however some nice apps available for mac with no Linux equivalent yet. If every user and their grandma needs to be a sysadmin, then perhaps Linux has nothing to offer a Mac user. And yes, there are many great artists using mac for sure, but most of them users are just wannabes who would use anything they think makes them look cool. That's where Linux really has nothing to offer Mac users ;)

But one size does not fit all. And I don't think that Apple is under such an illusion. Macs are clearly a niche product.

Personally, i LIKE the singular vision and integration that the Mac provides. But I also understand why one woudl want more options. It is just that I'm tired of piecing together working PCs, tinkering with printer drivers, customizing interfaces, mixing KDE apps with GNOME apps, with Motif apps (ok, I'm dating myself here).

Anyway, my real point wasn't to play the Mac fanboi. I just wanted to point out that you're not likely to get many Mac users converting to Ubuntu if only because Mac users (like me) have chosen the Mac for a reason. You're going to have much better luck converting Windows users who are often very frustrated with worrying about viruses and malware and such. And who aren't necessarily using Windows by choice.

-matthew

fyllekajan
June 28th, 2007, 09:45 PM
That is true, then again I have no interest in converting anyone to anything. But yes there are plenty of those around here too.

julian67
June 28th, 2007, 09:47 PM
Do you mean freedom from spellcheckers? Because last I checked the Mac apps I use have spellchecking built in. Apparently "spellcheckers" isn't in my spellchecker, BTW. :-)



No I was being facetious, as there was a blindingly obvious spelling error in the statement asserting the superiority of the Mac.



Oh, i'd never actually BUY OS X. As for the premium for the hardware... well I'd say you get what you pay for. The $1800 i plopped down on this MacBook Pro was well spent. You'd have to spend about the same to get a comparable PC laptop.

If you run a Mac you already paid for it. The OS isn't free (in either sense) and is not available at zero price. You paid money for it. That formed part of the price of the Mac computer. The fact that you didn't get an itemised receipt doesn't mean that any part of the package, hardware or software, was free of charge. I'm surprised anybody would even think this might be the case.




After 20 years on the PC, I say all that choice is overrated.. and is actually the source of a lot of frustrations and incompatabilities. As well as a lot of legacy crap.

That's your opinion and nothing more. There are always going to be a handful of outstanding applications in every area that tend to be the default choice, but some people have specific preferences or needs and then a broader choice becomes important.



Ok, well you just lost any credibility with me with that last comment. What a thoughtless and baseless stereotype.

I was just kidding. It wasn't supposed to be a negotiating point. Relax.




Look, I never said Macs were for everyone.

Actually you said "Linux has nothing to offer a mac user" which is not the case as we all know that people use Mac hardware but run GNU/Linux. The hardware is superb and quiet and powerful but not everyone wants to run Apple's OS. If you had said that Linux has nothing to offer you then I couldn't dispute that, but merely accept it as your preference.



My point is that if you've already decided to invest in a Mac, you've probably done so for a reason and are very unlikely to want to switch to PC (or run Linux on the Mac, tho some do). Whereas PCs are more of a "default" platform you don't so much choose as sort of fall into. I never really chose to use the PC for 20 years. It is just what was readily available and relatively inexpensive. This goes double for Windows. Windows is just the default. Few people explicitly choose it unless they must run Windows software for some reason. And very many actually find it extremely frustrating. Most Mac users, on the other hand, actually enjoy using their computer.

10 years ago I would made many of the same arguments against the Mac. In fact, I did. But the gap is closing. Macs are a LOT less expensive these days compared to PCs than they finally use a real OS with the full unix "experience" behind the scenes.

Yeah, I drank the Apple kool-aid, but I did so by choice, not by default.

-yarnosh

I know several people who run OS X and mostly they chose it because Windows is so obviously inadequate, or they work with graphics or create audio and in that context they conform to the norm, in the same way regular desktop users conform and choose Windows. None of the people I know who run a Mac could be called power users, or even technically curious, despite their skills in other areas. Most of them are as computer illiterate as a person from a developed country could be and I have to say that this shows one of the strengths of OS X (I'm not sniping, I mean this, I'm impressed). Anyone can easily use OS X and many will probably have no real technical or useability issues, that is a major achievement. But what happens when you do run into problems, particularly those arising from the proprietary nature of the software?* Or if you don't want to do things the Apple way? Or you think you paid enough for the machine that incremental upgrades shouldn't be paid for? Mac has many strengths but to say Linux has nothing to offer plainly isn't true.

*example: one OS X user I know has never been able to mount fat32 or ntfs external drives, only those formatted with HFS+, despite having all the relevant drivers (ntfs-3g etc) installed. Apple's official position? Don't use any drive that is not formatted with an Apple file system because it isn't supported.

edit: as for converting Mac users to Linux, what is more likely is that a person buys the Mac hardware as a development machine with the intention of running OS X, Linux and Windows on the one machine. This is the perfect solution for many people in web design or working on cross platform applications.

Yarnosh
June 28th, 2007, 10:49 PM
If you run a Mac you already paid for it. The OS isn't free (in either sense) and is not available at zero price. You paid money for it. That formed part of the price of the Mac computer. The fact that you didn't get an itemised receipt doesn't mean that any part of the package, hardware or software, was free of charge. I'm surprised anybody would even think this might be the case.

Go back and read what I was responding to. You specifically said OS *upgrades*. I don't buy those. I take the latest version home from work when we get it.


That's your opinion and nothing more.

Indeed it is. And I never claimed otherwise.


There are always going to be a handful of outstanding applications in every area that tend to be the default choice, but some people have specific preferences or needs and then a broader choice becomes important.

Obviously. Again, I'm not make a global statement that Macs are superior in every way for everyone. I simply gave my account and gave a reason (or two) why Mac users wouldn't, in general, see Linux as an upgrade. Especially if they've already invested in the Apple hardware.


Actually you said "Linux has nothing to offer a mac user" which is not the case as we all know that people use Mac hardware but run GNU/Linux. The hardware is superb and quiet and powerful but not everyone wants to run Apple's OS. If you had said that Linux has nothing to offer you then I couldn't dispute that, but merely accept it as your preference.

Well, i meant from my perspective as one who has "switched" to the Mac. I do sometimes forget to qualify statements of opinion. It is obvious to me that I'm just expressing a preference. Sometimes I forget that it isn't obvious to everyone else. :-)


I know several people who run OS X and mostly they chose it because Windows is so obviously inadequate, or they work with graphics or create audio and in that context they conform to the norm, in the same way regular desktop users conform and choose Windows. None of the people I know who run a Mac could be called power users, or even technically curious, despite their skills in other areas. Most of them are as computer illiterate as a person from a developed country could be and I have to say that this shows one of the strengths of OS X (I'm not sniping, I mean this, I'm impressed). Anyone can easily use OS X and many will probably have no real technical or useability issues, that is a major achievement. But what happens when you do run into problems, particularly those arising from the proprietary nature of the software?* Or if you don't want to do things the Apple way? Or you think you paid enough for the machine that incremental upgrades shouldn't be paid for? Mac has many strengths but to say Linux has nothing to offer plainly isn't true.

I would maintain that, because of the ease of use and the few problem that computer illiterate user do have with OS X, that LInux has little to offer the general desktop user. And that is really who we're talking about, isn't it? I mean, if the question really is "What makes an operating system 'desktop ready" I think a reasonable answer might be: "Something as easy to use and polished as OS X."


*example: one OS X user I know has never been able to mount fat32 or ntfs external drives, only those formatted with HFS+, despite having all the relevant drivers (ntfs-3g etc) installed. Apple's official position? Don't use any drive that is not formatted with an Apple file system because it isn't supported.

How long ago was that? I've never had any problems reading FAT32 external drives. Though I don't recommend it considering the file size limitations. I work at an art school and a student was having all kinds of trouble saving her iMovie project to her external drive.... only to find out that the movie was more than 2GB and her drive was FAT32. I reformatted it to HFS+ for her because she didn't really need to use it on a PC.

As for NTFS... Linux doesn't eactly have goot NTFS support either. Only read-only (officially) last time I checked. Just like OS X.


-yarnosh

julian67
June 28th, 2007, 11:11 PM
Actually you said that Linux has nothing to offer mac users, that's really a broad statement and beyond expressing your preference, but now you say you were only expressing your personal preference. Yeah right, ok, hmm, whatever you say, done. :confused:

OK you get your OS X upgrade for free from your employer. You think your emplyer didn't pay? C'mon, the stuff costs money and the fact that you are in a particular advantageous situation doesn't mean a thing to any other user. If you want the new version either you pay, someone pays for you or you rip it off.

A well set up GNU/Linux system is perfectly ready for to use, except for those people who are or feel compelled to use Win or Mac only hardware or applications or have an emotional crisis if their burner isn't called nero, browser isn't called IE, music player looks a bit different etc etc. Unless there's some specific hardware issue you have to something of a doofus to struggle to use the Gnome desktop.

ntfs problem how long ago? Now and since he bought it a few months ago. It isn't a warranty issue because officially only Apple's fs is supported.

Linux ntfs support? Perfect read/write access, completely stable, external usb ntfs drives automount as desired. Totally transparent with the latest ntfs-config tool. I can't find any difference from using ntfs in XP. I need and use ntfs support within Ubuntu so I can share stuff with non-networked 2000/XP users, some of the files are too big for FAT filesystem. So the situation is that I can use filesystems (HFS+, NTFS, FAT) from Apple, MS and the free software world with full and stable read/write access but my friends/colleagues who use Windows or Apple cannot. This is a real advantage for me and for those lucky people who want my files :D Who knows you might even be able to reach this level of interoperability and fantasticness with a Mac.....anything's possible I guess.

vexorian
June 28th, 2007, 11:55 PM
In my opinion, Linux has nothign to offer a Mac user. indeed, considering Mac users are of the kind that buy any kind of ad publicity and love to spend a bunch of money on their computers and they would never buy the fact there's something better out there that doesn't cost money,

Something free is better than their over expensive OS? NO WAY!!.

And they also love to have companies decide what's a better look or more useful UI for them, they should never decide stuff themselves.

--
I mean "choice is bad" is exactly the kind of non-sense that come out from a successfully brainwashed apple fan.

Feba
June 29th, 2007, 09:09 AM
Last I checked, OSX itself is fairly cheap, it's the hardware that costs way too much.

ukripper
June 29th, 2007, 10:31 AM
This is what you cal cheap http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0165825227.118310892 9@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccgeaddlgddmklicflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=888219&category_oid=-27753
as compared to this - http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0165825227.118310892 9@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccgeaddlgddmklicflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=169723&category_oid=-27749

????

Feba
June 29th, 2007, 10:37 AM
????

Ah, literacy, how I miss thee.

Is this what you call OSX itself - http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0165825227.118310892 9@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccgeaddlgddmklicflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=888219&category_oid=-27753
compared to this - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832110016

ukripper
June 29th, 2007, 10:46 AM
Did I mention OSX?

ukripper
June 29th, 2007, 10:49 AM
10 years ago I would made many of the same arguments against the Mac. In fact, I did. But the gap is closing. Macs are a LOT less expensive these days compared to PCs than they finally use a real OS with the full unix "experience" behind the scenes.

Yeah, I drank the Apple kool-aid, but I did so by choice, not by default.

-yarnosh

My comparison was for this post.

ukripper
June 29th, 2007, 10:52 AM
Ah, literacy, how I miss thee.

Is this what you call OSX itself - http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0165825227.118310892 9@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccgeaddlgddmklicflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=888219&category_oid=-27753
compared to this - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832110016

Really mate I have no idea what you talking about?

prizrak
June 29th, 2007, 02:26 PM
Unstable Office 2007?? It's apparent that you don't have a copy. I've been using it for nearly a month and it is awesome. OpenOffice doesn't even compare (which is what I'm using with Ubuntu).

Complete and utter piece of crap application. I do have a copy and I use it daily (at work) and hate every second of it. Also no matter how pretty 2007 is and how "great" (I suppose that would be a personal preference) it is there is no need whatsoever for it for your average home user. I don't even touch Office at home for anything but updating my resume, I don't exactly need any fancy features for that.

Another fun fact about MS Office is that MS Office for Mac is not compatible with it for PC. The formatting gets screwed up between the two, at this point might as well just us OpenOffice since it'll screw up formatting as well.

prizrak
June 29th, 2007, 02:46 PM
Oh, i'd never actually BUY OS X. As for the premium for the hardware... well I'd say you get what you pay for. The $1800 i plopped down on this MacBook Pro was well spent. You'd have to spend about the same to get a comparable PC laptop.
Wrong! I have done a price comparison between a MacBook Pro and a Thinkpad. The MacBook Pro was $2000 and the Thinkpad was $1500, same exact hardware. The only thing that the *Pad didn't have was the webcam. As those are like $50 at most it seems the Mac is $450 more. Now mind you Thinkpads are generally more expensive than other brands.

purplearcanist
June 29th, 2007, 06:51 PM
http://www.pctoday.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles/2004/t0205/04t05/04t05.asp

Sp4cedOut
June 29th, 2007, 06:57 PM
For the most part I agree with him. Although I love Linux, I have both the will and technical know-how to overcome the difficulties he's mentioned. The average computer user does not however.

Linux has come a long way since in the time it has, but I think it still has a way to go before it can compete for the average user.

Cheese Sandwich
June 29th, 2007, 06:57 PM
So far in skimming through it, the most common basis of his claims are that the linux distros aren't across-the-board consistent regarding features, UI, etc.

Cheese Sandwich
June 29th, 2007, 06:59 PM
Here's the core of his argument:


Consistent User Interface & User Experience

Although each successive version of Windows has tweaked the user interface, the Microsoft Windows user experience has evolved in only small ways since Microsoft introduced Windows 95 nearly 10 years ago. Open-source software's strength (multiple companies with wide-ranging development teams) may also be a weakness when it comes to operating system GUIs.

Most Linux distributions come with at least two "desktops" (GUI controls, file-system access, and program launching) that are sometimes customized specifically for that release. The multiplicity of interfaces throws fuel on the fire of confusion for desktop Linux users.

At its core, Linux is a character-based operating system, like DOS. Right now, Linux users should all learn to use both graphical and character-based consoles and editors to manage their systems. But Linux needs to evolve significantly out of that necessity before millions of Windows users are likely to accept it.

As it was for DOS/Windows in the Windows 3.1 timeframe, there's only one way out of this mess: A single interface must emerge as the best one. In Windows' case, that was Win95. Linux doesn't have a single company guiding its future and growth. But to succeed on the desktop, it will require the singular vision and expedited execution of someone like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs.

Either that, or Linux needs a killer desktop, a new piece of software that's tightly bound with the OS and so obviously better than any previous Linux desktop as to just clearly beóthe one. All or most Linux distributors would then need to rally around this desktop software (at least for their desktop versions) and work together to integrate it into the roots of the operating system. It could happen.

But will it happen? I guess we'll have to wait and see. Meanwhile, I'm still using Windows.

Celegorm
June 29th, 2007, 07:02 PM
Cheese Sandwich pretty much hit the nail on the head. Half of this guy's arguments, if not more, involve lumping all the different linux distros together and complaining that they're not the same. Might as well complain that proprietary operating systems are horrible because OS X and windows have such different GUI's....

vanadium
June 29th, 2007, 07:02 PM
I am afraid it is essentially true. While Linux has been the technically vastly superior operating systems for many years, this gap has greatly diminished. I find many points in the article to be essentially true. This does not mean that Linux these days cannot be a perfectly acceptable desktop system. With more industry support, it could easily have a greater user base.

juxtaposed
June 29th, 2007, 07:11 PM
Windows doesn't come with every software driver you'll ever need, but Microsoft ships each version of its OS with a large driver pack.

But it pales in comparison to Linux.



Managing app installs can be among the more frustrating aspects of the Linux experience for first-time Linux users.

It was one of my favorite things when I started, and still is.


Whether you love or hate the Windows Automatic Updates feature, Microsoft has made it easy to install security patches in Win2000/XP. While Linux aficionados love to extol the virtues of the open-source community's commitment to offering Linux patches quickly and effectively (with good cause most of the time), the solid truth is that most of the distros have very different end-user-oriented update processes. Some distros do make this fairly easy, but the lack of an accepted, unified experience is an ongoing problem.


Type in "sudo apt-get upgrade", wow, hard :/


Documentation & Support

Linux has great documentation, though some of it is kind of old.


the Microsoft Windows user experience has evolved in only small ways since Microsoft introduced Windows 95 nearly 10 years ago.

That's the problem.


But to succeed on the desktop, it will require the singular vision and expedited execution of someone like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs.

Yay, a corporate monkey to guide us in life.

LaRoza
June 29th, 2007, 07:17 PM
It seems most complaints against Linux focus on the user's own ignorance.

NewJack
June 29th, 2007, 07:19 PM
Yeah, evolving in small ways is part of Windows' problem. As far as the differences in the distros. Consistency breeds stagnation in my opinion.

The ability to choose the OS flavor that suits YOU! That is what makes Linux awesome..

NewJack
June 29th, 2007, 07:20 PM
It seems most complaints against Linux focus on the user's own ignorance.

QFE.

That is also what most of the "F*** Ubuntu/Linux" threads in these forums revolve around.

bonzodog
June 29th, 2007, 07:21 PM
As far as I can see, there will never be just one desktop environment existing in the world of Linux, as different people have different ideas about how the ideal desktop will work.

In Windows, you are more or less dictated to about how the desktop works.
The sheep are happy to go along with this, and follow whatever the shepherd wants.

In Linux, however, the GUI evolved from a very different place - the right click desktop came first, and this is in fact how I like my desks - with a right click menu anywhere on the desktop, so
I use Xfce and Openbox. ( I remember being introduced to the windows desktop and actually mailed MS and asked why they had a taskbar, and set about removing the whole thing - Panels did not belong on the GUI desk I knew and loved).

Because of the very core nature of open source there will always be multiple choices about how things are done, and you cannot effectively unite 40 odd distros, as someone in each one will disagree, and just fork the code away and create yet another project that sticks with the original prospectus.

What is happening, however is that certain distros are drifting towards the top of the pile popularity wise, and as the sheep generally use whatever comes pre-installed, it seems inevitable that either Ubuntu or Suse will triumph out in this, and thus make GTK/Gnome the established mainstream standard for a linux desktop. There will, however always be all the other desktops available for those that are savvy enough to know about them.

And the 'savvy' crowd is increasing all the time - kids are much more computer aware from a very early age now, and if linux was to start being pre-installed on a lot of machines, then the kids will know that they don't have to use gnome if they feel like it, and use KDE or Xfce instead. These are the kids who won't know what windows is as they have *always* used linux since they were old enough to look at a computer monitor.

The current battle does not need to centre on getting converts from windows, but getting the PC manufacturers to pre-install, and thus make linux the the only OS that people have ever used. At the end of the day, the reason that everyone uses windows is simply because that is what the computer came with.

Cheese Sandwich
June 29th, 2007, 07:21 PM
We need to drive home the point that winning a majority desktop share isn't important - what's important about linux is that it gives consumers a choice (a free one at that), so that they're not absolutely forced to pay for & use MS to be able to do personal computing.

Thanks to Linux, MS isn't the only game in town, so that even though they are comfortably in the lead, they need to keep on their toes & keep striving to deliver quality (and they do, at least in terms of hardware drivers & usability for the layperson). In the end, we the consumers win, even if Linux isn't on top.

dcoffey48
June 29th, 2007, 07:23 PM
The date on that article is 2004.

I'd say that today (2007) ubuntu has improved on most of the issues he brings up. But there is still some work to be done.

Dave.

@trophy
June 29th, 2007, 07:27 PM
Yeah I am usually the first to agree that we've got a ways to go, but this guy is clearly not got his head in the game at all. How can he say with a straight face that Windows comes out of the box with more drivers? I have been installing Windows on machines since I was a wee lad, and *NEVER* have I ever had a machine which didn't require MASSIVE amounts of driver hunting to get it working with stock Windows (any version.)
Also, claiming Windows has more centralized installation/removal of programs is a flat out lie. *IF* your program elected to put itself into your add/remove programs list when you installed it, you still had to go to its website to download the damned thing. You didn't pick it from a list of programs and install it like through Synaptic.

In other news, black is white, up is down, and what's going on with Paris Hilton is worth paying attention to.

There are plenty of things in Linux which actually need improving. None of them are listed in this article.

juxtaposed
June 29th, 2007, 07:37 PM
I just realised this thread was like a 1000 pages long.


I remember being introduced to the windows desktop and actually mailed MS and asked why they had a taskbar, and set about removing the whole thing - Panels did not belong on the GUI desk I knew and loved).

I use fluxbox and like the right click thing, but without a panel, how do you change windows? Alt+Tab isn't very good, but I might just not be used to it...

Miguel
June 29th, 2007, 07:39 PM
OK, I'll be eating the bait. This is where I think the author goes wrong:

Drivers:[b] Ehem, the linux kernel ships with more drivers than Vista. End of argument.

[b]Installing/Uninstalling apps: He states there is only one way of installing applications in windows. This is false. There are several installers (not only InstallShield). There are zips that only require decompression. And, you guessed it, there's also compiling from source (which is harder than windows unless you got the exact Visua Studio project file version).

Controlls: Don't really know what's his point. It's true though that changing advanced options in windows is usually easier if you know where to look. Expert config ends up being more or less the same. Anyway, abusing his argument I might as well say that the average user doesn't even tinker with screen resolution. Set it once, set it forever (unless some malware overrides it).

Technologies: Like Robson, the useless "turbo memory" for vista? That's what you get with manufacturers' support. Point for him. It's funny though, that he mentions USB support. I can only guess which one of the 4 different stacks of WinXP he is talking about. BTW: the fastest USB stack out there lies under the GPL license.

Patches: Aptitude rules them all. Ever tried upgrading to vista with one command?

Peer network: Anyone who sets up network printing should default to CUPS. Period. However, the author should know that MS is under monopoly investigation for not giving networking specs. Give us the specs, we code it.

Documentation: I still have to see any docs regarding the registry. Or how to stop/start/modify services in windows. That isn't explained in the XP guide.

Consistent UI: GTk+? Qt? Qt+Gtk? Now boot in windows and open: Explorer, IE 7, WMP 11 and finally Office 2007. Did you say consistent? Try again. Oh, by the way, I got a mail from a friend, asking me how to copy-paste the contents of a folder into word. It had over 300 files, so he couldn't do it by hand. This trivial issue with the commandline required him to do some Matlab (!) program. Now tell me to ditch the CLI. Come on.

Finally, sorry for the angry tone. I'm just bored of everything. And although picking every single point of the author may not be fair, I'm just pi$$ed today and this relaxed me a bit.

Cheese Sandwich
June 29th, 2007, 07:40 PM
The date on that article is 2004.

I'd say that today (2007) ubuntu has improved on most of the issues he brings up. But there is still some work to be done.

Dave.

Ah, good catch.

Gnub_Daemon
June 30th, 2007, 09:03 AM
I agree with some of these, and some I don't. Any OS you install yourself is going to take some configuring, that's all there is to it. It will also take a while to get used to the way it works and certain features that are unique to any and every different OS known to man. I think desktop ready means that most, but not all hardware is compatible and/or usable out of the box, or should at least have some sort of layman's-terms tutorial for configuring it that is easily accessible to the general public, for example, Ubuntu Forums. I think that it should also be easy to use once it is installed and configured, at least insofar as the programs/applications that are installed.

Bodizzle
July 2nd, 2007, 05:59 PM
I would agree that for most people, OpenOffice will do just fine in replacing MS Office. It is a problem for me though for a specific reason. I teach math and the equation writer and drawing feature of OO don't stack up to MathType and the drawing features of Office. Those are two things that OO really needs to improve upon but most people have little need for them.

As far as Photoshop, I think Paint Shop Pro is the best paint program out there for average users and I have been able to run it using wine. GIMP is also great for the average user but I haven't taken the time to figure out all of the details since I am so used to Paint Shop Pro.

The biggest setback for Linux/Ubuntu on the issue of whether it is ready for the Desktop is user attitude. I have a dual boot machine running XP and Ubuntu but my wife refuses to use Ubuntu. She does not know much about computers so she likes what is familiar, and she has been using Windows as long as she has had a computer. Even though she mainly uses the computer for looking at the web, typing documents, email, and photo organization, using Ubuntu is unfamiliar to her. It took her forever to get to use Firefox rather than IE but now she loves Firefox. It is the same idea. Firefox was new and different and she had always used IE. For her, OpenOffice would do everything she needs and Picasa works with Linux taking care of her photos.

Linux can be scary for average users because you have to use the terminal for some setup options and people don't like that. With that being said though, Ubuntu 7.04 is a great OS for the typical computer user and is fairly user friendly for most issues. Windows is easier to use with Networking/File Sharing/Printer Sharing but Ubuntu is just as capable with a little know-how.

I think as more and more people realize that Linux is a great alternative to Windows/Mac with a great price (you can't beat free) they will migrate to it. It could take several years of people dual booting until they get used to it but it will continue to grow. It will take a transition period like it did for my wife to switch to Firefox but it will happen. Most people view open source free software as inferior to proprietary expensive software. In many cases that is true but with things like Ubuntu, OO, Firefox and others, the free versions are just as good if not better.

I am in the process of making the switch to Linux but still have a need for Windows for certain uses. Linux does provide me a very affordable way to put a system together with an up to date OS for my kids (currently ages 4 and 2) when they start using computers more. Linux is great for people with kids. Little, if not no, threat of viruses, decent and free web filtering software, basic games, office software, and so on.

Well, that is my two cents.

Bannor
July 2nd, 2007, 07:35 PM
I find that linux has everything but sometimes you might need to use more than one program to get the same thing done (which is fine cause there free). I find my biggest challenge with Ubuntu is that I haven't been using it for my whole life. I have grown up with Microsoft and I tend to look at all things computer through their eyes. I would also point out that the author must have a very big checkbook. To get all those programs and windows you are talking about 1k in software costs.

vexorian
July 3rd, 2007, 05:42 PM
I would agree that for most people, OpenOffice will do just fine in replacing MS Office. It is a problem for me though for a specific reason. I teach math and the equation writer and drawing feature of OO don't stack up to MathType and the drawing features of Office

I must say, I am surprised to find that, since as an student I found that OpenOffice beats MSoffice in this regard.

But, I still think that LaTeX is the only sane and most complete way of doing this...


Linux can be scary for average users because you have to use the terminal for some setup options and people don't like that. With that being said though, Ubuntu 7.04 is a great OS for the typical computer user and is fairly user friendly for most issues. Windows is easier to use with Networking/File Sharing/Printer Sharing but Ubuntu is just as capable with a little know-how.

Actually, I can say that a correctly set up system won't need the terminal unless the user wants to use the terminal (once you get used to it you love it) or the user got very specific customization requirements.

Most of the times, I think that if you help them set up Ubuntu correctly they won't need the terminal thus they won't have to be scared. Although it is such a lovely thing to have...

KIAaze
July 3rd, 2007, 06:40 PM
And Openoffice can export to latex. :)

But it can't create animations with custom paths... :(

One (just one of them ^^) of the greatest things about GNU/Linux though are the regular expressions tools (command-line & GUI) ! (I loooove replacing regular expressions in Kate :D )

vexorian
July 3rd, 2007, 06:47 PM
The other day my cousin visited my home and he requested to use "Office" for some thing, I didn't tell him that my comp was on Linux and that the word processor I was giving him was OpenOffice.

He got able to make the whole document he was intending to, but eventually called for help since he couldn't find the "configure page" option, that's a little different to openoffice's "format\page..." well I entered that menu command and he set the page. Then he printed the document and all was right.

He then asked me why it was a little different than usual office "Is this the new Office version?" I had to reply "yeah..."

Peyton
July 3rd, 2007, 08:45 PM
I don't think that one should discount the author's arguments so quickly. Although I disagree with him, he does bring up some valid points that need to be considered.

The author states that eighty percent of the population is "never going to learn the quirky ins and outs of Linux well enough to adopt it in droves on the desktop." While it would be false to say that Ubuntu, for example, is hard to use, the fact is that Windows, to your average end-user, is still easier to use. People don't want to have to spend the time Googling a solution to a problem -- they want things to just work. I can login to a new Windows installation, open up Internet Explorer, download Flash, head over to YouTube, and watch a few videos. On Linux, however, I have to head over to Google in order to figure out why sound isn't working. There, I'm told to edit a Firefox configuration file (and it still doesn't work). Imagine this process from the viewpoint of your average user. Sure, your average user may find things hard only because he's been living in a Windows world, but the point's still valid.

What bothers me is the sense of elitism present within the Linux community. Some people just assume that free software is the greatest thing in the history of time. However, they may be shocked to learn (skip over this next bit if it's too much for you) that the majority of people probably don't think that proprietary software is evil, unethical, etc. Not every computer user wants to subscribe to some ideology -- most computer users just want to use their computers. A lot of people make statements like, "M$ is evil, and Windows is too. Use Linux." However, that's hardly going to get your average person to make the switch. People need to focus on what's good about Linux rather than what's bad about Windows. Windows users don't want to be told how evil you think their operating system is. That pretty much equates to belittling them, and nobody likes to be belittled.

prizrak
July 3rd, 2007, 09:21 PM
I don't think that one should discount the author's arguments so quickly. Although I disagree with him, he does bring up some valid points that need to be considered.

The author states that eighty percent of the population is "never going to learn the quirky ins and outs of Linux well enough to adopt it in droves on the desktop." While it would be false to say that Ubuntu, for example, is hard to use, the fact is that Windows, to your average end-user, is still easier to use. People don't want to have to spend the time Googling a solution to a problem -- they want things to just work. I can login to a new Windows installation, open up Internet Explorer, download Flash, head over to YouTube, and watch a few videos. On Linux, however, I have to head over to Google in order to figure out why sound isn't working. There, I'm told to edit a Firefox configuration file (and it still doesn't work). Imagine this process from the viewpoint of your average user. Sure, your average user may find things hard only because he's been living in a Windows world, but the point's still valid.

Do you know ins and outs of Windows? I don't and I administer Windows servers for a living. You know how hard it was for me to setup Flash and head on over to YouTube on Ubuntu Feisty? Synaptic>search>"flash">right click>install>apply changes. That was all that was required no sound problems or anything. You know how long it took me to install Ubuntu itself? 30 minutes, it was up and running and I apt-got a bunch of stuff I'm used to having. This included nVidia drivers and Beryl. By comparison on the same machine it took me about a day to install XP tablet. Then it took me a week to find Bluetooth driver (included in Ubuntu), after a month it turned out that I needed a different driver for it. And believe me that was not fun, I had to hunt down the info on who made the adapter and then hunt down the driver on manufacturer's site. It was not fun and a full undergrad degree above average user level.



What bothers me is the sense of elitism present within the Linux community. Some people just assume that free software is the greatest thing in the history of time. However, they may be shocked to learn (skip over this next bit if it's too much for you) that the majority of people probably don't think that proprietary software is evil, unethical, etc. Not every computer user wants to subscribe to some ideology -- most computer users just want to use their computers. A lot of people make statements like, "M$ is evil, and Windows is too. Use Linux." However, that's hardly going to get your average person to make the switch. People need to focus on what's good about Linux rather than what's bad about Windows. Windows users don't want to be told how evil you think their operating system is. That pretty much equates to belittling them, and nobody likes to be belittled.
Skip over this part if it's too much for you, but you don't know what you are talking about. There is much more recognition of user desires from the FLOSS side of things than there is from the proprietory. MS releases patches monthly, FLOSS releases them AS THEY ARE NEEDED, in some cases WITHIN HOURS of discovering the bug. By comparisson a recent bug that had to be addressed in Vista affected EVERY SINGLE VERSION OF WINDOWS since 95.

No one ever said that people need to migrate in droves to Linux. Not one sane person I know wants that. Linux has a very specific audience, it works best with people who like complete control over their systems and makes an excellent organizational desktop.

What the author of that article and many others don't realize/think about is the fact that the desktop market is not just aimed at your mother and Joe Sixpack. There are huge organizations that comprise an enormous chunk of the desktop market and could greatly benefit from Linux. The users don't need to know ins and outs, they have an IT department for that.

Linux may not be as easy and polished as OS X or as common place as Windows but it is a viable alternative and there is no reason, beyond vendor lock-in, for it to not have a very real presence on the market.

Peyton
July 3rd, 2007, 10:43 PM
My post is aimed at your average desktop user adopting Linux. If you only want organizations and the like to adopt Linux, then you can safely ignore everything I said. I will, however, ask you to keep in mind the whole "towards humanity" thing. It seems to me that Ubuntu is aimed more toward average users than organizations.

No, I'm not going to claim that nothing can go wrong in Windows. I've had my share of nightmarish experiences using Windows. Last fall, Windows refused to boot, so I Googled the problem. Microsoft's website had a list of suggested solutions, but none of them worked for me. Their final one was to re-install Windows, so I ended up just going full-time Kubuntu after dual-booting for some time. However, generally speaking, accomplishing tasks in Windows is less in-depth. I understand that this probably works in the favor of people who want more control over their system, but it nonetheless stands in the way of the adoption of Linux by average desktop users.

I don't want this to turn into a debate over free software versus proprietary software. I'm not trying to say that one is better than the other, but what I am trying to say is that your average desktop user (trying to think if a more creative term -- this is sounding repetitive) doesn't care about the debate.

KIAaze
July 3rd, 2007, 11:24 PM
I agree with both of you. :)

Things are generally easier in Windows (from a consumer's point of view (average user=consumer)) because commercial companies want to make it easy for their customers to use their product.
They could do the same for GNU/Linux. It's just that it isn't profitable enough yet for them to do so because of the reduced market share (or so they think).


Some people just assume that free software is the greatest thing in the history of time.
Well, I can't safely say that it's "the greatest thing in the history of time", but it certainly is one of the greatest things I have ever experienced and I think I can safely say that it has changed my life. :D

prizrak
July 4th, 2007, 12:20 AM
My post is aimed at your average desktop user adopting Linux.

No such thing. Actually let me elaborate,
1) There is no definition as to what an average desktop user is.
2) If we assume an average user as being one that can only do Web/E-mail/IM/etc... aka no technical aptitude for anything more complex than click next a few times to install some spyware then he/she will not switch to Linux. Such people do NOT install operating systems.

I agree with both of you. :)

Things are generally easier in Windows (from a consumer's point of view (average user=consumer)) because commercial companies want to make it easy for their customers to use their product.
They could do the same for GNU/Linux. It's just that it isn't profitable enough yet for them to do so because of the reduced market share (or so they think).


Well, I can't safely say that it's "the greatest thing in the history of time", but it certainly is one of the greatest things I have ever experienced and I think I can safely say that it has changed my life. :D

Point out one everyday task* that is easier in Windows as opposed to say Ubuntu and why it's more difficult.

*by everyday task I mean something that your mythical consumer/average user would do. That excludes installing hardware beyond USB drives or troubleshooting anything more complex than "I forgot to plug my speakers in and now I can't hear sound".

KIAaze
July 4th, 2007, 12:45 AM
Sorry, everyday_task_easier_in_Windows_than_in_GNU-Linux: No such task or activity :oops:

Playing .wmv videos, watching DVDs, installing games (think of native GNU/Linux games not in the repositories), buying a GNU/Linux compatible Webcam and installing it, getting on the internet with a dial-up modem, installing a printer or other stuff like that can however require the help of Google sometimes.
It's not necessarily harder, but it requires "more reading than clicking".

However, once you know the basics, it's about as easy as Windows. ^^

When I say generally easier, I mean that:
-You know the program you need because there are advertisments everywhere for it and you see it in shops (yeah, ok, in synaptics and add/remove software, programs are categorized and easy to find)
-You get step by step installation manuals printed on paper
-You can use hotlines and even go into the shop where you bought the product to ask for help and they usually can help and even advise you what other great things you can buy that are certified to work with Windows
-You can buy the software in shops if you don't have internet!!!

All those are especially true for computer-phobic people.

Anyway, I'm not an "average computer user" and not computer-phobic at all, so maybe I'm not the right person to evaluate the easiness of GNU/Linux. ^^'

All I can say is that I could attend to "every day tasks" like using the internet without any problems after my first installation of Debian 2 years ago.
But since I had a dual-boot setup, it wasn't a full "ready for the desktop" test.

I had to do some reading prior to that installation but that was mostly because I wanted to dual-boot and didn't want to loose any data.
I still haven't gotten my dial-up modem to work tough... Thankfully I already had a DSL connection at that time with DHCP.

Peyton
July 4th, 2007, 01:13 AM
With Ubuntu Desktop Edition you can surf the web, read email, create documents and spreadsheets, edit images and much more.
Sounds pretty average to me.

As for something the average user would do that's easier on Windows, I mentioned earlier my problem with sound in Firefox, and KIAaze mentioned some common examples. That's more than one example.

kamaboko
July 4th, 2007, 01:15 AM
Point out one everyday task* that is easier in Windows as opposed to say Ubuntu and why it's more difficult.


Easy. USB wirless NIC. Odds are the average Jack/Jill would have to **** around with a wrapper rather than just inserting a CD and let it run.

How about another everyday event like listening to a radio station on ones computer. I tried that the other day with a local station. Had I been in Windows all would have been fine. But if one is using Linux they have a load a crap to deal with. Here are the instructions. I'll leave you with a picture that I get from time-to-time when I want to watch MSN News on the Inet. Another issue to contend with.....

1) Build & install a fully functional copy of MPlayer. If you need help doing that, see my SxS here.
2) Download the plugin here. I recommend grabbing the source tarball, however the RPM should work just fine, if that's what you're more comfortable with.
3) Either install the RPM, or extract the tarball archive that you downloaded in a temporary location, and then run 'make' to compile the plugin.
4) As root, copy mplayerplug-in.so into the plugins directory for Mozilla. For example, on my boxes, I install Mozilla in /opt/mozilla/. So, I would copy the file into /opt/mozilla/plugins.
5) (Re)start mozilla, and click on Help -> About Plugins from the menu. You should see a section labeled "mplayerplug-in ..." and it should say "YES" under the Enabled column.

mdsmedia
July 4th, 2007, 01:23 AM
Sorry, everyday_task_easier_in_Windows_than_in_GNU-Linux: No such task or activity :oops:

Playing .wmv videos, watching DVDs, installing games (think of native GNU/Linux games not in the repositories), buying a GNU/Linux compatible Webcam and installing it, getting on the internet with a dial-up modem, installing a printer or other stuff like that can however require the help of Google sometimes.
It's not necessarily harder, but it requires "more reading than clicking".

However, once you know the basics, it's about as easy as Windows. ^^

When I say generally easier, I mean that:
-You know the program you need because there are advertisments everywhere for it and you see it in shops (yeah, ok, in synaptics and add/remove software, programs are categorized and easy to find)
-You get step by step installation manuals printed on paper
-You can use hotlines and even go into the shop where you bought the product to ask for help and they usually can help and even advise you what other great things you can buy that are certified to work with Windows
-You can buy the software in shops if you don't have internet!!!

All those are especially true for computer-phobic people.

Anyway, I'm not an "average computer user" and not computer-phobic at all, so maybe I'm not the right person to evaluate the easiness of GNU/Linux. ^^'

All I can say is that I could attend to "every day tasks" like using the internet without any problems after my first installation of Debian 2 years ago.
But since I had a dual-boot setup, it wasn't a full "ready for the desktop" test.

I had to do some reading prior to that installation but that was mostly because I wanted to dual-boot and didn't want to loose any data.
I still haven't gotten my dial-up modem to work tough... Thankfully I already had a DSL connection at that time with DHCP.As a relatively new convert to the wonderful world of Ubuntu/Linux, I'll defend/advocate Linux/Ubuntu to my back teeth, but I can't disagree with anything you say.

What you've portrayed is many symptoms of the Windows vendor lock-in which is the reason I will advocate Linux and rubbish Windows any chance I get.

I'll never say that Linux or Ubuntu is even close to perfect, but what I can't stand is when people try to tell me that Windows is any more perfect than Linux.

kamaboko
July 4th, 2007, 01:27 AM
My previous post didn't take the following pic. This is something I run into from time-to-time while watching Inet news on Linux.

Feba
July 4th, 2007, 01:28 AM
Peyton, fixing sound problems in firefox isn't something the average user does everyday. I imagine that if you fixed it once it would be alright for days afterwards.

KIAaze
July 4th, 2007, 01:37 AM
Oh, and I forgot to mention the very well known number one reason why Windows is easier: It comes pre-installed almost everywhere.
Computer-phobic persons don't even know what an OS is. Setting up hardware is "difficult" for people who need step by step instructions for copy/pasting and selecting files like my mother! (something which is exactly as "easy" as in Windows by the way)

I think I'll be buying a Dell next time... :)

Peyton
July 4th, 2007, 01:43 AM
Peyton, fixing sound problems in firefox isn't something the average user does everyday. I imagine that if you fixed it once it would be alright for days afterwards.

Well, it's not so much fixing it as getting it to work in the first place.

KIAaze
July 4th, 2007, 02:12 AM
My previous post didn't take the following pic. This is something I run into from time-to-time while watching Inet news on Linux.
This is the kind of thing I hate the most. ](*,)

I can understand when something doesn't work, but when they actually tell you that it's because of geographical restrictions, OS restrictions or browser restrictions, it pisses me off!
Especially geographical restrictions!!!
Regional lockout is about as horrible as DRM! How can they talk about globalization and do something like this?

Flash videos work on all platforms. But some websites still insist on using technologies that don't work on all browsers&OSes.

And what does the geographical restriction have to do with the OS anyway??? It's either one or the other!
If they created a specific error message for this they could at least have made 2 separate of them.

raja
July 4th, 2007, 02:13 AM
Sounds pretty average to me.


Well, average things are what average people do most of the time and these must be the yardsticks to decide on desktop readiness.
As for above-average things, of course some of them you can only do on windows and lots of them you can only do on windows.

kamaboko
July 4th, 2007, 03:04 AM
This is the kind of thing I hate the most. ](*,)

I can understand when something doesn't work, but when they actually tell you that it's because of geographical restrictions, OS restrictions or browser restrictions, it pisses me off!
Especially geographical restrictions!!!
Regional lockout is about as horrible as DRM! How can they talk about globalization and do something like this?

Flash videos work on all platforms. But some websites still insist on using technologies that don't work on all browsers&OSes.

And what does the geographical restriction have to do with the OS anyway??? It's either one or the other!
If they created a specific error message for this they could at least have made 2 separate of them.

I only posted it to demonstrate what I run into at times using Linux. I am in the US though.

prizrak
July 4th, 2007, 03:41 AM
Playing .wmv videos,
Never had a problem with all the Gstreamer plug ins. Perhaps I'm lucky.

watching DVDs
Yeah that one is sorta tricky you need to know to get libdvdcss2 otherwise it's not difficult.

installing games (think of native GNU/Linux games not in the repositories), buying a GNU/Linux compatible Webcam and installing it, getting on the internet with a dial-up modem
To be honest never tried, I assume a supported Webcam would be picked up just like anything else automatically but from what I understand the software is lacking.

installing a printer
The only tricky one was Lexmark, otherwise I had no problem. In fact Feisty picks up printers on a print server in a Windows domain with no problem (I'm not logged in to the domain either). I have had some serious issues with Windows though, with printers just plain refusing to work for no reason.

Easy. USB wirless NIC. Odds are the average Jack/Jill would have to **** around with a wrapper rather than just inserting a CD and let it run.
If you only knew how many hours I have spent trying to get USB and PCMCIA WNICs to work in Windows.... In fact in my girlfriend's laptop a PCMCIA WNIC does not work, it's an XP machine and all the drivers are there but it just won't connect. Reinstalled Windows like 10 times to try and get it to work.

How about another everyday event like listening to a radio station on ones computer. I tried that the other day with a local station. Had I been in Windows all would have been fine. But if one is using Linux they have a load a crap to deal with.
Never had a single problem. Exaile, Rhythmbox, Gstreamer, Banshee all picked up any feed I threw at them. The only thing I need something else for is RealPLayer stuff, granted that is a bit more involved in Ubuntu than it is in Windows.

. I'll leave you with a picture that I get from time-to-time when I want to watch MSN News on the Inet My previous post didn't take the following pic. This is something I run into from time-to-time while watching Inet news on Linux.
This is obviously a problem with the website, I want someone with a Mac to take a look and see if they get a similar error. I've ran into sites that didn't work with Windows as well...

No one said Linux has no problems or is perfect by the same token Windows has tons of problems, hell even OS X has problems and that is regarded as the best OS ever by many. Point is that Linux at the very least isn't any worse than Windows, or is any harder to use. When you run into problems in any OS you have to be fairly knowledgeable to resolve them, most "average users" I know/ran into will call someone for help with Windows even things I would consider very minor. Hell I was racing a Geek Squad car on the highway at some point, why do you think he was driving there?

Feba
July 4th, 2007, 03:45 AM
Well, it's not so much fixing it as getting it to work in the first place.

Uh huh. It's still not a thing you do every day. It's something the manufacturer fixes so the user doesn't have to use any brain cells on it.

prizrak
July 4th, 2007, 03:46 AM
Oh, and I forgot to mention the very well known number one reason why Windows is easier: It comes pre-installed almost everywhere.
Computer-phobic persons don't even know what an OS is. Setting up hardware is "difficult" for people who need step by step instructions for copy/pasting and selecting files like my mother! (something which is exactly as "easy" as in Windows by the way)

I think I'll be buying a Dell next time... :)

Of course that is an issue and is why so many people asked Dell to provide a preinstalled Ubuntu machine. There are plenty of other vendors that do that as well. That's the thing that many people don't seem to grasp, while Ubuntu and some other Linux distro's strive to be as easy to use as possible they are not necessarily aimed at converting Windows users or people who are computer illiterate. Linux based OS's can gain a significant enough market share without trying to convert the "Gramma user".

KIAaze
July 4th, 2007, 03:55 AM
To be honest never tried, I assume a supported Webcam would be picked up just like anything else automatically but from what I understand the software is lacking.


Nope, you usually have to install the drivers yourself, which is not always easy. They are not in the repository and mostly come in source tarballs as far as I know.
The first webcam I used, somebody did the installation of the driver for me. The second one, I never managed to finish running the installation script made for it. It always stopped on some error which I don't remember right now.

Peyton
July 4th, 2007, 04:03 AM
Never had a problem with all the Gstreamer plug ins. Perhaps I'm lucky.
Is that easier than in Windows, where all you have to do is click the file? No.

If you're content to have Linux as a tool for organizations and technical departments, then that's fine, but, as I pointed out earlier, the Ubuntu philosophy seems to be inconsistent with that, and the article in dispute isn't either. The scope of my original argument was limited to the average desktop user and the barriers to him adopting and using Linux.

No, I'm not trying to say that Windows is perfect -- no one here is. However, what I am trying to say is that Linux isn't the cure-all that some people think it is, and there are a number of obstacles in the way of adoption by average desktop users. Sure, some of these obstacles are what makes Linux Linux, but people need to realize they are there and find ways to counterbalance them if they want Linux to get a hold in the mainstream.

Also, if people want to convert Windows users or what-not, then people should focus more on what's good about Linux then what's bad about Windows and Microsoft. For example, instead of telling someone that Microsoft is evil or whatever, try showing someone the benefits of Linux. For example, one thing that I find amazing about Ubuntu is its software repositories. If I want a piece of software, all I have to do is type in a few keywords and click a few buttons. That honestly is like magic.

Feba, but using sound in one's browser is an everyday task. Sound shouldn't be too much to ask for.

bionerual
July 4th, 2007, 04:40 AM
While I do love linux, saying that windows seems to "just work" is a very valid point.
The following things are issues that took me quite alot of time to figure out and some that have not yet been completely solved for me

1. First of all, one of the most common wireless cards for labtops are the bcm43xx cards. I would like to see a corporation go through and install ndiswrapper and configure it for say 300 labtops, while you can maybe write a script for it, it would be nice just to have those 300 labtops work with no problems. My wireless card still won't automatically connect to a network when i turn it on. While it may only take a few seconds to connect to one, its also pleasent to have it just work. Even somebody with good computer knowledge could have trouble discovering how to make it work.

2. Graphics cards are another issue. While you can blame this on the company who makes them, its still a problem that exists. It's like if you had a biofueled powered car. Most gas stations simply don't allow you to fuel up. Even though it's not the fault of the car, you can't say the car is ready for mass marketing.

3. My logitech 5 button mouse only utilizes 3 of the buttons. I think there exists a way to fix this but as stated before, most people don't want to take time looking up ways to fix it. I remember trying to fix it a few years ago on an older installation of of kubuntu. I ended up with a xorg error on boot-up. It took me, having another computer with internet, and an hour or so to be able to fix this. For linux to succeed for the majority of people, issues like this cannot exist.

Ubuntu has made great progress towards becoming "ready" but i would say it is not quite there yet. Its that "just working" ability that people like.

prizrak
July 4th, 2007, 04:51 AM
Is that easier than in Windows, where all you have to do is click the file? No.
Umm yes actually quite a bit easier, Feisty will install w/e plugins are necessary for playback as soon as the user OK's it. Even if it doesn't, installing the good, the bad, and the ugly plug in packs for Gstreamer takes like 20 seconds and can all be done in GUI. If you ever had to deal with codec installation in Windows when it doesn't either come installed or auto-installed you know how much of a hassle it is. If you don't happen to know the names of the codes you gonna have some serious problems.

No, I'm not trying to say that Windows is perfect -- no one here is. However, what I am trying to say is that Linux isn't the cure-all that some people think it is, and there are a number of obstacles in the way of adoption by average desktop users. Sure, some of these obstacles are what makes Linux Linux, but people need to realize they are there and find ways to counterbalance them if they want Linux to get a hold in the mainstream.

Also, if people want to convert Windows users or what-not, then people should focus more on what's good about Linux then what's bad about Windows and Microsoft. For example, instead of telling someone that Microsoft is evil or whatever, try showing someone the benefits of Linux. For example, one thing that I find amazing about Ubuntu is its software repositories. If I want a piece of software, all I have to do is type in a few keywords and click a few buttons. That honestly is like magic.
Very much agree with every word you said except that Ubuntu philosophy doesn't mention converting anyone at all, it just strives to be an easy to use OS. In fact Mark Shuttleworth said more than a few times that his goal is to get those who are not current users of any OS to use Ubuntu instead of something proprietory.

Feba, but using sound in one's browser is an everyday task. Sound shouldn't be too much to ask for.
As have been pointed out, that is your experience is not necessarily that of the majority of users. Gutsy should have no problem with it whatsoever with Gnash comming by default.

1. First of all, one of the most common wireless cards for labtops are the bcm43xx cards. I would like to see a corporation go through and install ndiswrapper and configure it for say 300 labtops, while you can maybe write a script for it, it would be nice just to have those 300 labtops work with no problems. My wireless card still won't automatically connect to a network when i turn it on. While it may only take a few seconds to connect to one, its also pleasent to have it just work. Even somebody with good computer knowledge could have trouble discovering how to make it work.

The most common? Where do you get your data? Most laptops I seen use Intel, Centrino is the best platform for mobile computing anyway. Nothing "just works" in Windows, it all requires drivers and believe me I had a fair share of wireless problems with Windows if you read the previous page I documented some of them. I had no wireless problems with any of my laptops at all.

2. Graphics cards are another issue. While you can blame this on the company who makes them, its still a problem that exists. It's like if you had a biofueled powered car. Most gas stations simply don't allow you to fuel up. Even though it's not the fault of the car, you can't say the car is ready for mass marketing.
The only one that actually has problems is ATI. Intel and nVidia are just fine, I even got hibernate working on my laptop with it running along with Beryl (didn't do anything to make it work either).

3. My logitech 5 button mouse only utilizes 3 of the buttons. I think there exists a way to fix this but as stated before, most people don't want to take time looking up ways to fix it. I remember trying to fix it a few years ago on an older installation of of kubuntu. I ended up with a xorg error on boot-up. It took me, having another computer with internet, and an hour or so to be able to fix this. For linux to succeed for the majority of people, issues like this cannot exist.
My touchpad has two normal buttons, vertical and horizontal scroll on the touchpad itself and a multi-directional button on the middle. Pressing the up/down on the button scrolls, pressing left/right goes back/forward in Firefox. This is default setup never did anything for it.

Ubuntu has made great progress towards becoming "ready" but i would say it is not quite there yet. Its that "just working" ability that people like.
Ubuntu has "just worked" for me ever since about Breezy. Point is that your your mileage WILL vary no matter what OS you use. Aysiu has posted a while ago about a pretty serious problem he encountered with OS X. I've had very serious incompatibility issues with every Windows version. It only seems that OS X and Windows "just work" because they are preinstalled, pick up an Ubuntu Dell or a System76 and then tell me what problems you have getting wireless to work.

KIAaze
July 4th, 2007, 05:17 AM
prizrak, it's not because you had no problems with Ubuntu that others haven't had any.

This thread is about GNU/Linux Desktop readiness, so I think it can only help if people point out the problems with Ubuntu so that it can be improved.

Criticism can be contructive. :)

(The only problem is unfortunately that most issues are problems with hardware using closed sourced drivers and not providing GNU/Linux drivers. :( )

prizrak
July 4th, 2007, 05:22 AM
prizrak, it's not because you had no problems with Ubuntu that others haven't had any.

This thread is about GNU/Linux Desktop readiness, so I think it can only help if people point out the problems with Ubuntu so that it can be improved.

Criticism can be contructive. :)

I was simply pointing out that while some people may have problems, doesn't mean all do. Your mileage will vary, this thread isn't really for constructive criticism it has been created and things get merged into it because they are either plain wrong or we know about them already. Another thing worth pointing out is that developers don't actually read the forums, best thing to do if there is a real suggestion is create a thread with JUST that suggestion and let people discuss it, after the idea is hammered out well enough submitting it to launchpad as a feature request is beneficial ;)


(The only problem is unfortunately that most issues are problems with hardware using closed sourced drivers and not providing GNU/Linux drivers. :( )
That and the vendor lock in.

Peyton
July 4th, 2007, 05:31 AM
Umm yes actually quite a bit easier....
What's easier than just clicking the file? We're talking about WMV files. Given the choice between installing a plugin and just clicking the file, I'll settle for the latter.


Very much agree with every word you said except that Ubuntu philosophy doesn't mention converting anyone at all, it just strives to be an easy to use OS. In fact Mark Shuttleworth said more than a few times that his goal is to get those who are not current users of any OS to use Ubuntu instead of something proprietory.
No, it doesn't specifically mention converting Windows users or what-have-you, but it does center around the whole "toward humanity" concept, and, besides, the original article two pages back is about what the author says is in the way of eighty or ninety percent of desktop users adopting Linux.


As have been pointed out, that is your experience is not necessarily that of the majority of users. Gutsy should have no problem with it whatsoever with Gnash comming by default.
No, I wouldn't dare to say that it's an experience shared by the majority of users, but it doesn't appear to be an uncommon one, either. But, yes, future versions of Ubuntu are making things easier.

KIAaze
July 4th, 2007, 05:32 AM
this thread isn't really for constructive criticism it has been created and things get merged into it because they are either plain wrong or we know about them already. Another thing worth pointing out is that developers don't actually read the forums,

True. :rolleyes:

I was just having the impression that you weren't accepting that some users can have more problems with Ubuntu than Windows. ^^

steven8
July 4th, 2007, 05:44 AM
I have aslo found that two different people working with the same computer can have totally different problems. or, oddly enough, one can always have problems while the other has none.

Case in point:

Our first computer. 266 mhz, 32 mbs edo ram, 1 mb on video memory, running windows 95. Not a powerhouse, but good at the time. Anyway, my wife always complained about the computer freezing during shutdown. I never had this problem. Ever. Then, one day, I was sitting in the room with her when she was on the computer. She had IE open brwosing the net, MS Works open, writing a note, and media player open, listening to music. She took out her cd, saved her document, clicked all the x's on the open app in succession, then clicked shutdown, and proceeded to shutdown the computer at the same time all of the programs were closing. I almost jumped out of my skin, and explained to her that that was probably the reason she was having trouble with the computer freezing up during shutdown. Oi! She couldn't understand what my issue was. The computer should be able to handle it, she said. I just shook my head and walked away.

bionerual
July 4th, 2007, 05:52 AM
The most common? Where do you get your data? Most laptops I seen use Intel, Centrino is the best platform for mobile computing anyway. Nothing "just works" in Windows, it all requires drivers and believe me I had a fair share of wireless problems with Windows if you read the previous page I documented some of them. I had no wireless problems with any of my laptops at all.


Feel free to do a search of broadcom, on the first few pages there are multiple topics with Literally hundreds of posts and hundred thousands of views. Centrino is not a wifi card either. I used the word common to loosely. Even if the broadcom cards are not the majority, they cannot be ignored. Just like you have no problem with Linux cards, I have had no problems with windows. And yes it does just work. If i reinstalled windows, i can simply insert the "drivers and applications" cd that came with my labtop and bam it just works.



The only one that actually has problems is ATI. Intel and nVidia are just fine, I even got hibernate working on my laptop with it running along with Beryl (didn't do anything to make it work either).


And there is a problem. Of all the people I know, i don't know anybody that has had no problems with video cards on linux but had problem on windows. You "got" somthing to work. On windows in most cases everything "already" worked. This may be mostly a problem with the manufacturers but if you read by "biofuel" car analogue the point would be made.




My touchpad has two normal buttons, vertical and horizontal scroll on the touchpad itself and a multi-directional button on the middle. Pressing the up/down on the button scrolls, pressing left/right goes back/forward in Firefox. This is default setup never did anything for it.


My touchpad works great also. My touchpad and external mouse works great in windows also.



Ubuntu has "just worked" for me ever since about Breezy. Point is that your your mileage WILL vary no matter what OS you use. Aysiu has posted a while ago about a pretty serious problem he encountered with OS X. I've had very serious incompatibility issues with every Windows version. It only seems that OS X and Windows "just work" because they are preinstalled, pick up an Ubuntu Dell or a System76 and then tell me what problems you have getting wireless to work.

You're ignoring the point that as of right now 99.9% of shipped system with windows installed, everything worked. If I installed kubuntu on all of those machines, simply everything would not work. You cannot deny this fact. It is evident in the (1579 Viewing) (250,608 Threads) (1,186,871 Posts) currently in the support section of these forums.

At the end of the day, Windows is a great OS for those looking for the most compatible out of the box system. Linux is great for those who want to delve deeper into computers and are willing to spend time fixing things that go wrong, and know what to do when things go wrong.

Windows "safe mode" always a easy gui way to fix problems an intelligent user might have. They can goto their control panel and rollback that driver they just installed. It is self explanitory

Ubuntu "recovery mode" logs you into a command line.. what does one do now?

Don't get me wrong, I prefer running linux over windows but the learning curve is steep, and cannot be ignored.

mdsmedia
July 4th, 2007, 07:24 AM
You're ignoring the point that as of right now 99.9% of shipped system with windows installed, everything worked. If I installed kubuntu on all of those machines, simply everything would not work. You cannot deny this fact. It is evident in the (1579 Viewing) (250,608 Threads) (1,186,871 Posts) currently in the support section of these forums.

At the end of the day, Windows is a great OS for those looking for the most compatible out of the box system. Linux is great for those who want to delve deeper into computers and are willing to spend time fixing things that go wrong, and know what to do when things go wrong.

Windows "safe mode" always a easy gui way to fix problems an intelligent user might have. They can goto their control panel and rollback that driver they just installed. It is self explanitory

Ubuntu "recovery mode" logs you into a command line.. what does one do now?

Don't get me wrong, I prefer running linux over windows but the learning curve is steep, and cannot be ignored.You made my point for me. 99.9% of SHIPPED SYSTEMS with Windows installed WILL just work (at least at first), because the hardware was chosen for the OS, the drivers selected and added to the installation CDs, and the OS configured for the hardware.

Then you said "If I installed kubuntu on all of those machines, simply everything would not work.", but Kubuntu wasn't configured for the hardware. YOU installed Kubuntu on those machines, but you expect that it will work as flawlessly out of the box as the pre-installed Windows on the same machine?

It might be just me, but I could never get Windows rollback to work properly. Then again I wouldn't have a clue how to use Linux recovery mode either.

Then, as I said, Windows will work, pre-installed, out of the box...but give it six months and installing and uninstalling software, changing/adding hardware etc, and see if it works as well as Linux does after six months. I've had Ubuntu on my notebook for going on 2 years, and it works as well now as it did then, upgraded from Hoary to Breezy to Dapper. This after 6 months of XP on a brand new HP laptop almost ground to a halt.

And the wireless and video worked "out of the box", as soon as I'd installed Ubuntu, as did the touchpad, sound, etc.

Comparing Windows, pre-installed on hardware configured for Windows, with Kubuntu installed by you on hardware configured for Windows, is like comparing apples with oranges and unfair. Buy hardware that supports/is supported by Ubuntu/Linux, or have Linux pre-installed on hardware configured for Linux, then do the comparison.

m.musashi
July 4th, 2007, 07:43 AM
You're ignoring the point that as of right now 99.9% of shipped system with windows installed, everything worked. If I installed kubuntu on all of those machines, simply everything would not work. You cannot deny this fact. It is evident in the (1579 Viewing) (250,608 Threads) (1,186,871 Posts) currently in the support section of these forums.
This is a faulty argument. Computers don't ship with windows because windows just works. They ship with windows because windows is all most people know and in order to stay in business manufacturers go to great lengths to make sure windows works so people will buy their computers. And I suppose all the 24/7 toll free tech support from Dell, Gateway, HP, IBM and on and on are not there to support the fixing of windows problems because windows just works.

Oh, and quoting the number of support threads in a support forum is meaningless. Actually, a million posts only proves that a heck of a lot of people are using Ubuntu. If half the people that use Ubuntu have problems then half don't and you won't see them for that precise reason. Most people have problems because they are not very tech savvy and are trying to install an operating system on a computer that was not manufactured to run that OS. The fact that most of them eventually succeed is a testament to Ubuntu and the people here who help them and the desire of those wanting to use it to work hard at fixing their problems.

If manufacturers would spend as much effort to ensure K/Ubuntu worked like they do with windows then it would. Don't go throwing out a bunch of baseless suppositions and ignore the reality of the issue. Hardware makers can make Linux work just as well as windows. In fact, given the amount of money microsoft has spent on windows, it should work a whole lot better than it does. If you like windows then use it. You are free to do so (within the boundaries of the EULA of course). If you like Linux you are even more free to use it. But coming to a Linux forum and telling everyone that Linux has problems and windows is better accomplishes nothing. If you want to see Linux/Ubuntu get better then do something useful. If you could care less what happens then live and let live. Your comments here will achieve nothing except to incite people. And if you think you are helping by posting here you are not. No one here is going to say "oh, he makes a good point. Let's go fix that." If you want to discuss the pros/cons of using Ubuntu then by all means do so. But stick to facts and avoid hyperbole.

Finally, do not ignore that fact that for many people using Linux/Ubuntu is also a philosophy. Many of us are sick and tired of all the MS bull and saturation of the market with secret formats. In a free society information must remain free. Microsoft's ubiquitousness undermines freedom of access and freedom of information. What if the bible, koran, declaration of independence or any other important document had been written in ms word and only those who could afford to buy the software could read them? Is that freedom? You may not accept the underlying philosophy and you do not have to accept it to use free (as in freedom) software. But you do have to acknowledge that for many of us the philosophy is important and respect that.

Peace.

prizrak
July 4th, 2007, 04:18 PM
What's easier than just clicking the file? We're talking about WMV files. Given the choice between installing a plugin and just clicking the file, I'll settle for the latter.
Not a very good argument. You are talking about an MS format in an MS OS, by the same token .ogg will play out of the box in Ubuntu and .mov in Apple. The latter is actually alot more popular than .wmv. If you wanna talk about codec support then Ubuntu is just as easy as Windows in that sense as they both will download and install any necessary codecs as needed.

bionerual
July 4th, 2007, 05:47 PM
This is a faulty argument. Computers don't ship with windows because windows just works. They ship with windows because windows is all most people know and in order to stay in business manufacturers go to great lengths to make sure windows works so people will buy their computers. And I suppose all the 24/7 toll free tech support from Dell, Gateway, HP, IBM and on and on are not there to support the fixing of windows problems because windows just works.

Oh, and quoting the number of support threads in a support forum is meaningless. Actually, a million posts only proves that a heck of a lot of people are using Ubuntu. If half the people that use Ubuntu have problems then half don't and you won't see them for that precise reason. Most people have problems because they are not very tech savvy and are trying to install an operating system on a computer that was not manufactured to run that OS. The fact that most of them eventually succeed is a testament to Ubuntu and the people here who help them and the desire of those wanting to use it to work hard at fixing their problems.

If manufacturers would spend as much effort to ensure K/Ubuntu worked like they do with windows then it would. Don't go throwing out a bunch of baseless suppositions and ignore the reality of the issue. Hardware makers can make Linux work just as well as windows. In fact, given the amount of money microsoft has spent on windows, it should work a whole lot better than it does. If you like windows then use it. You are free to do so (within the boundaries of the EULA of course). If you like Linux you are even more free to use it. But coming to a Linux forum and telling everyone that Linux has problems and windows is better accomplishes nothing. If you want to see Linux/Ubuntu get better then do something useful. If you could care less what happens then live and let live. Your comments here will achieve nothing except to incite people. And if you think you are helping by posting here you are not. No one here is going to say "oh, he makes a good point. Let's go fix that." If you want to discuss the pros/cons of using Ubuntu then by all means do so. But stick to facts and avoid hyperbole.

Finally, do not ignore that fact that for many people using Linux/Ubuntu is also a philosophy. Many of us are sick and tired of all the MS bull and saturation of the market with secret formats. In a free society information must remain free. Microsoft's ubiquitousness undermines freedom of access and freedom of information. What if the bible, koran, declaration of independence or any other important document had been written in ms word and only those who could afford to buy the software could read them? Is that freedom? You may not accept the underlying philosophy and you do not have to accept it to use free (as in freedom) software. But you do have to acknowledge that for many of us the philosophy is important and respect that.

Peace.


You made my point for me. 99.9% of SHIPPED SYSTEMS with Windows installed WILL just work (at least at first), because the hardware was chosen for the OS, the drivers selected and added to the installation CDs, and the OS configured for the hardware.

Then you said "If I installed kubuntu on all of those machines, simply everything would not work.", but Kubuntu wasn't configured for the hardware. YOU installed Kubuntu on those machines, but you expect that it will work as flawlessly out of the box as the pre-installed Windows on the same machine?

It might be just me, but I could never get Windows rollback to work properly. Then again I wouldn't have a clue how to use Linux recovery mode either.

Then, as I said, Windows will work, pre-installed, out of the box...but give it six months and installing and uninstalling software, changing/adding hardware etc, and see if it works as well as Linux does after six months. I've had Ubuntu on my notebook for going on 2 years, and it works as well now as it did then, upgraded from Hoary to Breezy to Dapper. This after 6 months of XP on a brand new HP laptop almost ground to a halt.

And the wireless and video worked "out of the box", as soon as I'd installed Ubuntu, as did the touchpad, sound, etc.

Comparing Windows, pre-installed on hardware configured for Windows, with Kubuntu installed by you on hardware configured for Windows, is like comparing apples with oranges and unfair. Buy hardware that supports/is supported by Ubuntu/Linux, or have Linux pre-installed on hardware configured for Linux, then do the comparison.

This is exactly my point. I did not say windows is better. I said ubuntu is simply not ready like windows is. Yes it is not the fault of the developers and yes it will get to the point where the generic ubuntu installation works way more smoothly then the generic windows installation. I CAN compare pre-installed windows to installing kubuntu on that same computer because my computer and probably yours too came preinstalled with windows and you chose to install ubuntu.

Yes the big computer corporations try very hard to make all their products work for windows. So far, ubuntu has been so great that alot of this hardware works flawlessly for ubuntu. But as I said before, take a biofuel car for example, it's probably a great car, i would love to have one myself, but I would be unable to goto any random gas station and fuel it up because the majority of gas stations simply dont have the ability to fuel it up. You cannot say that this car is "ready"



Then, as I said, Windows will work, pre-installed, out of the box...but give it six months and installing and uninstalling software, changing/adding hardware etc, and see if it works as well as Linux does after six months. I've had Ubuntu on my notebook for going on 2 years, and it works as well now as it did then, upgraded from Hoary to Breezy to Dapper. This after 6 months of XP on a brand new HP laptop almost ground to a halt.

I completely agree with this. No matter what you do windows will slow down after time, linux will not.


Most people have problems because they are not very tech savvy and are trying to install an operating system on a computer that was not manufactured to run that OS. The fact that most of them eventually succeed is a testament to Ubuntu and the people here who help them and the desire of those wanting to use it to work hard at fixing their problems.

This is also what is great about ubuntu. When you need support about anything you can find it. However as stated before, alot of users would rather use the preinstalled windows because the computer was made to function perfectly then spend time on forums looking for solutions




If manufacturers would spend as much effort to ensure K/Ubuntu worked like they do with windows then it would. Don't go throwing out a bunch of baseless suppositions and ignore the reality of the issue. Hardware makers can make Linux work just as well as windows. In fact, given the amount of money microsoft has spent on windows, it should work a whole lot better than it does. If you like windows then use it. You are free to do so (within the boundaries of the EULA of course). If you like Linux you are even more free to use it. But coming to a Linux forum and telling everyone that Linux has problems and windows is better accomplishes nothing

I am not ignoring the reality of the issue, you are the one doing so. If you had read my posts then you would have seen that I did say it was the fault of the manufacturers. Being 100% realistic the amount of products not working has greatly diminished over the year and is rapidly becoming close to 100% out of the box compatibility.

The reality of the issue is that 99.9% of computers preinstalled with windows work when turned on. The reality of kubuntu is that, if large portion may work perfectly and better on linux, there would still be a large portion that has a number of issues. Yes those computers were made to work with windows, but ubuntu was also made to work, was it not?

This is not a thread about which is better. If i believed windows was better i would not spend my time here or running linux. This is a thread about ubuntu being "ready". All of my arguments were directed towards this topic. In my opinion (as you see in my posts) it is not. You could argue that windows is not ready. It is obvious that it has problems as well.

kamaboko
July 4th, 2007, 05:48 PM
Not a very good argument. You are talking about an MS format in an MS OS, by the same token .ogg will play out of the box in Ubuntu and .mov in Apple. The latter is actually alot more popular than .wmv. If you wanna talk about codec support then Ubuntu is just as easy as Windows in that sense as they both will download and install any necessary codecs as needed.


.ogg is more popular in the open source community, but doesn't hold a candle to .wmv in total number of users.

Feba
July 4th, 2007, 06:11 PM
The latter in that statement would be .mov, which IS far more popular than .wmv.

Reading is fun.

Peyton
July 4th, 2007, 06:40 PM
I don't see how Linux should be given extra points here just because WMV is a Microsoft codec. The fact is that it's a Windows world, and as such, one can reasonably expect to find a lot of WMV-encoded videos out there.

And I'll remind some of you that, as bionerual said, this isn't a Windows versus Linux debate, so I don't know where you guys are taking this.

m.musashi
July 4th, 2007, 10:04 PM
The reality of the issue is that 99.9% of computers preinstalled with windows work when turned on. The reality of kubuntu is that, if large portion may work perfectly and better on linux, there would still be a large portion that has a number of issues. Yes those computers were made to work with windows, but ubuntu was also made to work, was it not?
You know, 99.9% of the computers preinstalled with K/Ubuntu also work perfectly (System 76 for example). Your point is meaningless. You simply cannot compare the readiness of an OS that is not preinstalled and was not set up by the manufacturer to work with the readiness of an OS that is preinstalled and was configured by those in control of the hardware. Try to install OSX on a Dell. Does that mean OSX isn't ready because it won't work? Yes, it's true that the devs are working hard to make Ubuntu work on as many boxes as possible, but until the people making the boxes also make an effort to be compatible with Ubuntu and Linux in general you just can't expect perfect compatibility. There are too many variables that the Ubuntu devs have no control over. That is not a reflection of the readiness of the OS. It's a reflection of the readiness of manufacturers to design for Ubuntu.


This is not a thread about which is better. If i believed windows was better i would not spend my time here or running linux. This is a thread about ubuntu being "ready". All of my arguments were directed towards this topic. In my opinion (as you see in my posts) it is not. You could argue that windows is not ready. It is obvious that it has problems as well.
Actually, if you have read the majority of the posts here (as I have) you would know that this thread is not about Ubuntu being ready at all. It is the dumping ground for all the people who come to the forums and want to complain that Ubuntu isn't ready because they can't get it to work. Your arguments are no more original than anyone else's. Furthermore, you would also have noticed that the term "ready" is highly subjective and therefore meaningless. My entire family from 7 year old to my parents are using Ubuntu. Using your brand of logic I should be able to conclude that Ubuntu is ready for everyone because it's ready for me.

Peace.

bionerual
July 4th, 2007, 11:55 PM
You know, 99.9% of the computers preinstalled with K/Ubuntu also work perfectly (System 76 for example). Your point is meaningless. You simply cannot compare the readiness of an OS that is not preinstalled and was not set up by the manufacturer to work with the readiness of an OS that is preinstalled and was configured by those in control of the hardware. Try to install OSX on a Dell. Does that mean OSX isn't ready because it won't work? Yes, it's true that the devs are working hard to make Ubuntu work on as many boxes as possible, but until the people making the boxes also make an effort to be compatible with Ubuntu and Linux in general you just can't expect perfect compatibility. There are too many variables that the Ubuntu devs have no control over. That is not a reflection of the readiness of the OS. It's a reflection of the readiness of manufacturers to design for Ubuntu..

Actually, if you have read the majority of the posts here (as I have) you would know that this thread is not about Ubuntu being ready at all. It is the dumping ground for all the people who come to the forums and want to complain that Ubuntu isn't ready because they can't get it to work. Your arguments are no more original than anyone else's. Furthermore, you would also have noticed that the term "ready" is highly subjective and therefore meaningless. My entire family from 7 year old to my parents are using Ubuntu. Using your brand of logic I should be able to conclude that Ubuntu is ready for everyone because it's ready for me.

Peace

I just don't think you get it at all or are not reading my posts fully. Stop pulling the argument off in your own direction simply for the sake of arguement.
Yes of course 99.9% of preinstalled ubuntu works. But that is NOT all the computers in the world. The computers shipped with windows are MOST of the computers in the world.

OSX actually can be installed on a dell with some tweaking but that is not what it is meant for. Ubuntu is meant for those computers. As i stated multiple times I KNOW that manufacturers aren't developing for linux and this the world we live in. It IS a windows world. Of course ubuntu is ready for the linux world, but unfortunately that is a very small world. Ubuntu is simply not ready for the world in which we live in today.

If you wish to argue that ubuntu is ready for computers made for it then please, skip my posts because that is not what I am talking about and I am not interested.

m.musashi
July 5th, 2007, 12:40 AM
I just don't think you get it at all or are not reading my posts fully. Stop pulling the argument off in your own direction simply for the sake of arguement.
Yes of course 99.9% of preinstalled ubuntu works. But that is NOT all the computers in the world. The computers shipped with windows are MOST of the computers in the world.
So, what is your point? Your argument seems to be that Ubuntu doesn't work as well as windows but you don't compare it on equal grounds. What I'm hearing you say is that the majority of computers run windows so therefore Ubuntu isn't ready for the world. That makes absolutely no sense. Following this logic, Ubuntu will only be "ready" when everyone starts to buy computers running it, but no one can start to buy it because it isn't ready. See where this is going? By this logic, you are also saying that OSX isn't ready because most people buy windows. Most people also bought VHS instead of Beta despite the fact that Beta was a better product at that time. Consumers don't always buy what's best. They buy what's cheap and convenient. It's convenient to buy windows so they do. Most don't even know there is a choice. If you walk into a store all you see are different versions of windows.

In reality, what you are saying is that world isn't ready for Ubuntu. And I totally agree with that. Most people are windows puppets. They can do things with windows so they are happy. So happy, in fact that they are willing to buy it over and over and deal with the hassle of running anti-malware. It's actually more convenient to do this than learning something new. Nearly everyone I know uses windows and they are all totally computer illiterate. They know that by clicking a series of icons or buttons they can do certain things. If you set them in front of a mac or linux box they take one look and leave. They are unwilling to change because they are unwilling to learn. To attribute this to some fault, defect or lack of "readiness" on the part of Ubuntu is meaningless.


OSX actually can be installed on a dell with some tweaking but that is not what it is meant for. Ubuntu is meant for those computers. As i stated multiple times I KNOW that manufacturers aren't developing for linux and this the world we live in. It IS a windows world. Of course ubuntu is ready for the linux world, but unfortunately that is a very small world. Ubuntu is simply not ready for the world in which we live in today.
Again, you are simply saying that the world isn't ready to change. You admit that Ubuntu is ready for the Linux world. Isn't that enough? Why does it have to be ready for the windows world? And what would that even look like? There are only two options here: Ubuntu emulates windows so the world can accept and use it, or the world changes and decides to learn how to use Ubuntu. The first option is out because no one working on Ubuntu wants to emulate windows. So the only option is that people have to change.


If you wish to argue that ubuntu is ready for computers made for it then please, skip my posts because that is not what I am talking about and I am not interested.
So, what are you talking about? That Ubuntu is not ready for computers NOT made for it? Because, in truth 99.9% of computers made are NOT made for Ubuntu. What's the point of discussing that? That is obvious and not in dispute. So are you suggesting that Ubuntu can only be ready when they figure out how to make it run on all the computers in the world that are not designed for it? Chances are your computer came with a sticker saying "designed for windows". Not "designed for Linux". If this is your argument then perhaps you should just not post. If you are trying to say something else, then please be more clear. I actually have read your posts (and most of the other 7000+) and I do understand your point. It's only that you aren't saying anything new. Read the rest of this thread and you'll see that. If you think you are saying something new and you have read a good percentage of this thread so you can offer some evidence of your originality, then please share that.

If you think I am not understanding your point then please clarify what it is you want to say, because what I hear is that Ubuntu isn't ready because everyone uses windows. I'm sorry, but that just doesn't make any sense.

vexorian
July 5th, 2007, 01:03 AM
Windows is certainly not ready for the desktop.

After installing windows XP SP2 on my computer:
- intel pentium 4 2.4 Ghz.
- Integrated soundcard "SoundMax"
- 768 MB RAM
- 128 MB nvidia graphics card (geforce *something* "something")
- HP deskjet 3420 printer
- HP scanjet 2400 scanner
- LG CD and DVD burners

I made a review:

Installation:
- The CD initially boots into some text mode installation, very hard to deal with, then in the middle of the process it is required to format partitions from text mode and then it copies itself to continue the process. This install process is average in regards of simplicity.

Dual Boot:
- The installer totally ignored my other partitions, I had to implement Grub manually in order to recover my other operating systems.

Hardware compatibility:
- Windows said that it was installed, so I booted into it, the first thing you notice is some kind of welcome to windows animation, it was silent, I could eventually figure out that sound wasn't working.
- When the animation ended and I got outside the tutorial, I could notice that the resolution was very small! this monitor+graphic card combo allows a max of 1280x1024, but windows wouldn't allow me to choose more than 400x300!

- tried checking if it detected my printer, I went to control panel, etc. But it simply couldn't detect my printer.
- The same happen happened to my scanner.

I don't know what should I do, is MS requesting me to get an OEM system instead of the computer I built? I don't really have that money, I am not sure why windows XP has failed to detect most of my hardware, when people advertise that it has great hardware support. I guess they lied to me! Sorry but I don't think windows XP is usable for me in this stage.

Software:
This is one of the points in which windows is terribly lacking, let's see:
- Notepad: VERY limited, you can't even enable auto indentation, and it only supports MSDOS text file format...
- WordPad: Not too much options, I couldn't find basic things like spell check, openoffice writer or even abiword are like 45 times more complete than this.
- MSPaint : Has anyone tried doing serious art work on this? No point of comparisson to the Gimp.
- Calc : It is kind of good although I miss expression evaluation, it is a little faster than an actual simulation of a real calculator.
- Games : VERY few games, although minesweeper is good.
- Internet explorer 6: I don't think it actually had theme support? And no tabs? wtf?

I couldn't find any spreadsheet software or presentation software.

Multimedia:
- I tried windows media player but it can't play my DVDs, it keeps poping out something like "incompatible format" I decided to give up. When it plays it is kind of good, although it takes almost all of my screen and is slow.
- Burning CDs/DVDs is either very unfriendly or missing, I couldn't find any way to burn stuff...

Customizability:
- Windows XP hardly comes with 3 themes, blue, silver and green, I think I was able to change the font size. I can also change up to 4 icons: My Computer, My documents , Recycle bin and Recycle bin (full). I am not sure if there is more customization options, I certainly couldn't find much from the menu maze, ooh I think I can also change the wallpaper..

Conclusion
Windows is probably ready for people willing to pay a lot of software licenses or to commit the crime of piracy. As for the rest, it is 'ready' in the sense that it would probably allow you to "sorta" browse the web, and do a couple of text documents but nothing advanced. For more thing, you will need a lot of tweaking and help from other people to learn its wereabouts like the gate to 'secret' software which is not accessible through the panel control. People wanting customization would either have to break the EULA or refer to a different OS. Games are out of the question without good hardware support. Windows is not ready for the desktop, sorry guys...

m.musashi
July 5th, 2007, 01:25 AM
windows is certainly not ready for the desktop
/snip/
Lol. Now that's a fair comparison - clean self-install of windows on a computer not "designed for windows" (vs the implied clean self install of Ubuntu with which we are all familiar). Nice job.

freebird54
July 5th, 2007, 02:31 AM
Left out a few things too... in particular the reason why Windows is not ready for the desktop. Well - no longer ready for MY desktop at least.

That reason - the addition of WGA. I have used computers since early C64 days, and worked on them since punch card days. I have dealt with any amount of problems with different systems - hardware/driver/OS/user failures all included. I expect a certain amount of hassle to get things running correctly. Windows is no better than other things I have used - though it has become more difficult to fix over the years when something DOESN'T work (registry diving etc). The constant changing of how a well-understood option is accessed has been a major problem.

But the END of acceptance came with the addition of code that can ON ITS OWN, and WITH NO CONCEIVABLE BENEFIT TO ME shut down my system and deny access to potentially critical information. What if I'm in e-mail consultation with my lawyer? What if I have a couple of stock transactions to complete NOW? What if my updated resume needs to be sent NOW while the job is unfilled?

I thought that the battle over serious inconvenience with software and related products had been won when Lotus lost its 'key disk' protection after the howls of outrage of businesses who couldn't get the functionality they paid for. MS has constantly been trying to bring the bad old days back (with painful product keys, and activation, and restricting updates) and now they have succeeded. With Vista, they have even gone a step further and impacted even hardware costs (for video card DRM 'features' etc) - again with no benefit to me - the end user.

So - the debate should die now. It is Windows that is NOT ready (anymore) for the desktop..

Oh yes... :)


but I am serious....

bootdoc
July 5th, 2007, 03:02 AM
I have read numerous posts here stating that hardware and peripherals do not work out of the box with linux. I have to say that I have experienced many windoze boxes where things don't work OTB and those machines were configured at the factory! I use kubuntu feisty and adding printers is a breeze. capturing video is no problem. Downloading digital stills even easier. My mom and dad use kubuntu. My sister uses kubuntu. When I setup a linux box for someone I do whatever config need be done so that person doesn't have to. That is what dell and HP and toshiba etc. etc. do at there factory is it not? Open source OS' and software open doors for people to create new and better products. Check out the openmoko phone due out in september. Use your imagination and opensource can make it reality. All three shrek movies were made on linux machines.

" All the big film studios primarily use Linux for animation and visual effects. Perhaps no commercial Linux installation is larger than DreamWorks Animation, with more than 1,000 Linux desktops and more than 3,000 server CPUs." Linux journal

Linux not ready for desktop??!!
the windsor unified school district in CA just made the switch from windows to linux. 5,000 students and 250 teachers working off of a linux based thin client network.

wake up and smell the coffee dudes.

If you can't get your linux install off the ground then pay someone who knows how, to do it for you.
Charlie

prizrak
July 5th, 2007, 03:16 AM
I don't see how Linux should be given extra points here just because WMV is a Microsoft codec. The fact is that it's a Windows world, and as such, one can reasonably expect to find a lot of WMV-encoded videos out there.

And I'll remind some of you that, as bionerual said, this isn't a Windows versus Linux debate, so I don't know where you guys are taking this.

You seem to have missed the point. Ubuntu doesn't get any extra points for WMV being an MS codec. The point is that if a codec is already installed on your system then of course the video will play if it needs it. WMV is just one example of a codec and is hardly the most popular one. MOV (Quicktime) is loads upon loads more popular than WMV and to play that in Windows you either have to install Quicktime or, if you know about it, Quicktime alternative. In Ubuntu it is the same exact thing, OGG will play out of the box, WMV and Quicktime will need to be installed. Considering that it is installed automatically upon trying to play it, I don't see a problem.

W/e this debate is about, this argument has been brought up and I responded to it.

DoctorMO
July 5th, 2007, 03:48 AM
one can reasonably expect to find a lot of WMV-encoded videos out there.

Expecting it and believing it to b reasonable are two very different things. just because the world is messed up doesn't mean I have to ignore it and play along. nothing ever changes unless people make a stand and I stand against the use of wmv, quicktime, realmedia etc; I don't think using those formats or supporting them is at all right or what we should be doing.

Peyton
July 5th, 2007, 04:33 AM
Prizrak, I don't think I missed any point. You're misunderstanding me and are arguing a different case. WMV may or may not be the most popular codec. However, it does exist, and encountering it isn't too uncommon. As I said before, it's a Windows world, and we have to gauge things according to that. No, you may not be interested in making Linux mainstream or what-not. In that case, you can safely ignore my posts because they don't apply to you. My posts, and bionerual's as well it looks like, are geared towards the if you want to make Linux more mainstream path.

DoctorMO, I never claimed that WMV's presence is reasonable (or unreasonable, for that matter). I only said that one can reasonably expect to find it.

m.musashi
July 5th, 2007, 09:08 AM
Why is it that most of the people who seem to be in favor of or in support of Ubuntu/Linix have been here a long time (i.e. lots of bean) and those who are arguing against it in one way or another have been here only a short time (i.e. very few beans)? If you only have a few beans, perhaps you should hold your yorr tounge until you have a bit more experience.

KIAaze
July 5th, 2007, 09:22 AM
Users should not be judged by the number of their beans but by the content of their posts. ;)

But instead of just complaining about problems, it is good to ask for solutions. So spending more time on the forums might indeed make them more Ubuntu friendly. :)

Tomosaur
July 5th, 2007, 01:25 PM
Prizrak, I don't think I missed any point. You're misunderstanding me and are arguing a different case. WMV may or may not be the most popular codec. However, it does exist, and encountering it isn't too uncommon. As I said before, it's a Windows world, and we have to gauge things according to that. No, you may not be interested in making Linux mainstream or what-not. In that case, you can safely ignore my posts because they don't apply to you. My posts, and bionerual's as well it looks like, are geared towards the if you want to make Linux more mainstream path.

DoctorMO, I never claimed that WMV's presence is reasonable (or unreasonable, for that matter). I only said that one can reasonably expect to find it.

Then your point is irrelevant. I'm no more likely to come across a .wmv file than I am a .mov, and indeed, most videos anyone is likely to encounter these days comes in a flash player, so the format and player are self contained (and indeed, available to both Linux and Windows users). What you're saying is that since .wmv exists, we should all make sure .wmv works out of the box! That is a ridiculous idea, particularly when many people will never encounter a .wmv anyway. I can't remember the last time I watched anything in .wmv format, to be perfectly frank. Flash is possibly the MOST common media format at the moment, and it isn't available out of the box in any system, as far as I'm aware. So should we make Flash work by default in Ubuntu? Of course not. Proprietary issues aside, it just isn't important. If people want to watch a Flash video, they'll just install the Flash player. There's no problem here, and any Windows user who argues that Ubuntu 'isn't ready' because of it has obviously never installed Windows themselves. Ubuntu is ready for the desktop, and has been ready for ages - what we need is for retailers to start pre-installing Ubuntu on machines (which is starting to happen).

prizrak
July 5th, 2007, 01:45 PM
Then your point is irrelevant. I'm no more likely to come across a .wmv file than I am a .mov, and indeed, most videos anyone is likely to encounter these days comes in a flash player, so the format and player are self contained (and indeed, available to both Linux and Windows users). What you're saying is that since .wmv exists, we should all make sure .wmv works out of the box! That is a ridiculous idea, particularly when many people will never encounter a .wmv anyway. I can't remember the last time I watched anything in .wmv format, to be perfectly frank. Flash is possibly the MOST common media format at the moment, and it isn't available out of the box in any system, as far as I'm aware. So should we make Flash work by default in Ubuntu? Of course not. Proprietary issues aside, it just isn't important. If people want to watch a Flash video, they'll just install the Flash player. There's no problem here, and any Windows user who argues that Ubuntu 'isn't ready' because of it has obviously never installed Windows themselves. Ubuntu is ready for the desktop, and has been ready for ages - what we need is for retailers to start pre-installing Ubuntu on machines (which is starting to happen).

Thanks you saved me quite a bit of typing ;)


windows is certainly not ready for the desktop.

Yeah let's see.


After installing windows XP SP2 on my computer:
- intel pentium 4 2.4 Ghz.
- Integrated soundcard "SoundMax"
- 512 MB RAM
- 128 MB nvidia graphics card
- HP deskjet 3420 printer
- HP scanjet 2400 scanner
- LG CD and DVD burners

I made a review:

Installation:
- The CD initially boots into some textmode installation, very hard to deal with, then in the middle of the process it is required to format partitions from textmode and then it copies itself to continue the process. This install process is average in regards of simplicity.

Dual Boot:
- The installer totally ignored my other partitions, I had to implement Grub manually in order to recover my other operating systems.

Hardware compatibility:
- Windows said that it was installed, so I booted into it, the first thing you notice is some kind of welcome to windows animation, it was silent, I could eventually figure out that sound wasn't working.
- When the animation ended and I got outside the tutorial, I could notice that the resolution was very small! this monitor+graphic card combo allows a max of 1280x1024, but windows wouldn't allow me to choose more than 400x300!

- tried checking if it detected my printer, I went to control panel, etc. But it simply couldn't detect my printer.
- The same happen happened to my scanner.

I don't know what should I do, is MS requesting me to get an OEM system instead of the computer I built? I don't really have that money, I am not sure why almost all of my hardware has totally failed to be detected.

Software:
This is one of the points in which windows is terribly lacking, let's see:
- Notepad: VERY limited, you can't even enable auto indentation, and it only supports MSDOS text file format...
- WordPad: Not too much options, I couldn't find basic things like spell check, openoffice writer or even abiword are like 45 times more complete than this.
- MSPaint : Has anyone tried doing serious art work on this? No point of comparisson to the Gimp.
- Calc : It is kind of good although I miss expression evaluation, it is a little faster than an actual simulation of a real calculator.
- Games : VERY few games, although minesweeper is good.
- Internet explorer 6: I don't think it actually had theme support? And no tabs? wtf?

I couldn't find any spreadsheet software or presentation software.

Multimedia:
- I tried windows media player but it can't play my DVDs, it keeps poping out something like "incompatible format" I decided to give up. When it plays it is kind of good, although it takes almost all of my screen and is slow.

- Burning CDs/DVDs is either very unfriendly or missing, I couldn't find a way to burn stuff...

Customizability:
- Widnows XP comes with 3 themes, blue, silver and green, I think I was able to change the font size. I can also change up to 4 icons: My Computer, My documents , Recycle bin and Recycle bin (full)
Be happy it saw your drives to begin with. I was building a system for my father a few months ago, and as he is a bit of a gamer and doesn't change his system too often (once 3-4 years or so) we went for fairly powerful components among which was a SATA II RAID. XP SP2 setup could not see the drives if the controller was in RAID or native SATA mode (AHCI I think it is). In order to get the RAID to work I had to find a floppy disk and use a floppy drive from the old system and then install the driver that way. A frigging floppy in 2007, seriously...... Before anyone mentions that Vista could probably pick that controller up without a problem, it doesn't have enough compatibility to be useful. The nVidia card wouldn't work for sure, half of the software would most likely need to be upgraded/replaced. Not to mention that the amount of power the OS requires would have made the entire upgrade completely pointless.

Peyton
July 5th, 2007, 06:25 PM
Why is it that most of the people who seem to be in favor of or in support of Ubuntu/Linix have been here a long time (i.e. lots of bean) and those who are arguing against it in one way or another have been here only a short time (i.e. very few beans)? If you only have a few beans, perhaps you should hold your yorr tounge until you have a bit more experience.

Nobody's arguing "against" Ubuntu or Linux. If I didn't like Ubuntu, then I wouldn't have an account in an Ubuntu forum.

Tomosaur, while I'll admit that WMV isn't extremely common, there still are places where one will encounter it (did so the day before last when I was trying to watch a press conference). Even so, simply go back to the post that initiated the WMV argument and select the next point.

m.musashi
July 5th, 2007, 07:30 PM
Nobody's arguing "against" Ubuntu or Linux. If I didn't like Ubuntu, then I wouldn't have an account in an Ubuntu forum.
That wasn't directed at anyone in particular. Just a general observation. Perhaps "against" isn't the best word, but there are certainly a lot of posts here that, while usually well-meaning, take on the general tone of "Ubuntu is nice and all but just not ready" or "not as good as windows" and so on. To those of us who do think Ubuntu is ready, actually better than windows and use it every day these comments do appear as being a kind of attack - whether or not the poster intended that.

And, yes, I know beans aren't a great way to measure time or involvement but they often give a good approximation. For example, many of the "Ubuntu just isn't good enough" type posts came from users who's accounts were only days or weeks old at the time of the post. Some of them start, "I've been using Ubuntu for 3 hours now and..." Conversely, it's pretty rare (though not non-existent) to find similar posts by users who have been here a couple years (at the time of the post).

SWBgHz
July 5th, 2007, 07:32 PM
I have always been trying to find a use for Linux if for no other reason than to expand my base of experience. In the past, I have always found quite enough problems with various distros to eliminate it as a viable desktop OS. Mind you, for specific purposes there is no question that Linux excels, be it a file server or PVR like Myth or any number of purpose built uses - but as an all around main desktop it has always show itself to be grossly inadequate to me. Just FYI, I consider a desktop OS to be one that can install and work without advanced configuration - downloading and running some driver executables is acceptable, even necessary in todays more complex hardware world, but the Achilles heal of Linux has always been the ridiculous need for advanced processes needed to do even common things and the requirement that the more advanced things be done through an archaic command line.

I am not an average user, I am quite technically proficient. I hold more than one computer science degree and have a number of computer certifications. I have worked with UNIX in the past in a commercial setting so am not afraid of a command line, I just understand the limitation of the command line is that you can ONLY do what you know exactly how to do with it. It is also more than a bit ridiculous how the many Linux distros to often insist on their own switches and formats for the most common of things.

So, that is by background, my biases - here is my story with Ubuntu...

Having heard allot about Ubunutu over the past months I have wanted to give it a try and see what people where talking about. I had been wanting to do something with it just to see for myself. I installed it pretty easily and have to say I found it impressive how many drivers it recognized without issue. I use a Promise HDD controller and a PCIe SATA controller (due to NVIDIAs crappy 680i SATA implementation) and I didn't expect it to auto detect both. I did expect issues with video and sound and that is where, ultimately, my previous experiences with Linux where confirmed. I did not expect to have Ubunutu automagically recognize my 8800 GTXs and have them running in SLi, heck, NVIDIA can barely get SLI working in Vista. But that being said, finding that after install the best I could get from the default video driver was a 1024x768 desktop, not even a WS option, was disappointing. No worries, I had to do a custom config on a PVR I built to host mythTV (running on fiesty) a couple weeks ago so I wasn't concerned.

I went about playing around and trying to get some things setup to try it out and came across two issues that to me make Ubuntu totally useless as a real desktop PC OS. First, and the most ridiculous, was in trying to copy/paste a file from my home directory to the firefox directory (namely, my bookmarks). Yes, I know I could import it but I should have been able to just copy/paste my archived one over the profiles existing default one as well. The problem came from permissions as I don't have permission to the /etc folder. this I know being familiar with the Linux kernel and I don't find that a fault in and of itself. What I fault Ubuntu for is the complete lack of a way for me to trigger and privilege elevation to complete the operation. I mena I copy from one folder and then in the other I right click to paste and no option to do so exists with NO explanation of the problem. Being and experiences computer guy I realize the issue and complete the operation from the command line with about 10 times the effort. But explain to me how a regular person would do this? Command line to copy/paste files? No way - this behavior alone disqualifies Ubuntu as being usable by 955 of PC users.

The next issue, the final straw really - was when I went to try to get the NVIDIA driver going. I tried to different ways of doing this - both from the standpoint of what a moderately informed average user would be able to do - and I tried with and with both 8800s installed and with only one installed, the results where the same so I will describe what happened with both installed. First, downloaded the driver from NVIDIA. Of course I cannot double click it and run it as 95% of PC users would try to do, I did find the "allow to run as executable" and check it under the file properties but when it went to run it still needed privilege and no dialogue or means of granting the privileged escalation existed. So, right here - dead in the water for 95% of PC users and for no good reason. Why no right clilck option to execute as root? Anyways, to the command line - run the file and it completes and prompts to reboot. Upon reboot - Xwindows fails to load and I am at a command line. For all practical purposes a DEAD PC. I can easily get xWindows back up and going but are you kidding me, such a routine driver installation can kill the GUI for the OS? No way this is ready for anyone but expert users. I got xWindows back and the default driver back and tried the alternate method using the 'restricted drivers' option. This seems to be an Ubunutu specifc thing, and I had no idea what it was other than ascertaining that it was installing the open source NVIDIA drivers that I know are out there. Anyways, it was easy enough to find and to start; definitely something any user could do. Upon completing a reboot was requested (don't Linux folk make fun of all the reboots Windows requires?) so I did. After rebooting I got back to the same problem as before - Xwindows crashes on load and the system drops to a command line - again, DEAD PC to anyone but an expert.

All this just trying to get better than the base display driver - no mention of trying to get good performance or, god help me, 3d. I didn't even try sound either. Just one of the most basic things ALL computers need - display. How can Linux be taken seriously as a desktop contender with such critical failures on such basic and necessary elements. I really find it disappointing as I have used Ubunutu (running MythTV and MythWeb ona box in the garage now) enough to know it is a quality distribution and word on the street is of all the Linux distributions it is the most 'usable'. 'Linux for human beings' is far from what Ubuntu seems to be at this point - sure, if all you want is a cheesy resolution and a web browser and email then I suppose it works great, but heck - the damn iPhone does that and more. If Ubunutu, or Linux in general, really wants to take advantage of MS recent incompetence and their struggle to make Vista not suck then there is alot of work to do. First, driver support is worlds better but still not good enough - a bad driver install cannot kill the computer. Command line has to go - I know this will never happen and that because of it Linux will never be much more than it is but this is 2007, command lines are great for automated tasks, administration, and for servers and other single purpose machines but in the desktop world the command line should be NOTHING but an alternative to GUI for use when doing advanced maintenance or other such expert work. A regular user should be able to install, configure, edit, copy and paste files, remove files, etc, etc, etc without EVER having to hit a terminal.

I am going to try SuSe next having played a good deal with Fedora a bit back and being even less impressed. I wish Ubuntu well, I find allot of good in it - and I will probably continue to use it for my PVR (where Linux really shines IMHO - those single purpose systems, proprietary services, etc). But it has a long way to go to compete with Windows for the desktop market, a long way.

a12ctic
July 5th, 2007, 07:37 PM
Linux fails as a desktop for you. Just because you're not used to how it works doesn't mean that its broken or not ready for the desktop. Maybe you should stop and think that maybe we like how linux is now and we dont want it to be more like Windows. I don't care if average joe can't use ubuntu or any other linux distribution, thats not my fault. The point is that I can and it opens me up to a world of free software, a stable, tweakable, free operating system that works for ME.

Erunno
July 5th, 2007, 07:38 PM
I am not an average user, I am quite technically proficient. I hold more than one computer science degree and have a number of computer certifications. I have worked with UNIX in the past in a commercial setting so am not afraid of a command line, I just understand the limitation of the command line is that you can ONLY do what you know exactly how to do with it. It is also more than a bit ridiculous how the many Linux distros to often insist on their own switches and formats for the most common of things.

Welcome to the Internet!

By the way, does anyone care that I hold at least 3 PhDs, worked in the Manhattan Projekt and that I earned a fortune selling turnips? Oh, least I forget, supermodels keep going in and out of my bedroom!

forrestcupp
July 5th, 2007, 07:39 PM
Yeehaw, I got in this thread before it got merged with the megathread!

Dragonbite
July 5th, 2007, 07:51 PM
G'bye! ):P
Bye-bye ):P
So long ):P
C-ya! ):P
Adios! ):P

Amazing how many people are technically adept and incapable of getting Ubuntu to work while an even a larger number of people saying "I'm a noob", ask their questions, get answered and stick around and accumulate a large number of postings/replies (at least more than "0"!!)

dca
July 5th, 2007, 07:55 PM
That copy/paste files with no interaction (hey, everyone's an admin, right?) is one of the many many ways virus' propagate through a Windows system like gang busters.

I don't know. Anyone w/ *nix experience that I know of (whether AIX, HP-UX, BSD, RHEL, etc) seems quite impressed how far desktop Linux has come along.

For the money, which is what I base everything on, I think desktop Linux (Ubuntu, SLED, etc) is far superior to Windows.

Dragonbite
July 5th, 2007, 08:00 PM
Just FYI, I consider a desktop OS to be one that can install and work without advanced configuration - downloading and running some driver executables is acceptable, even necessary in todays more complex hardware world, but the Achilles heal of Linux has always been the ridiculous need for advanced processes needed to do even common things and the requirement that the more advanced things be done through an archaic command line.
huh? :confused:


I am not an average user, I am quite technically proficient. I hold more than one computer science degree and have a number of computer certifications. I have worked with UNIX in the past in a commercial setting so am not afraid of a command line,
Aren't we all?


It is also more than a bit ridiculous how the many Linux distros to often insist on their own switches and formats for the most common of things.
Feel the same way about cars. Why aren't they all made exactly alike? Everybody needs a Mini Cooper, even large families! It's got a trunk, right?


First, and the most ridiculous, was in trying to copy/paste a file from my home directory to the firefox directory (namely, my bookmarks). Yes, I know I could import it but I should have been able to just copy/paste my archived one over the profiles existing default one as well.
I tried doing things the hard way at first.. then I decided to try it out the proper way and it worked! Silly me, maybe developers DO have brains!


The problem came from permissions as I don't have permission to the /etc folder. this I know being familiar with the Linux kernel and I don't find that a fault in and of itself.
Not being familiar with the Linux kernel and given 10 minutes or so I would have figured this out too!


What I fault Ubuntu for is the complete lack of a way for me to trigger and privilege elevation to complete the operation.
Yeah, me and 995 hackers across the world wish to too.


Being and experiences computer guy I realize the issue and complete the operation from the command line with about 10 times the effort.
If you're so experienced, (with Unix and Linux and blah. blah.. blah..) then WHY would it take so much effort? You should be able to do it in your sleep.


But explain to me how a regular person would do this? Command line to copy/paste files? No way - this behavior alone disqualifies Ubuntu as being usable by 955 of PC users.
Don't worry, I think there are more than 1,000 people in the world.


The next issue, the final straw really - was when I went to try to get the NVIDIA driver going.
So buy a Dell (http://www.dell.com/ubuntu) and you shouldn't have this problem.



DEAD PC to anyone but an expert.
Good thing you just sooooo experienced!

prizrak
July 5th, 2007, 08:01 PM
Yay another thing to be merged. You, my friend, ****** your computer up through your own incompetence. You don't go to the nVidia site to download the driver, that's what a Windows user would do, in Ubuntu you can download the said driver from the repository and have it 100% setup for you. Of course X was dead, you destroyed it with the driver from nVidia. No need to blame the OS.

Pasting a file outside of /home is not something for an average user (w/e that happens to be) to know or be able to do. Just because you can do it in Windows doesn't mean it's a good idea. By the way Vista FINALLY remedied that problem. You might also want to consider that no average user I know (or even an advanced one like me) has a clue of where Firefox keeps the bookmarks file so we just import/export it.
NOTE: Firefox, like ALL applications in Linux, holds user data in the user's /home folder not /etc. Why you went there I got no idea, perhaps you should have enabled viewing hidden files (something Windows hides by default as well).


a bad driver install cannot kill the computer.
ROFL, if we go with that line of thinking then Windows is the LEAST ready OS for the desktop. At least in your case on Ubuntu you wouldn't need to reinstall the OS, just reconfigure the X server. Also you might want to note that the next release of Ubuntu will include something called Bulletproof X that will safeguard against just such a thing.

You claim to be an expert but you obviously have not a single clue about the OS. You failed to go through the proper channels to accomplish what you wanted and ended up with a "broken" system. If you try to import bookmarks into IE by messing with the registry in Windows you won't be getting very far either.

matthinckley
July 5th, 2007, 08:01 PM
WOW Another one of these threads....

EDIT: I always wonder if these people invest as much time and energy into trying to get (insert software/hardware being complained about here) to work as they do in writing this novel of a thread about how it didn't work

prizrak
July 5th, 2007, 08:02 PM
Welcome to the Internet!

By the way, does anyone care that I hold at least 3 PhDs, worked in the Manhattan Projekt and that I earned a fortune selling turnips? Oh, least I forget, supermodels keep going in and out of my bedroom!

Yeah but do they ever stay? ;)

Feel the same way about cars. Why aren't they all made exactly alike? Everybody needs a Mini Cooper, even large families! It's got a trunk, right?
NOOOOO!!!!! Then all cars would be FWD :((((((((( (/me hates FWD)

Spr0k3t
July 5th, 2007, 08:10 PM
hmm... me thinks the megathread merge soon.

prizrak
July 5th, 2007, 08:12 PM
That wasn't directed at anyone in particular. Just a general observation. Perhaps "against" isn't the best word, but there are certainly a lot of posts here that, while usually well-meaning, take on the general tone of "Ubuntu is nice and all but just not ready" or "not as good as windows" and so on. To those of us who do think Ubuntu is ready, actually better than windows and use it every day these comments do appear as being a kind of attack - whether or not the poster intended that.

And, yes, I know beans aren't a great way to measure time or involvement but they often give a good approximation. For example, many of the "Ubuntu just isn't good enough" type posts came from users who's accounts were only days or weeks old at the time of the post. Some of them start, "I've been using Ubuntu for 3 hours now and..." Conversely, it's pretty rare (though not non-existent) to find similar posts by users who have been here a couple years (at the time of the post).
Well you know what?! Bluetooth ABSOLUTELY sux in Ubuntu (and I suspect Linux in general). I'm taking my beans and making some doggon coffee!!!! Seriously though BT is horrible, luckily I don't use it a whole lot.

chadlewis
July 5th, 2007, 08:15 PM
Better title for this thread - Why I still fail as a Linux desktop user. ..

saulgoode
July 5th, 2007, 08:16 PM
.

matthinckley
July 5th, 2007, 08:47 PM
Better title for this thread - Why I still fail as a Linux desktop user. ..
LOL

smoker
July 5th, 2007, 09:08 PM
bet the OP took longer to write that than installing the OS

yawn:-)

maniacmusician
July 5th, 2007, 09:22 PM
bet the OP took longer to write that than installing the OS

yawn:-)
lol, probably.

OP: your fault relaly lies in the fact that you didn't bother to read any documentation. Had you looked around just a little, you would've discovered that all you had to do to install the nvidia drivers was type "sudo apt-get install nvidia-glx"...or, since you seem to abhorr the command line, use the Synaptic package manager to search for and install it. That gives you the latest stable release for the drivers.

Had you looked around a little more than that, perhaps tried google, you would've found a nice script called ENVY, which installs AT and nVIDIA drivers for you; both stable and bleeding edge versions, should you prefer the latter.

Despite what you keep saying about your experiences with Linux and Unix, you came at this from a Windows perspective, and didn't attempt to change your mindset at all. The reason that linux distros have package management is to assure QA. The packages in our repositories are built to be stable and are optimized to work with the system.

So, please, get off your high horse and start learning how to use Linux as a desktop. Indeed, you can't compare learning CS on Unix to using a Linux desktop at all; they're two completely different tasks that require different methodologies and mindsets. The fact is, you never tried to learn your way around the Linux desktop. You just relied on your previous knowledge to get you through it. While this is a natural first attempt, you have to realize that your old approach won't work, and you have to learn some new stuff. It's not rocket (computer) science.

vexorian
July 5th, 2007, 09:24 PM
Why Linux still fails as desktop...
Because it is a kernel. NEXT!

SWBgHz
July 5th, 2007, 09:28 PM
Yay another thing to be merged. You, my friend, ****** your computer up through your own incompetence. You don't go to the nVidia site to download the driver, that's what a Windows user would do, in Ubuntu you can download the said driver from the repository and have it 100% setup for you. Of course X was dead, you destroyed it with the driver from nVidia. No need to blame the OS.

Pasting a file outside of /home is not something for an average user (w/e that happens to be) to know or be able to do. Just because you can do it in Windows doesn't mean it's a good idea. By the way Vista FINALLY remedied that problem. You might also want to consider that no average user I know (or even an advanced one like me) has a clue of where Firefox keeps the bookmarks file so we just import/export it.
NOTE: Firefox, like ALL applications in Linux, holds user data in the user's /home folder not /etc. Why you went there I got no idea, perhaps you should have enabled viewing hidden files (something Windows hides by default as well).


ROFL, if we go with that line of thinking then Windows is the LEAST ready OS for the desktop. At least in your case on Ubuntu you wouldn't need to reinstall the OS, just reconfigure the X server. Also you might want to note that the next release of Ubuntu will include something called Bulletproof X that will safeguard against just such a thing.

You claim to be an expert but you obviously have not a single clue about the OS. You failed to go through the proper channels to accomplish what you wanted and ended up with a "broken" system. If you try to import bookmarks into IE by messing with the registry in Windows you won't be getting very far either.

You failed to note that I did what I did thinking of what the 95% of the world would do, of what the people I build PCs for would do and what thier ability is. If that 95% cannot do such simple things as I described then Linux still fails.

And FYI, as I said - I tried the driver from NVIDIA and the driver from the repository and both crashed X. Certainly, I can easily reconfig X and briong it back up - but there is no way in hell the 95% can and I was evaluating it from that standpoint.

Also, as I said, I have found a great use for Ubunutu and it the role of a dedicated PVR it shines but Linux has allways shined as a single purpose OS. It is the broad desktop use that has allways been difficult, Ubunutu represents a better than historical crack at the desktop role but it still has a long, long way to go. But as a desktop - please - Ubunutu, while greatly improved, is NOWHERE near ready fo rthe mainstream of PCs.

23meg
July 5th, 2007, 09:35 PM
And FYI, as I said - I tried the driver from NVIDIA and the driver from the repository and both crashed X. Certainly, I can easily reconfig X and briong it back up - but there is no way in hell the 95% can and I was evaluating it from that standpoint.

There's also no way in hell it will crash X for that 95%. Your problematic configuration is just one configuration among the hundreds of thousands, and your experience counts as one case out of that many.

vexorian
July 5th, 2007, 09:35 PM
You are suffering from PC power user syndrome.

Since you know windows so much and so well, you simply don't see the sense on having to follow all of the differences.

Regarding your issues, that is in no way related to desktop readyness, windows' native hardware support is way worse and everybody seems to think it is ready for the desktop.

We only need compatible computers, and that's slowly happening.

MY nvidia card worked pretty well on Ubuntu with its repository drivers. In fact all my hardware works perfectly in Linux and not in windows, since a single user experience is all what is worth to judge desktop readiness I will have to stick to the FACT: windows is not ready for the desktop.

fuscia
July 5th, 2007, 09:35 PM
i know nothing. i used automatix to install my nvidia driver. it works. i haven't seen my terminal in three days. i don't even remember which one i'm using.

SWBgHz
July 5th, 2007, 09:36 PM
lol, probably.

OP: your fault relaly lies in the fact that you didn't bother to read any documentation. Had you looked around just a little, you would've discovered that all you had to do to install the nvidia drivers was type "sudo apt-get install nvidia-glx"...or, since you seem to abhorr the command line, use the Synaptic package manager to search for and install it. That gives you the latest stable release for the drivers.


Uhm - I said the package manager install crashed X as well. I know you guys want to stick your heads in the sand and pretend these issues don't exists but at least take note of what was said before commenting. Both ways crashed X and made the computer unusable by any non expert which is the perspective I was evaluating it from.


Despite what you keep saying about your experiences with Linux and Unix, you came at this from a Windows perspective, and didn't attempt to change your mindset at all.

And here in lies the biggest reason Linux continues to be irrelevant in the desktop market - failing to see the obvious lanscape of the world we exist in. IT IS A WINDOWS WORLD in terms of the desktop, despite MS recent blunders and other crap. So for any OS to survive and thrive in the desktop market it will have to EXPECT people to come at it from the 'windows perspective' as you call it. I wouldn'd say I didn't attempt to change my perspective, and I would question that I should have to. If ubunutu or any other distributor wants to gro beyond the Linux community it is going to have to APPEAL to people who may view thier offering with a cautious eye, and even with poor preconceived ideas. That being said, I wasn't evaluating Ubunutu for my use, I am not stupid enough to think I coudl replace windows for my needs - I was evaluating the 'claim' that Linux has become Windows replacable for the average user what I found is that it clearly hasn't even if it has become alot less painful to learn and use.

vexorian
July 5th, 2007, 09:38 PM
I'd rather not see Ubuntu gain any market than it becoming compatible with windows' ways (aka windows' BS).

Mac's OSX is severly different to windows and yet with single advertising and marketting they holds some big percentage of the market, although I am not sure how much.

tcpip4lyfe
July 5th, 2007, 09:38 PM
But as a desktop - please - Ubunutu, while greatly improved, is NOWHERE near ready fo rthe mainstream of PCs.

I went over to my parents and installed ubuntu with any problems in 30 minutes and put 3 icons on her desktop. "Intenet" "Mail" "Word" Her reaction on being converted to linux? "I like how the windows wobble when I move them around." For the majority of PC users, this is enough.

23meg
July 5th, 2007, 09:39 PM
all you had to do to install the nvidia drivers was type "sudo apt-get install nvidia-glx"...or, since you seem to abhorr the command line, use the Synaptic package manager to search for and install it. That gives you the latest stable release for the drivers.

In Feisty, there's no need to do that; I'm sure the "95%" can just go to System → Administration → Restricted Driver Manager and get it done automatically. Click click click.

forrestcupp
July 5th, 2007, 09:42 PM
I went about playing around and trying to get some things setup to try it out and came across two issues that to me make Ubuntu totally useless as a real desktop PC OS. First, and the most ridiculous, was in trying to copy/paste a file from my home directory to the firefox directory (namely, my bookmarks). Yes, I know I could import it but I should have been able to just copy/paste my archived one over the profiles existing default one as well. The problem came from permissions as I don't have permission to the /etc folder.
The bookmarks are found in your /home directory in the /.mozilla/firefox folder. You don't need any special permissions for that. Whenever I want to upgrade/reinstall, I back up that directory, and afterwards, hey presto! I have my bookmarks. You just have to enable the showing of hidden files to see it in nautilus/konqueror/dolphin.


The next issue, the final straw really - was when I went to try to get the NVIDIA driver going. I tried to different ways of doing this - both from the standpoint of what a moderately informed average user would be able to do
Did you try opening the Restricted Drivers Manager in your menus? You open that and check a box to enable the proprietary drivers, and it just works! It downloads it and installs it for you. I've had trouble installing nvidia-glx from apt, but I've never had trouble when I used the Restricted Drivers Manager. Even if you have Kubuntu with KDE (which doesn't have this), you can just install it from apt and run it:

sudo aptitude install restricted-manager
restricted-manager

Edit:
I'm surprised this still hasn't been merged

Edit Again:
23meg beat me to the Restricted Drivers Manager thing

SWBgHz
July 5th, 2007, 09:42 PM
Better title for this thread - Why I still fail as a Linux desktop user. ..

And here we have the EXACT reason Linux remains such a minor, allmost insignificant, part of the desktop market. The arrogance to pressume that anyone should have to qualify to use a product - that is even greater arrogance and piaty than the hated Gates/MS exhibit.

Again, I could use Linux all day long if I wanted to. If I wanted to have routine tasks be more troublesome than with a windows box, if I wanted to have archane legacy methods forced on me becuase self rightous linux geeks feel better about themselves when some switch or some command or some process is overly proriatary and ackwardly cumbersome. I could use it all day long if I want to get **** poor hardware support for the latest in technology. If I wanted to not be able to play the latest games without tons of trouble and even more comprimises and limitiations. Get over yourselves people - nobody gives two $#@!s about whether Ubunutu or Linux die tommorow or not in terms of the desktop PC world - yoru arrogance and condensending self rightousness only perpetuates that.

Nekiruhs
July 5th, 2007, 09:43 PM
Linux fails as a desktop because Windows ships with 90% PCs. How many people do you know that have ever installed an OS? People don't care about their OS they just want it to work. Thats why MS can A$$ ream us for cash and get away with making a crappy OS.

SWBgHz
July 5th, 2007, 09:45 PM
In Feisty, there's no need to do that; I'm sure the "95%" can just go to System → Administration → Restricted Driver Manager and get it done automatically. Click click click.


This crashed X too - jesus - heads in teh sand much?

vexorian
July 5th, 2007, 09:46 PM
And here we have the EXACT reason Linux remains such a minor, allmost insignificant, part of the desktop market. The arrogance to pressume that anyone should have to qualify to use a product - that is even greater arrogance and piaty than the hated Gates/MS exhibit.

I detect arrogance from your part, for thinking that the fact you couldn't do it was not because of unfamiliarity but because it is obviously hard or unintuitive.

Plenty of people fall into thinking that they are supposed to learn just once and then they stick to the old ways, it is understandable but that makes us unable to progress.

stchman
July 5th, 2007, 09:46 PM
I have always been trying to find a use for Linux if for no other reason than to expand my base of experience. In the past, I have always found quite enough problems with various distros to eliminate it as a viable desktop OS. Mind you, for specific purposes there is no question that Linux excels, be it a file server or PVR like Myth or any number of purpose built uses - but as an all around main desktop it has always show itself to be grossly inadequate to me. Just FYI, I consider a desktop OS to be one that can install and work without advanced configuration - downloading and running some driver executables is acceptable, even necessary in todays more complex hardware world, but the Achilles heal of Linux has always been the ridiculous need for advanced processes needed to do even common things and the requirement that the more advanced things be done through an archaic command line.

I am not an average user, I am quite technically proficient. I hold more than one computer science degree and have a number of computer certifications. I have worked with UNIX in the past in a commercial setting so am not afraid of a command line, I just understand the limitation of the command line is that you can ONLY do what you know exactly how to do with it. It is also more than a bit ridiculous how the many Linux distros to often insist on their own switches and formats for the most common of things.

So, that is by background, my biases - here is my story with Ubuntu...

Having heard allot about Ubunutu over the past months I have wanted to give it a try and see what people where talking about. I had been wanting to do something with it just to see for myself. I installed it pretty easily and have to say I found it impressive how many drivers it recognized without issue. I use a Promise HDD controller and a PCIe SATA controller (due to NVIDIAs crappy 680i SATA implementation) and I didn't expect it to auto detect both. I did expect issues with video and sound and that is where, ultimately, my previous experiences with Linux where confirmed. I did not expect to have Ubunutu automagically recognize my 8800 GTXs and have them running in SLi, heck, NVIDIA can barely get SLI working in Vista. But that being said, finding that after install the best I could get from the default video driver was a 1024x768 desktop, not even a WS option, was disappointing. No worries, I had to do a custom config on a PVR I built to host mythTV (running on fiesty) a couple weeks ago so I wasn't concerned.

I went about playing around and trying to get some things setup to try it out and came across two issues that to me make Ubuntu totally useless as a real desktop PC OS. First, and the most ridiculous, was in trying to copy/paste a file from my home directory to the firefox directory (namely, my bookmarks). Yes, I know I could import it but I should have been able to just copy/paste my archived one over the profiles existing default one as well. The problem came from permissions as I don't have permission to the /etc folder. this I know being familiar with the Linux kernel and I don't find that a fault in and of itself. What I fault Ubuntu for is the complete lack of a way for me to trigger and privilege elevation to complete the operation. I mena I copy from one folder and then in the other I right click to paste and no option to do so exists with NO explanation of the problem. Being and experiences computer guy I realize the issue and complete the operation from the command line with about 10 times the effort. But explain to me how a regular person would do this? Command line to copy/paste files? No way - this behavior alone disqualifies Ubuntu as being usable by 955 of PC users.

The next issue, the final straw really - was when I went to try to get the NVIDIA driver going. I tried to different ways of doing this - both from the standpoint of what a moderately informed average user would be able to do - and I tried with and with both 8800s installed and with only one installed, the results where the same so I will describe what happened with both installed. First, downloaded the driver from NVIDIA. Of course I cannot double click it and run it as 95% of PC users would try to do, I did find the "allow to run as executable" and check it under the file properties but when it went to run it still needed privilege and no dialogue or means of granting the privileged escalation existed. So, right here - dead in the water for 95% of PC users and for no good reason. Why no right clilck option to execute as root? Anyways, to the command line - run the file and it completes and prompts to reboot. Upon reboot - Xwindows fails to load and I am at a command line. For all practical purposes a DEAD PC. I can easily get xWindows back up and going but are you kidding me, such a routine driver installation can kill the GUI for the OS? No way this is ready for anyone but expert users. I got xWindows back and the default driver back and tried the alternate method using the 'restricted drivers' option. This seems to be an Ubunutu specifc thing, and I had no idea what it was other than ascertaining that it was installing the open source NVIDIA drivers that I know are out there. Anyways, it was easy enough to find and to start; definitely something any user could do. Upon completing a reboot was requested (don't Linux folk make fun of all the reboots Windows requires?) so I did. After rebooting I got back to the same problem as before - Xwindows crashes on load and the system drops to a command line - again, DEAD PC to anyone but an expert.

All this just trying to get better than the base display driver - no mention of trying to get good performance or, god help me, 3d. I didn't even try sound either. Just one of the most basic things ALL computers need - display. How can Linux be taken seriously as a desktop contender with such critical failures on such basic and necessary elements. I really find it disappointing as I have used Ubunutu (running MythTV and MythWeb ona box in the garage now) enough to know it is a quality distribution and word on the street is of all the Linux distributions it is the most 'usable'. 'Linux for human beings' is far from what Ubuntu seems to be at this point - sure, if all you want is a cheesy resolution and a web browser and email then I suppose it works great, but heck - the damn iPhone does that and more. If Ubunutu, or Linux in general, really wants to take advantage of MS recent incompetence and their struggle to make Vista not suck then there is alot of work to do. First, driver support is worlds better but still not good enough - a bad driver install cannot kill the computer. Command line has to go - I know this will never happen and that because of it Linux will never be much more than it is but this is 2007, command lines are great for automated tasks, administration, and for servers and other single purpose machines but in the desktop world the command line should be NOTHING but an alternative to GUI for use when doing advanced maintenance or other such expert work. A regular user should be able to install, configure, edit, copy and paste files, remove files, etc, etc, etc without EVER having to hit a terminal.

I am going to try SuSe next having played a good deal with Fedora a bit back and being even less impressed. I wish Ubuntu well, I find allot of good in it - and I will probably continue to use it for my PVR (where Linux really shines IMHO - those single purpose systems, proprietary services, etc). But it has a long way to go to compete with Windows for the desktop market, a long way.

Looking at your hardware specs you will have to go download drivers for the following:

Nvidia card
Nvidia chipset
Sound card
Ethernet

Lets not mention all the downloads you will need to get to make the OS useful. Maybe you want professional software so you will have to spend thousands $$$$$$$

If you think that you stick the XP or Vista CD in and PRESTO everything works you are sadly mistaken. I recently built a PC for a friend of mine. He needed XP for his Quickbooks Pro.

Well the driver CD contained outdated drivers so I had to go download the latest drivers and download a lot of free ware apps. All in all it took me about 4 hours to install and configure XP. I can do the same install in about 45 mins with Ubuntu. So much for the not needing to be heavily configured.

23meg
July 5th, 2007, 09:47 PM
Get over yourselves people - nobody gives two $#@!s about whether Ubunutu or Linux die tommorow or not in terms of the desktop PC world - yoru arrogance and condensending self rightousness only perpetuates that.

Nobody gives two pence about what OS you use either. Please, just use what works for you, and leave us alone. We're an arrogant, elitist bunch and our inferior OS will remain as an insignificant part of the OS market forever. You've just proven that with your well informed and consistent arguments.

SWBgHz
July 5th, 2007, 09:48 PM
The bookmarks are found in your /home directory in the /.mozilla/firefox folder. You don't need any special permissions for that. Whenever I want to upgrade/reinstall, I back up that directory, and afterwards, hey presto! I have my bookmarks. You just have to enable the showing of hidden files to see it in nautilus/konqueror/dolphin.

The bookmark thing isn't the point - the lack of a way to elevate privledge for a simple copy/paste job is. this is something necessary for an average user.


Did you try opening the Restricted Drivers Manager in your menus? You open that and check a box to enable the proprietary drivers, and it just works! It downloads it and installs it for you. I've had trouble installing nvidia-glx from apt, but I've never had trouble when I used the Restricted Drivers Manager.
Edit Again:
23meg beat me to the Restricted Drivers Manager thing


Again - 10th time - that crashed X too.

vexorian
July 5th, 2007, 09:48 PM
When some people have trouble with something they just ask for help. Instead some others instantly rush into blaming the OS...


The bookmark thing isn't the point - the lack of a way to elevate privledge for a simple copy/paste job is. this is something necessary for an average user.


The average user should stay away of elevated priviledges. But cnp works for sudoed nautilus...

zach12
July 5th, 2007, 09:49 PM
linux is hard to use yes but it is free and fast and just more fun!!!!!!!!!!!
and this is from a xp user

SWBgHz
July 5th, 2007, 09:49 PM
Mac's OSX is severly different to windows and yet with single advertising and marketting they holds some big percentage of the market, although I am not sure how much.

Yeah - big 4% or so - woo hoo.

Nekiruhs
July 5th, 2007, 09:51 PM
Uhm - I said the package manager install crashed X as well. I know you guys want to stick your heads in the sand and pretend these issues don't exists but at least take note of what was said before commenting. Both ways crashed X and made the computer unusable by any non expert which is the perspective I was evaluating it from.



And here in lies the biggest reason Linux continues to be irrelevant in the desktop market - failing to see the obvious lanscape of the world we exist in. IT IS A WINDOWS WORLD in terms of the desktop, despite MS recent blunders and other crap. So for any OS to survive and thrive in the desktop market it will have to EXPECT people to come at it from the 'windows perspective' as you call it. I wouldn'd say I didn't attempt to change my perspective, and I would question that I should have to. If ubunutu or any other distributor wants to gro beyond the Linux community it is going to have to APPEAL to people who may view thier offering with a cautious eye, and even with poor preconceived ideas. That being said, I wasn't evaluating Ubunutu for my use, I am not stupid enough to think I coudl replace windows for my needs - I was evaluating the 'claim' that Linux has become Windows replacable for the average user what I found is that it clearly hasn't even if it has become alot less painful to learn and use.
Get your head out of the sand. You dont need X to use the dang package manager. If X crashes press CTRL + ALT + F1, login, type in
sudo apt-get install nvidia-glx . Type in
sudo nano /etc/X11/xorg.conf. Change the line refrerencing the driver from "nv" to "nvidia" and add the desired resoulutions under each depth categoery.

Yoooder
July 5th, 2007, 09:51 PM
Obviously every OS and every piece of software has a learning curve... Linux may seem more difficult to a Windows user, but that's just because it's not intuitive to them (btw: intuitive means "familiar"--too many people think it means "imbued with direction/instructions").

I can tell you that I have sold several PC-illeterate families machines preloaded with Linux. Usually I tell them I can put Windows on, as it's the most popular, however when I tell them what the license costs and mention there are free alternatives they almost always decide to "give the freebie a shot."

With these users who are green to computers, I've found the majority stick with Linux. They learn to use it for their needs, they learn how to Google for help, and they learn the behaviours of Linux. Those who have switched tend to do so because family members want them to use Messenger Live! or some other MS-only product.

My point is that it may be difficult for you, but to a completely new use Windows is as counterintuitive and confusing as Linux--and if you have to learn one or the other, and the other saves you a couple hundred $$$ then most people are willing to take a stab at it.

vexorian
July 5th, 2007, 09:51 PM
Yeah - big 4% or so - woo hoo.
If your point is that 4% represents very few computers then I am afraid you are not as well versed in computers as you claim to be.

23meg
July 5th, 2007, 09:51 PM
The bookmark thing isn't the point - the lack of a way to elevate privledge for a simple copy/paste job is. this is something necessary for an average user.

Can you not read? You don't need to elevate privileges or anything to perform common tasks. If you do, that's a bug; report it. You just happened to look in the wrong place. Had you asked for help, you'd be pointed to the correct place to look.

23meg
July 5th, 2007, 09:56 PM
This crashed X too - jesus - heads in teh sand much?

Did you ask around for help when that happened? Probably no, since your first post was in this thread. Had you started a thread asking for help instead of delivering your very original sermon that we're hearing for only the second or third time on why our OS sucks because it crashed someone's X, chances are your problem would have been solved by now. But apparently all you wanted to do was reach a predecided conclusion: that since the default Ubuntu installation crashed X on your configuration, and you looked in the wrong place to paste your bookmark file, Ubuntu isn't "ready for the desktop".

@trophy
July 5th, 2007, 09:57 PM
Can you not read? You don't need to elevate privileges or anything to perform common tasks. If you do, that's a bug; report it.

Huh? ANYTHING outside of your home directory requires root access to mess with. This includes, but is not limited to, the drivers he was complaining about, and configuration files.

Anyways, I read that novella in its entirety, and it boils down to "I'm pissed cause I can't escalate to root privileges under Nautilus." And I agree. This is one of those things that really ought to be fixed. And this one's a fairly easy fix, at that... you're asked for your password when you try to open the updater, for instance.

kknd
July 5th, 2007, 09:58 PM
Linux does not fail as a desktop O.S.
Many people out there uses GNU / Linux derivates as Desktop. I'm one of them, and I dont see what it lack....

Frak
July 5th, 2007, 10:01 PM
Because it is a kernel. NEXT!
I agree, its changed too radically between releases.

23meg
July 5th, 2007, 10:02 PM
Huh? ANYTHING outside of your home directory requires root access to mess with. This includes, but is not limited to, the drivers he was complaining about, and configuration files.

Under the assumed general use cases, the user shouldn't need to mess with anything they don't have permission to. Shouldn't and doesn't need to mess with xorg.conf, or know where the drivers go to, or need to tweak them. What should happen is that the user goes to System → Administration → Restricted Driver Manager, clicks a checkbox, and the driver gets installed. If it doesn't, and the device is supported, and there's no user error, and no other interfering factor, that's a bug. Bugs are to get reported, and fixed.

tcpip4lyfe
July 5th, 2007, 10:02 PM
Huh? ANYTHING outside of your home directory requires root access to mess with. This includes, but is not limited to, the drivers he was complaining about, and configuration files.

Anyways, I read that novella in its entirety, and it boils down to "I'm pissed cause I can't escalate to root privileges under Nautilus." And I agree. This is one of those things that really ought to be fixed. And this one's a fairly easy fix, at that... you're asked for your password when you try to open the updater, for instance.

Maybe Im just reading this wrong but why not just sudo nautilus if you really want to have root privileges?

vexorian
July 5th, 2007, 10:02 PM
I wonder if people whose threads get merged with this figure out that happened or still think that ubuntuforums is censoring them.

bapoumba
July 5th, 2007, 10:03 PM
One more thread merged ;)

Bothered
July 5th, 2007, 10:05 PM
I must admit I can sympathise with some of SWBgHz's frustrations. It seems he/she is taking a Window-like approach, and can't understand how seemingly trivial operations don't work. Hell, if you blow into a violin you can't expect it to sound like a trumpet.

stchman
July 5th, 2007, 10:07 PM
I also noticed that he has a SLI configuration. Those require a lot of tinkering to get them working as well.

Bothered
July 5th, 2007, 10:08 PM
Maybe Im just reading this wrong but why not just sudo nautilus if you really want to have root privileges?

It would be much better if nautilus presented you with a password box to enable single operations with root privileges, rather than needing to run nautilus itself with root privileges. I've seen this requested before.

fyllekajan
July 5th, 2007, 10:09 PM
Ubuntu auto-detected my NVIDIA card, all I had to do was enable the proprietary driver in the restricted drivers dialog, after clicking on the popup notification message iirc. Are those 95% you're talking about able to do that? Then again if they run into trouble they could always ask the community for help and their problems would probably be solved in no time. I believe Windows users also run into trouble sometimes? You can even come to this forum and rant about how it didn't work out for you this time and ventilate your frustration and when you leave you feel much better. The community is great isn't it :)

Edit: In response to SWBgHz before merge

forrestcupp
July 5th, 2007, 10:12 PM
The bookmark thing isn't the point - the lack of a way to elevate privledge for a simple copy/paste job is. this is something necessary for an average user.
An average user does not need to copy/paste to anywhere outside of /home. If you need to do that, you're no longer an average user, and you should know to run:

gksudo nautilus

or

kdesu konqueror
to get a file manager with administrative privileges.


Again - 10th time - that crashed X too.
This was only about the 2nd time you said that. You said that you installed the binary from the website, and that you used apt-get for the repositories. You didn't mention the Restricted Drivers Manager. What you probably needed to do was reconfigure X to get it back to the nv drivers by typing:

sudo dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg
then follow the on-screen directions. Then you probably could have used the Restricted Manager without trouble.

Soon they will be releasing a "bullet-proof x" that will boot to a usable xserver if what you've done would cause a crash. Probably similar to Windows' "safe mode" only more usable.

Sorry you've had so much trouble. And I'm glad they finally merged the thread.

Edit:
Bothered already beat me to the nautilus thing.

aysiu
July 5th, 2007, 10:17 PM
How to install Nvidia drivers in Ubuntu (http://psychocats.net/ubuntu/nvidia)
[IDEA] Automatic password request (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2456140#post2456140)

AusIV4
July 5th, 2007, 10:17 PM
And here we have the EXACT reason Linux remains such a minor, allmost insignificant, part of the desktop market. The arrogance to pressume that anyone should have to qualify to use a product - that is even greater arrogance and piaty than the hated Gates/MS exhibit.
I do think that there is a fair amount of immaturity among linux users directed towards Microsoft, and it probably steers users away. That said, I think the primary reason Linux has an insignificant portion of the desktop market is that MS was successful at being the only OS available from the major OEMs for so long. As OEMs like Dell begin to pick up Linux desktops, more people will learn that there are alternatives.



Again, I could use Linux all day long if I wanted to. If I wanted to have routine tasks be more troublesome than with a windows box, if I wanted to have archane legacy methods forced on me becuase self rightous linux geeks feel better about themselves when some switch or some command or some process is overly proriatary and ackwardly cumbersome. I could use it all day long if I want to get **** poor hardware support for the latest in technology. If I wanted to not be able to play the latest games without tons of trouble and even more comprimises and limitiations. Get over yourselves people - nobody gives two $#@!s about whether Ubunutu or Linux die tommorow or not in terms of the desktop PC world - yoru arrogance and condensending self rightousness only perpetuates that.

We're self righteous? We're arrogant? We have an operating system that we like using, and we don't want the changes you're proposing. The key thing to remember when approaching Linux is that it is not Windows. If you try to approach it as a Windows power user and use past experience instead of reading documentation, you will fail.

Hardware configuration on Ubuntu is very straightforward, in my experience. If the open source drivers aren't adequate for your needs, the first step is to look for information on configuring your specific hardware - the forums are a good place to start. Generally all you need to do is install one or two packages from the repositories (using command line, synaptic, adept), maybe fill in a few paramters, and you're done.

As far as playing the latest games, you do have a point. The latest games are written for Windows. While projects like Wine, Cedega, and Crossover do there best to make compatibility layers (which often take a great deal of configuration), you're trying to run programs that aren't meant to run on Linux. Does Windows fail because it's incapable of running MythTV or Amarok? If Windows specific programs are a must have, then you need to be using Windows.

Approached with the right mindset, Ubuntu is not hard to use. Programs and drivers come readily available just a few clicks away in the repositories. My girlfriend is going into pre-veterinary medicine, has minimal computer experience, and was able to install Ubuntu and install the software she needed with very few prompts from me (and what help I did give her was to keep her Windows partition intact - if she'd wanted to wipe that out, she could have done it all on her own).

While you may find it rude for us to say that you fail as a Linux desktop user, that's exactly what has happened. Linux fails as a desktop when the user fails to understand that it is a different operating system with different functionality, generally for very specific reasons.

I'm a big advocate of Linux, and I've converted a few people, but when I'm talking to someone who is looking for a free, secure version of Windows, I tell them not to waste their time. When people wanted to change operating systems and take all of their favorite Windows software with them, expecting Wine to fill in the gaps, I tell them to stick with Windows. But when people are tired of Windows, looking for a cheap alternative (as opposed to Macs), and are able to approach Linux with an open mind, then I give them a CD.

Bothered
July 5th, 2007, 10:17 PM
You failed to note that I did what I did thinking of what the 95% of the world would do, of what the people I build PCs for would do and what thier ability is. If that 95% cannot do such simple things as I described then Linux still fails.


And here in lies the biggest reason Linux continues to be irrelevant in the desktop market

I refer you to Linux is not Windows (http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm).

@trophy
July 5th, 2007, 10:19 PM
It would be much better if nautilus presented you with a password box to enable single operations with root privileges, rather than needing to run nautilus itself with root privileges. I've seen this requested before.

+1

That's exactly what I was thinking of, at any rate...

@trophy
July 5th, 2007, 10:22 PM
Maybe Im just reading this wrong but why not just sudo nautilus if you really want to have root privileges?

*sigh* yes, that would work. I would like it a lot more if Nautilus said "Enter your root password to complete this process." whenever I tried to do anything that needed root.

m.musashi
July 5th, 2007, 10:41 PM
Well you know what?! Bluetooth ABSOLUTELY sux in Ubuntu (and I suspect Linux in general). I'm taking my beans and making some doggon coffee!!!! Seriously though BT is horrible, luckily I don't use it a whole lot.
Lol. See, not all of us have our "heads in the sand". However, I think the newest addition to our megathread proves my point quite well.


But as a desktop - please - Ubunutu, while greatly improved, is NOWHERE near ready fo rthe mainstream of PCs.

Readiness refers to the user, not the OS. Ubuntu is 100% ready for any PC designed to run it. And it's also ready for a lot the PCs NOT designed to run it. It would appear, however, that you are not ready for Ubuntu.

I really don't understand how people can complain about something not working and blame the OS. My car won't run on diesel fuel. Can't the idiots at the refinery make a diesel fuel that works in my car? Doesn't matter that my car wasn't designed to run on diesel. If diesel wants to exist in a gas world, then it had better start acting like gas.

As Apple has proven, the only way to have really good interplay between OS and hardware is to build both. That fact that Ubuntu runs at all is amazing. You cannot install windows on any PC and have it run half as well as windows. Fortunately for the computer noobs out there you don't have to. You go to the store and buy one already set up the manufacturer to work. Lucky noobs.

If your PC won't run Ubuntu, buy one that will or complain to the company that built it.

Oh, and just for fun, read the last 50-100 posts in the megathread you've just been dumped into. It might give you a bit of perspective.

prizrak
July 5th, 2007, 11:21 PM
SWBgHz,
Would you also say that OS X is not ready for the desktop? Most people wouldn't, in fact most people I ever spoke to (and I know very few "geeks") LOVE OS X. In fact one of the MS devs who worked on the new Vista interface said that they had a MacBook with OS X as an example of good GUI design. It is COMPLETELY different from Windows but it doesn't seem to stop people liking it. Pretty much every person I know wants to get a Mac, the only thing that stops them is the price. What should that tell you? It should tell you that an OS does not have to do things the Windows way in order to be a viable alternative. It should also tell you that as long as the OS is installed and configured by the OEM average users won't have a problem adapting to the new way of doing things.

Either way, you have your own opinion. Ubuntu doesn't work for you, that's fine. It works for me and many others.

hellomeow
July 5th, 2007, 11:25 PM
How to install Nvidia drivers in Ubuntu (http://psychocats.net/ubuntu/nvidia)
[IDEA] Automatic password request (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2456140#post2456140)

Aysiu, thank you for posting again.

SWBgHz, a large proportion of the Ubuntu userbase considers marketshare to be irrelevant. Their philosophy is more important to them then popularity (though, as in any group of people, opinions will differ substantially).

freebird54
July 5th, 2007, 11:46 PM
Just a small point here (to the new megaposter).

The problems you had were a direct result, not of an Ubuntu failure, not even from coming at things with a Windows perspective - but of coming at things with a WINDOWS POWER USER PERSPECTIVE!

The 95.5% you refer to would not even THINK of trying to hijack a bookmarks file - at most they would ask if there is a way to import it (or find the import themselves - or have it done automatically at install time). Many of them would not even be sure that there WAS a bookmarks file.

The driver problem is similar - if you had in fact done what a non-power-user would have done, you would have easily ended up with the Restricted Driver manager - or asked about how to get it better.

As for trying to write where there was no need to, it WOULD be nice if there was a privilege escalation feature in Nautilus - *IF* it came with a warning about why you are NOT likely to need it :)

I suffered from the same sort of problems a few times before when switching systems. In particular I suffered GREATLY when forced to go to Windows from AmigaDOS - only one thing at a time - no separate screens (with differing resolutions) to run things on - a braindead command line - nothing on the right mouse button (often triplijng the necessary clicks to set up a task - until they 'invented' tabbed dialogs). Eventually I adapted - but I did not think only that Windows sucked, but accepted that I was not familiar with it.

Switching to Ubuntu was another such thing - but again I assumed that I didn't know - and asked on these forums. What *DID* surprise me was finding answers before I could log off and wait for them! Good thing I had my email checking as often as it did,,,,

Good luck w/ Suse - you'll need it!

SWBgHz
July 6th, 2007, 03:15 AM
Did you ask around for help when that happened? Probably no, since your first post was in this thread. Had you started a thread asking for help instead of delivering your very original sermon that we're hearing for only the second or third time on why our OS sucks because it crashed someone's X, chances are your problem would have been solved by now. But apparently all you wanted to do was reach a predecided conclusion: that since the default Ubuntu installation crashed X on your configuration, and you looked in the wrong place to paste your bookmark file, Ubuntu isn't "ready for the desktop".

You fanboys are so blind, I already said several times I know how to fix it and in fact did. I regarded it as a major failure because there is no ay in hell an 'average' user would have been able to solve the problems I came across. And one thing, Google'ing for help with a system stuck at a command line is quite impossible for most all people regardless of whether you or I can do it.

SWBgHz
July 6th, 2007, 03:20 AM
I must admit I can sympathise with some of SWBgHz's frustrations. It seems he/she is taking a Window-like approach, and can't understand how seemingly trivial operations don't work. Hell, if you blow into a violin you can't expect it to sound like a trumpet.

Again, I know how to do the things in Linux (and Unix) - heck, I brought up my entire Myth box without even bothering to install Xwindows. I was performing this install as a test of its capability for use by 'average' people. Anything that an average (or even above average user) couldn't do I wouldn't do.

When using the BUILT IN driver update system (the restricted driver dialogue) crashes the Xwindows system rendering the computer to a command line only system it is a serious failure in terms of being 'Linux for Human Beings'.

SWBgHz
July 6th, 2007, 03:21 AM
I also noticed that he has a SLI configuration. Those require a lot of tinkering to get them working as well.

As I stated - the same thing happened with one card installed AND both.


Just a small point here (to the new megaposter).

The problems you had were a direct result, not of an Ubuntu failure, not even from coming at things with a Windows perspective - but of coming at things with a WINDOWS POWER USER PERSPECTIVE!

The 95.5% you refer to would not even THINK of trying to hijack a bookmarks file - at most they would ask if there is a way to import it (or find the import themselves - or have it done automatically at install time). Many of them would not even be sure that there WAS a bookmarks file.

The driver problem is similar - if you had in fact done what a non-power-user would have done, you would have easily ended up with the Restricted Driver manager - or asked about how to get it better.

As for trying to write where there was no need to, it WOULD be nice if there was a privilege escalation feature in Nautilus - *IF* it came with a warning about why you are NOT likely to need it :)


I said I did try the restricted drivers - I tried it both ways. I am not a Linux dufus even if I am not a Linux expert. I tried one way the average person might try it and then tried another after resetting things. Both failed, and both failed with either one or two of the GPUs. As for the file thing, yes - the average person wouldn't do that but that is not the point. the point is that it is pretty ridiculous that I would want to do something and be rejected by the OS with no info or dialogue explaining why and with no way to then authenticate my supremacy as the owner of the damn hardware to do what I want. Other processes ask for privileged elevation so why not GUI processes? It is just legacy BS. If I am at the command line and type sudo ./file_name_whatever to run it it will prompt for proper password before running so why not have that SAME behavior as an option when at the GUI so if I double click (or right click and get a run as root) option?

SWBgHz
July 6th, 2007, 03:29 AM
We're self righteous? We're arrogant? We have an operating system that we like using, and we don't want the changes you're proposing. The key thing to remember when approaching Linux is that it is not Windows. If you try to approach it as a Windows power user and use past experience instead of reading documentation, you will fail.


I think you are wrong here - a 'desktop' is a fairly definable role so when evaluating Linux as a desktop it either fails or succeeds at fitting in that role. I mena maching code can get a computer to do anything you want but suggesting people work in binary machine code on desktops would be idiotic.

It is like making a car where the gas pedal and brake are reversed and somewhere in the owners manual it mentions this but still you, as the car maker or as a dedicated fan of the car, wonder why people keep crashing them when they use them.


As far as playing the latest games, you do have a point. The latest games are written for Windows. While projects like Wine, Cedega, and Crossover do there best to make compatibility layers (which often take a great deal of configuration), you're trying to run programs that aren't meant to run on Linux. Does Windows fail because it's incapable of running MythTV or Amarok? If Windows specific programs are a must have, then you need to be using Windows.

Actually, there is a Windows Version of MythTV and it is decent enough to be considered comporable, Media Center. Laugh if you want but I have both up and running and find Vista MCE to be lacking in some features that MythTV has but to make up for it with its seemless integration with the Windows PCs and even 360 in the house. Point is, If Windows cannot claim to have a viable version of Myth for it than OpenOffice can't be claimed as a viable alternative to office.


I'm a big advocate of Linux, and I've converted a few people, but when I'm talking to someone who is looking for a free, secure version of Windows, I tell them not to waste their time. When people wanted to change operating systems and take all of their favorite Windows software with them, expecting Wine to fill in the gaps, I tell them to stick with Windows. But when people are tired of Windows, looking for a cheap alternative (as opposed to Macs), and are able to approach Linux with an open mind, then I give them a CD.

I want to acknowledge that this statement is very well reasoned and pretty much what I tell people who ask me about Linux (again, I am not a new to Linux guy). What prompted my post and the arguments that followed is that much of the Linux community, particuarly the Ubuntu community, do run around offering it as a perfect replacement for XP and that is just not right. It may be the best alternative to XP in terms of Linux distros but it is far from being capable of sitting on 95% of the desktops around the country where Windows computers sit. And without addressing many of the still needless command line functions and fragility of the GUI and other legacy UNIX operations it will never get there. So what - Linux fan says I don't care if it gets there - fine, then don't EVER whine about getting no love from the manufacturers because so long as Linux remains in the low single digits of the desktop market you will struggle to get drivers and such for yoru preferred OS (not to mention software support too).

Also - can I make another contreversial comment here - this whole thing about the cost of windows. Please, give me a break. Who here is dumb enough to go to Best Buy and pick up a retail copy of Windows? If you are you deserve to get charged an insanely inflated price. OEM versions of XP are as cheap as $80 and tha tis a prefectly reasonable price for a piece of software such as an OS. Besides that, a Technet subscription is an incredible value giving you access not only to the FULL MS software catlogue but to support direct from MS and Technet as well as a number of excellent technical resources suitable for supporting not just a user but an organization. Technet subscriptions are as cheap as a couple hundred a year. I realize it isn't free, Linux is certainly unrivaled in that sense - but Microsoft doesn't gouge prices like people make them out to, they make less off the average OEM POS than NVIDIA or ATI or Intel do I can assure you of that - not to mention what Apple makes off thier overpriced proprietary crap while getting a pass for beign the good guys. MS are no saints and certainly with vista you wonder what they are thinking - but they are not the evil, greedy, gouging asses people around Linux make them out to be.

Bothered
July 6th, 2007, 09:22 AM
Again, I know how to do the things in Linux (and Unix) - heck, I brought up my entire Myth box without even bothering to install Xwindows. I was performing this install as a test of its capability for use by 'average' people. Anything that an average (or even above average user) couldn't do I wouldn't do.

Installing and configuring any operating system from scratch is not necessarily a task for the average user. I have, in the past, had Windows systems become unusable after updates, and sometimes due to lack of technical knowledge it took me time to recover it.


When using the BUILT IN driver update system (the restricted driver dialogue) crashes the Xwindows system rendering the computer to a command line only system it is a serious failure in terms of being 'Linux for Human Beings'.

I agree, it is a serious failure. If you're having hardware issues I recommend (as you have already suggested) that you try another distribution. If you were simply testing the ease-of-use of ubuntu, but know (or are willing to find out) how to fix the graphics problems, then you could also try that, if you still want to use it as an operating system.

Bothered
July 6th, 2007, 09:53 AM
If I am at the command line and type sudo ./file_name_whatever to run it it will prompt for proper password before running so why not have that SAME behavior as an option when at the GUI so if I double click (or right click and get a run as root) option?

Because the developers of (in this case nautilus) decided not to include it. There could be any of a number of reasons for them choosing to not include the functionality. They may have considered it a security risk (how many users would really think before typing in a password in nautilus - these sorts of mistakes can happen in a GUI), or they may have not had time to introduce it in the development cycle. Or it might not be a feature they consider important to introduce. In any case, we are users of nautilus, not customers of the developers. If you really think such a feature is important, you are free to code it in yourself.


I think you are wrong here - a 'desktop' is a fairly definable role so when evaluating Linux as a desktop it either fails or succeeds at fitting in that role.

I think that's too simplistic. The needs of each desktop user varies, and any given operating system can satisfy them more or less well than another. I don't think it's a pass/fail thing.


It may be the best alternative to XP in terms of Linux distros but it is far from being capable of sitting on 95% of the desktops around the country where Windows computers sit. And without addressing many of the still needless command line functions and fragility of the GUI and other legacy UNIX operations it will never get there. So what - Linux fan says I don't care if it gets there - fine, then don't EVER whine about getting no love from the manufacturers because so long as Linux remains in the low single digits of the desktop market you will struggle to get drivers and such for yoru preferred OS (not to mention software support too).

I think you're missing the point of the open source argument that is being put forward. It isn't the lack of linux support that is objected to, it's the fact that the drivers which do exist are not classed, by the people who use this argument, as truly "free". Open source developers would then be able to develop their own linux drivers based on, say, a Windows driver.


OEM versions of XP are as cheap as $80 and tha tis a prefectly reasonable price for a piece of software such as an OS.

I can't speak for other people, but I don't really want to buy an operating system that has been superseded. The cheapest prices I can find for Windows Vista Home Premium are ~$110 for an upgrade and ~$200 for complete. You can argue that that's cheap for what it is, but I am not (yet) prepared to pay it.

fyllekajan
July 6th, 2007, 11:54 AM
SWBgHz,

You're right about there are some individuals in the community wrongly claiming Ubuntu to be a perfect replacement for XP which isnít true - at least not for everyone. As already being said Linux is an alternative to XP not a replacement. Then again, you will find people claiming different things in any community.

It's not a secret there are certain tools, applications, viruses and games not available for Linux. If the users must have those they may want to stick with XP or dual-boot (most Windows users reboot their system on a regular basis anyway).

It's not a secret Linux doesn't work with all hardware. People may want to do some research before installing a new OS or ask the community. If those 95% are too lazy to do that then maybe they need to have it pre-installed or have someone else to do it for them just to be sure. For your car analogy there will always be a learning curve somewhere when trying something new no matter how user friendly it is, and Ubuntu is getting more and more user friendly. There's no need however to replicate Windows behavior to satisfy Windows poweruser converts if it means ending up with a less intuitive system for beginners and others. And if you still crash using Ubuntu you'll have a team of mechanics and technicians standing by to help you out.

Microsoft isn't greedy you say.. LMAO good one!

darrenm
July 6th, 2007, 12:55 PM
Also - can I make another contreversial comment here - this whole thing about the cost of windows. Please, give me a break. Who here is dumb enough to go to Best Buy and pick up a retail copy of Windows? If you are you deserve to get charged an insanely inflated price. OEM versions of XP are as cheap as $80 and tha tis a prefectly reasonable price for a piece of software such as an OS. Besides that, a Technet subscription is an incredible value giving you access not only to the FULL MS software catlogue but to support direct from MS and Technet as well as a number of excellent technical resources suitable for supporting not just a user but an organization. Technet subscriptions are as cheap as a couple hundred a year. I realize it isn't free, Linux is certainly unrivaled in that sense - but Microsoft doesn't gouge prices like people make them out to, they make less off the average OEM POS than NVIDIA or ATI or Intel do I can assure you of that - not to mention what Apple makes off thier overpriced proprietary crap while getting a pass for beign the good guys. MS are no saints and certainly with vista you wonder what they are thinking - but they are not the evil, greedy, gouging asses people around Linux make them out to be.
You're so far off the mark I don't even know where to begin. Almost everything you say in this block is incorrect. OEM POS? Do you know what POS stands for? ATi or NVidia don't make cards, they sell chips and reference designs to 3rd partys and Microsoft DO make a lot off OEM licensing.

edit: If you like I can find all the nasty things Microsoft have done and are still doing to show they are far worse than just evil, greedy, gouging asses.

Tomosaur
July 6th, 2007, 01:35 PM
You failed to note that I did what I did thinking of what the 95% of the world would do, of what the people I build PCs for would do and what thier ability is. If that 95% cannot do such simple things as I described then Linux still fails.

And FYI, as I said - I tried the driver from NVIDIA and the driver from the repository and both crashed X. Certainly, I can easily reconfig X and briong it back up - but there is no way in hell the 95% can and I was evaluating it from that standpoint.

Also, as I said, I have found a great use for Ubunutu and it the role of a dedicated PVR it shines but Linux has allways shined as a single purpose OS. It is the broad desktop use that has allways been difficult, Ubunutu represents a better than historical crack at the desktop role but it still has a long, long way to go. But as a desktop - please - Ubunutu, while greatly improved, is NOWHERE near ready fo rthe mainstream of PCs.

And therein lies the problem. By your own admission, you are NOT representative of 95% of the world, and you can't ever hope to speak for them. It is this arrogant mindset which shows you up I'm afraid. The most successful converts to Ubuntu are, in fact, the kind of users who don't know all that much about Windows in the first place. The reason this is so is that these users haven't yet learnt all the ins and outs of Windows, and haven't formed all of the (bad) habits that come along with it. If you had given Ubuntu a fair trial, instead of comparing everything to Windows, then of course, Ubuntu is going to fail by your standards, because it is so radically different from Windows in most areas. If you view 'different from Windows' as 'bad', then I'm afraid you're already a lost cause.

You say that you downloaded the nVidia driver from their website. Well, unfortunately in the Linux world, we don't tend to download stuff from websites )even though we technically can). This is perhaps the most obvious difference from Windows. The repository system is just so much cleaner, faster, and more organised, and if you had bothered for even a second to search for nvidia related stuff in Synaptic, then you would have found the correct drivers, and you'd have no problems. Just don't download vital stuff likedrivers from websites, it is an all-round bad idea. Everything (and I mean EVERYTHING) in the repository is checked and re-checked to make sure that it will work with Ubuntu. It is odd that you claim that 95% of users couldn't figure this behaviour out, when in reality, most do, usually because they take the time to read up on what they're getting themselves into when they decide to have a go at Linux. I know when I was first thinking of trying Linux, the repository system was one of its biggest selling points. It seemed so obvious to me that a repository system is much, much better than the 'random download and install' approach which Windows uses. Yes, you also say that you tried the driver from the repository, and if that failed too, then this is certainly an issue, but you should also understand, with all of your degrees and whatnot, that computers are:

a)fickle.
b)different from each other in almost every circumstance.

While the driver SHOULDN'T have caused you problems, it is certainly not as common a problem as you make it out to be. I've had the nvidia driver crash my system on Windows quite a few times - it even caused a BSOD once, and I had to roll-back the driver and wait for the next release. Did I say 'Windows isn't ready' because of this? Of course not - and at least with Ubuntu I have the opportunity to contact the Ubuntu developers and let them know that the nVidia driver wouldn't work (even though I have never actually had such a problem with Ubuntu, apart from one time where it was very obviously my fault, and took about a minute to fix).

Of course, Ubuntu isn't perfect, and it's not for everyone - just like Windows isn't perfect and is not for everyone, and just like Macs are not perfect and not for everyone. I'm sorry you had a bad experience with Ubuntu, but such is life. It does no good to come and complain here, because most of the forum users aren't Ubuntu developers,so more often than not, such complaints are responded to with sarcasm, if not complete hostiliy. If you had bothered to learn something about the system you were using, and had asked for help, rather than assuming you would be instantly comfortable with Ubuntu, then I'm sure your experience would have been radically different, and you may even have enjoyed using Ubuntu.

prizrak
July 6th, 2007, 02:36 PM
I want to acknowledge that this statement is very well reasoned and pretty much what I tell people who ask me about Linux (again, I am not a new to Linux guy). What prompted my post and the arguments that followed is that much of the Linux community, particuarly the Ubuntu community, do run around offering it as a perfect replacement for XP and that is just not right. It may be the best alternative to XP in terms of Linux distros but it is far from being capable of sitting on 95% of the desktops around the country where Windows computers sit. And without addressing many of the still needless command line functions and fragility of the GUI and other legacy UNIX operations it will never get there. So what - Linux fan says I don't care if it gets there - fine, then don't EVER whine about getting no love from the manufacturers because so long as Linux remains in the low single digits of the desktop market you will struggle to get drivers and such for yoru preferred OS (not to mention software support too).
And you are basing this assumption on how many installs? What you fail to realize is that you are using a singular experience to extrapolate your conclusion. Additionally you did not do a single thing that an average user would do. An average user does not install his/her own OS. He/she will either buy a pre-built system with an OS already isntalled and configured or will pay someone to install and configure the OS on their current system. As such they would not run into a hardware issue like you would. You can order and Ubuntu system from Dell and I'm willing to bet that it will work just right as soon as you turn it on.

As for Nautilus not telling you you don't have permissions to the folder and letting you elevate them. It would be a pretty nice feature to have, however any user who doesn't know to use gksudo nautilus to open up the window with full system permissions should not be attempting to write into a system directory.

I installed Ubuntu on 3 systems for myself all with very different hardware and never had to touch the CLI. In fact my mother was able to use Thunderbird on my laptop to get some addresses out of my address book that she needed, all on my Ubuntu machine (Breezy I think it was). Just an FYI one of the machines is a convertible (tablet/laptop) and in Feisty the tablet portion was picked up and configured out of the box. It also uses an nVidia card as well as my desktop and both of them work perfectly with either the FLOSS or proprietary drivers. Even run Beryl AND Compiz (I played with both) without a single issue. This was all set up without ever touching the CLI.

Another point I would like to make is that I had very idiotic problems with XP. If you go back about 30-40 pages you will see me documenting my experience with it. It failed to recognize my Intel RAID controller and required a floppy with drivers. We are talking XP SP2 here not Gold. The systems engineers at my current job tell me they have the same problem with Server 2003 installations where they have an external floppy drive lying around just for that. So based on this singular experience Windows is a horrible OS and is not ready for the desktop.

Another thing I would like you to consider is that home user desktops comprise at most 50% of the market. The other 50% or so is taken up by organizations. While Linux based OS's in general and Ubuntu in particular may not be a good OS for home users for whatever reason. It is a very viable alternative for an organizational desktop. Breaking into that market is much easier than a home user market and it could provide Linux based OS's with a significant enough marketshare to be supported by major ISVs/OEMs.


For your car analogy there will always be a learning curve somewhere when trying something new no matter how user friendly it is
As a complete and utter gearhead I would like to expand on this. If you have driven FWD cars your entire life you will get into trouble on an RWD. RWD tends to oversteer and allow for a spin out, while FWD tends to understeer, which would just make you go wider around the turn. Recovery procedure for either of those are very different in both FWD and RWD vehicles. For instance in an FWD if you are understeering you just tap the brakes (or left foot brake if you are good), in an RWD under same conditions you will give the throttle a quick whack to get the rear tires sliding. You can't say that one layout is better than the other (although I do think that FWD is useless with AWD/4WD cars comming down in price lately) they are just different. Ubuntu is different from Windows, it has it's quirks and issues as does Windows neither can be said to be perfect.

P.S. The recovery procedures I outlined are obviously simplified for the purpose of making an argument.

stalker145
July 6th, 2007, 03:59 PM
You fanboys are so blind, I already said several times I know how to fix it and in fact did. I regarded it as a major failure because there is no ay in hell an 'average' user would have been able to solve the problems I came across.

My, my, my. Someone had a big bowl of Bitch-O's for breakfast. The arrogance in your tone tells me that no matter what anyone says, you will not be swayed. Meh, I'll say it anyway.

I... am... an... average... user. There, it's out.

When I came to Ubuntu, I had NO knowledge of Linux and a pretty good amount of experience in Windows. I also came to Linux with the understanding that I was not using Windows <gasp>. That said, I must say that your definition of the 'average user' must be laid out, because I think yours is different from most people's here.

My first install of Ubuntu left me with an unusable system (because of a PCI-EIDE card). Did I panic? Nope. Did I know how to fix it? Nope. Did I know where to go for info? Yup... 1) Insert LiveCD, 2) Head for the forums... Man, a typical, average user going where the knowledge will be to fix a system that he knows nothing about and not delving into the OS and breaking things. But, then I don't have any degrees...


I was performing this install as a test of its capability for use by 'average' people. Anything that an average (or even above average user) couldn't do I wouldn't do.

When using the BUILT IN driver update system (the restricted driver dialogue) crashes the Xwindows system rendering the computer to a command line only system it is a serious failure in terms of being 'Linux for Human Beings'.

See my above statement. If an average person (myself for one) were to go to the forums to try to find a fix for his problem, why did you not post here until you'd sufficiently borked your gear up? You, my friend, were not holding to the average, but were trying to fix it with your knowledge. When that failed, you decided to lash out. Oh, well. I hope you get over it and maybe we can help you fix your problem instead of wasting bandwidth like this.


I am not a Linux dufus even if I am not a Linux expert. I tried one way the average person might try it and then tried another after resetting things. As for the file thing, yes - the average person wouldn't do that but that is not the point.

I thought the point of your experiment was to test what the average user would do. Oh, wait, that wasn't the point. Yes it was. Damn, now I'm confused...


the point is that it is pretty ridiculous that I would want to do something and be rejected by the OS with no info or dialogue explaining why and with no way to then authenticate my supremacy as the owner of the damn hardware to do what I want. Other processes ask for privileged elevation so why not GUI processes? It is just legacy BS. If I am at the command line and type sudo ./file_name_whatever to run it it will prompt for proper password before running so why not have that SAME behavior as an option when at the GUI so if I double click (or right click and get a run as root) option?

Ummm, ok, let's go over this one thing at a time.

No info or dialogue: The GUI is set up so that people that are not comfortable with the command line can operate an OS. People that use GUI's are generally not in need of the amount of information that is passed on the CLI. If you wish to know what's going on behind the scenes or why something failed, drop to the CLI.

Elevation of privileges: You mention typing sudo at the command prompt and ask for similar behavior from the GUI. Well, the option is there. By typing sudo, you are already telling the OS that you want root privilege. That's why you get the magic password prompt. It was already mentioned how to get a root GUI-thingy-app. CLI~>gksudo appname~>be happy.

Anyway, thanks for the insightful comments. In my response I have also learned something. 1) My Firefox doesn't seem to know the words Ubuntu or Forefox, and I seem to have a British version because it insists that I spell behavior as behaviour. Eh, spell-check is fun...

Bothered
July 6th, 2007, 05:07 PM
Off topic: Firefox dictionaries: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browse/type:3

forrestcupp
July 6th, 2007, 05:24 PM
I want to acknowledge that this statement is very well reasoned and pretty much what I tell people who ask me about Linux (again, I am not a new to Linux guy). What prompted my post and the arguments that followed is that much of the Linux community, particuarly the Ubuntu community, do run around offering it as a perfect replacement for XP and that is just not right. It may be the best alternative to XP in terms of Linux distros but it is far from being capable of sitting on 95% of the desktops around the country where Windows computers sit. And without addressing many of the still needless command line functions and fragility of the GUI and other legacy UNIX operations it will never get there. So what - Linux fan says I don't care if it gets there - fine, then don't EVER whine about getting no love from the manufacturers because so long as Linux remains in the low single digits of the desktop market you will struggle to get drivers and such for yoru preferred OS (not to mention software support too).

Also - can I make another contreversial comment here - this whole thing about the cost of windows. Please, give me a break. Who here is dumb enough to go to Best Buy and pick up a retail copy of Windows? If you are you deserve to get charged an insanely inflated price. OEM versions of XP are as cheap as $80 and tha tis a prefectly reasonable price for a piece of software such as an OS. Besides that, a Technet subscription is an incredible value giving you access not only to the FULL MS software catlogue but to support direct from MS and Technet as well as a number of excellent technical resources suitable for supporting not just a user but an organization. Technet subscriptions are as cheap as a couple hundred a year. I realize it isn't free, Linux is certainly unrivaled in that sense - but Microsoft doesn't gouge prices like people make them out to, they make less off the average OEM POS than NVIDIA or ATI or Intel do I can assure you of that - not to mention what Apple makes off thier overpriced proprietary crap while getting a pass for beign the good guys. MS are no saints and certainly with vista you wonder what they are thinking - but they are not the evil, greedy, gouging asses people around Linux make them out to be.

I actually agree with most of what you're saying here. Anyone who defends Linux to the point that they claim there's nothing wrong with it is crazy. There are a lot of things that aren't worked out yet, and they need to be fixed. But just look at the difference between Linux now and Linux 5 years ago. Linux is way more user friendly than it used to be, and it's only getting better at a fast pace. Just visually alone, it has gone from an OS that didn't care much about appearance, to beating the pants off of Microsoft's newest OS visually.

Where I disagree is the thought that Windows is any better. I recently did a clean install of Ubuntu Feisty and Windows XP on the same computer. It was incomparable. I had way more trouble getting XP to work than I did Ubuntu, and I've had a lot of experience with Windows. I also tried doing a clean install of Vista on the same machine. I won't even talk about that hell.

I'm sorry about the trouble you've had, but I don't think you can assume that you're in the majority with that.

Dragonbite
July 6th, 2007, 05:34 PM
I recently did a clean install of Ubuntu Feisty and Windows XP on the same computer. It was incomparable. I had way more trouble getting XP to work than I did Ubuntu, and I've had a lot of experience with Windows. I also tried doing a clean install of Vista on the same machine. I won't even talk about that hell.Since Linux has not had the comfort of being pre-installed on computers by professionals who have time and expertise, it has had to find other means of being distributed and has worked hard over the years to make it as easy as possible.

I tried installing Windows 2000 on a machine and it was a pain-in-the-**** to find, download and install all of the drivers for it (some of which were actually hacks because the drivers were stopped being developed with Windows98!).

With Ubuntu I had a working machine almost immediately and the two things that were not working fine were the Winmodem (no surprise there) and the video playback was messed up. Other than that, it was fully working.

SWBgHz
July 7th, 2007, 03:00 AM
I can't speak for other people, but I don't really want to buy an operating system that has been superseded. The cheapest prices I can find for Windows Vista Home Premium are ~$110 for an upgrade and ~$200 for complete. You can argue that that's cheap for what it is, but I am not (yet) prepared to pay it.

XP has hardly been supplanted by Vista, in fact it is quite questionable if it ever will be the way Vista is going (it is well on its way to being the second coming of Windows milenium). Nevertheless, OEM Vista is only $110, with a game or any other commercial software product typically running in the $50 to $60 range it is hard to flame MS for selling the OS at $90 to $110.

Frak
July 7th, 2007, 03:08 AM
I've never seen Vista lower than $190

kamaboko
July 7th, 2007, 03:15 AM
I've never seen Vista lower than $190

Last week Fry's had Vista Ultimate OEM for $146

Frak
July 7th, 2007, 03:34 AM
Last week Fry's had Vista Ultimate OEM for $146
I've never seen Vista lower than $146

freebird54
July 7th, 2007, 03:52 AM
What I want to know is when MS will pay people to use it? So far, none of the people I know that buy nothing (yes, I'm afraid I do know people like that) have even bothered to run Vista when they can get it for free...

Yes - they have the hardware to handle it...

And yes, sorry, I shouldn't put such things into this thread - it's supposed to be about how ready WE are for the desktop :) (not whether others are)

I'll be good now :oops:

Feba
July 7th, 2007, 04:53 AM
HP is selling new computers for 300$. Overwrite that with good ol Tux and sell off the Vista license :D

m.musashi
July 7th, 2007, 05:05 AM
I've never seen Vista lower than $146

Even if it was $100, who pays to upgrade windows (okay, millennium was the exception I guess)? Seriously, you'd have to an individual of less than average intelligence to buy another copy of windows. You will likely have slower performance than the OS your PC came with. Just wait until you buy your next computer (assuming you are one of 90% of computer users incapable of setting up a PC with a better OS:)).

Frak
July 7th, 2007, 05:21 AM
Even if it was $100, who pays to upgrade windows (okay, millennium was the exception I guess)? Seriously, you'd have to an individual of less than average intelligence to buy another copy of windows. You will likely have slower performance than the OS your PC came with. Just wait until you buy your next computer (assuming you are one of 90% of computer users incapable of setting up a PC with a better OS:)).
I agree.

Skeith
July 7th, 2007, 06:41 AM
The problem with desktop Linux in general is that it seems to fall just a little short every time. But everybody is ecstatic that it came just a bit closer this time. For Linux to gain any significant ground it needs to surpass Vista and OS X as a home operating system. Impress the users and Linux will start to gain momentum all its own with average users. Give them a reason to switch, and make the switch as painless as possible. Both issues applications that make up Linux and the people who create them need to be fixed before Linux can make the leap into a significant number of homes.

m.musashi
July 7th, 2007, 07:13 AM
The problem with desktop Linux in general is that it seems to fall just a little short every time. But everybody is ecstatic that it came just a bit closer this time. For Linux to gain any significant ground it needs to surpass Vista and OS X as a home operating system. Impress the users and Linux will start to gain momentum all its own with average users. Give them a reason to switch, and make the switch as painless as possible. Both issues applications that make up Linux and the people who create them need to be fixed before Linux can make the leap into a significant number of homes.

Short of what? The expectations of the top 10% of windows users maybe, but the rest of the windows user population have only one expectation - to take a computer home, turn it on and it works. Of course, most of them already know how to do this with windows so they are fairly unmotivated to learn anything new. However, a good majority of the computing public is pretty computer illiterate. If someone held their hand and gave them a an hour into to Ubuntu (already installed and set up of course) they would likely be able to switch. My dad did and so did my mom - two very average and generally illiterate computer users. Unfortunately, there just aren't enough Linux users to go around and train windows users. While I'd like to see Ubuntu hit the 15% or more mark, in the end, I don't really care. Let all the windows user keep using windows. As long as they keep spending their money and funding IT development in general, I can enjoy my safe, secure, fast and generally superior OS AND take advantage of any tech advances I choose to. The world doesn't just need ditch diggers, it needs tech idiots too. Next time you are wandering around Best buy or similar store, take a moment to thank a few of the sheep there :).

As for surpassing windows and osx, I'd say ubuntu already has. All the OS does is run the human-computer interface. Ubuntu does that as well / better than windows (not sure about osx as I haven't used it much). The gap is probably in the apps that run on top of windows, Linux and osx. People are hung up on their use of things like Office, Photoshop and other apps. If those ran in Ubuntu natively then I think many more people would switch (not that I'm proposing that). As for motivation, it already exists. There just isn't marketing. Most people need someone to tell them what they should buy. No one is telling them they should buy Ubuntu/Linux ready computers.

The mistake most people make is to think that we all want to see Ubuntu be on 100% (or even a majority) of desktops. While it's true that many of us would love to see this happen, it's not like we care if it doesn't. Many of us are happy in our knowledge that we run a superior OS. It works for us and we enjoy it. Many more people using it helps prove our point but in the end few of us really care. There is a certain amount of frustration in hearing people rave about how wonderful windows is or how poor Ubuntu is, but after a good rant, we all go back to enjoying our free, secure, fast, and downright enjoyable OS while the rest go back to downloading the latest virus definitions, fighting popups, and paying for apps to do the same things we do for free. Suckers.

Feba
July 7th, 2007, 07:14 AM
Skeith, linux itself is fine, it's just a lack of applications, and the social stigma. I promise you, if we had even a quarter of the REAL PC games market, Linux would shoot off like a rocket.

forrestcupp
July 7th, 2007, 02:15 PM
Skeith, linux itself is fine, it's just a lack of applications, and the social stigma. I promise you, if we had even a quarter of the REAL PC games market, Linux would shoot off like a rocket.

The only thing Linux can't do is run all Windows programs flawlessly. Well, neither can OSX, but people don't claim it falls short. They just say Mac has its own set of software, and if you buy a Mac, you have to realize that and buy Mac software. It's the same with Linux. It has its own set of software, and if you choose Linux, you have to realize that and use Linux software. No different than Mac.

Linux has most software that people need available natively.

I agree that having commercial PC games ported would help, but I don't think Linux would shoot off like a rocket.

23meg
July 7th, 2007, 04:08 PM
I already said several times I know how to fix it and in fact did. I regarded it as a major failure because there is no ay in hell an 'average' user would have been able to solve the problems I came across.

And I already told you that there's no way in hell "95%" of "average" users are going to have your problem by default. It's your problem, specific to your configuration, no more or less. When you spot a "major failure" that's reproducible, the thing to do is file a bug report, so that it will get fixed, so that "average" users won't be caught by it.


And one thing, Google'ing for help with a system stuck at a command line is quite impossible for most all people regardless of whether you or I can do it.

It's safe to assume that the "95%" already have Windows installed, right? They can use that to Google or check the forums. And they do; you may be surprised to hear that 35% of the traffic of ubuntuforums.org is from Windows machines (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=380980).

cobrn1
July 7th, 2007, 05:09 PM
you may be surprised to hear that 35% of the traffic of ubuntuforums.org is from Windows machines (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=380980).

interesting statistic...

I would say that linux has surpassed windows atleast (and mac) already, but it just needs more people to realise it so market share increases and manufacturers start working with us. Then driver issues and lack of professional software-issues all dissapear.

Anyway, how can you say that it hasn't surpassed the apple and MS offerings. Vista has huge driver problems, and while I like the aero OS, it's a joke compared to what you can do with compiz-fusion, etc. PS: anyone else seen the aquarium / atlantis add-in - very cool...:) . Oh, and mac's interface (if you swing that way) can be easily replicated anf improved upon...

As for desktop readiness - it's ready now. Sure, I think that 7.10 will really seal the deal with the new Xorg (or whatever it's called) fixing resolution issues and bringing some really cool features, but as many people point out, you can very easily teach people how to use linux, esp with the cool GUI's (like KDE and GNOME) that are available. The younger generation, me included :p (student), are generally very good at moving to linux and learn to appreciate a mixed GUI/CLI approach. Kids can (and do) use it. All it needs is more market penetration. Windows has rotted your brain into thinking it can only use windows (cue discussion on windows likeing piracy until recently...)

anyway, my 2c worth (wish i could think of a less cliched ending, but alas...)

kamaboko
July 7th, 2007, 05:22 PM
interesting statistic...

I would say that linux has surpassed windows atleast (and mac) already, but it just needs more people to realise it so market share increases and manufacturers start working with us. Then driver issues and lack of professional software-issues all dissapear.

Anyway, how can you say that it hasn't surpassed the apple and MS offerings. Vista has huge driver problems, and while I like the aero OS, it's a joke compared to what you can do with compiz-fusion, etc. PS: anyone else seen the aquarium / atlantis add-in - very cool...:) . Oh, and mac's interface (if you swing that way) can be easily replicated anf improved upon...

As for desktop readiness - it's ready now. Sure, I think that 7.10 will really seal the deal with the new Xorg (or whatever it's called) fixing resolution issues and bringing some really cool features, but as many people point out, you can very easily teach people how to use linux, esp with the cool GUI's (like KDE and GNOME) that are available. The younger generation, me included :p (student), are generally very good at moving to linux and learn to appreciate a mixed GUI/CLI approach. Kids can (and do) use it. All it needs is more market penetration. Windows has rotted your brain into thinking it can only use windows (cue discussion on windows likeing piracy until recently...)

anyway, my 2c worth (wish i could think of a less cliched ending, but alas...)

Seriously, who gives a rip about how pretty a desktop is? Pretty doesn't get the work done. This is a problem with open source. Instead of producing enterprise software solutions, people work on "gadgets" and little "cutesy" apps. I use Linux (infact on Edgy right now), but if I had to put my life on the line for producing serious business solutions for clients, you can bet your *** that MS gets powered up.

m.musashi
July 7th, 2007, 05:33 PM
Seriously, who gives a rip about how pretty a desktop is? Pretty doesn't get the work done. This is a problem with open source. Instead of producing enterprise software solutions, people work on "gadgets" and little "cutesy" apps. I use Linux (infact on Edgy right now), but if I had to put my life on the line for producing serious business solutions for clients, you can bet your *** that MS gets powered up.

Huh? I don't think there are many people that would argue that pretty desktops is what Linux is about. In fact, being less attractive has been a common complaint. Yes, beryl and compiz have added a lot of bling but those are just a couple examples and not really core elements. I'd say it's vista that has gone out it's way to looks pretty - and it does. It just sucks to use for more than 10 minutes.

Oh, and for the record, lots of "serious business solutions" are produced in Linux. Much of the cellular network's back end (i.e the really important part) runs Linux. Much of the Internet itself runs Linux. Given that so much of the desktop market is windows, it's interesting that it has much less of the "serious" side of computing.

kamaboko
July 7th, 2007, 05:46 PM
Huh? I don't think there are many people that would argue that pretty desktops is what Linux is about. In fact, being less attractive has been a common complaint. Yes, beryl and compiz have added a lot of bling but those are just a couple examples and not really core elements. I'd say it's vista that has gone out it's way to looks pretty - and it does. It just sucks to use for more than 10 minutes.

Oh, and for the record, lots of "serious business solutions" are produced in Linux. Much of the cellular network's back end (i.e the really important part) runs Linux. Much of the Internet itself runs Linux. Given that so much of the desktop market is windows, it's interesting that it has much less of the "serious" side of computing.

How does Vista suck to use for more than ten minutes? If it were the pain-in-the-*** everyone here seems to claim, then my parents (who are using Vista) would be ringing my phone off the hook everyday asking for help. They have absolutely no problems.

Walk into any fortune 500 accounting firm, law firm, advertising firm, and take a look at what they're running on their desktops. It's all MS platform software. That's what I'm talking about.

forrestcupp
July 7th, 2007, 05:56 PM
Seriously, who gives a rip about how pretty a desktop is? Pretty doesn't get the work done. This is a problem with open source. Instead of producing enterprise software solutions, people work on "gadgets" and little "cutesy" apps. I use Linux (infact on Edgy right now), but if I had to put my life on the line for producing serious business solutions for clients, you can bet your *** that MS gets powered up.

Not everyone is all about "getting the work done." Some people enjoy eye candy, gadgets, and cutesy apps. But until recently, Linux has been all about getting the work done and not enough about making things look nice.

wog
July 7th, 2007, 06:53 PM
interesting statistic...
{snip}

As for desktop readiness - it's ready now. Sure, I think that 7.10 will really seal the deal with the new Xorg (or whatever it's called) fixing resolution issues and bringing some really cool features, but as many people point out, you can very easily teach people how to use linux, esp with the cool GUI's (like KDE and GNOME) that are available. The younger generation, me included :p (student), are generally very good at moving to linux and learn to appreciate a mixed GUI/CLI approach. Kids can (and do) use it. All it needs is more market penetration. Windows has rotted your brain into thinking it can only use windows (cue discussion on windows likeing piracy until recently...)

The trouble is, the young aren't going to apply pressure to Market Share for another 20 years. The people you need to win over are the Old Men in their 40s and beyond who aren't tech savvy, who run the businesses right now, and the Office Ladies who support them.

The experience most people get is buying a computer with the OS already installed, and never having to think about how to install anything until they see some new office toy they simply must have. At that point, having only one popular route for software installation, Windows has Linux beat hands down. With Linux you have three or four methods of installation, which is confusing to anyone without tech experience.

Windows is also not very configurable at all until you install software to play with the few available switches, so you don't have to think about it until you're ready to play with them. Macs are far more configurable, but the included tools are transparent to the user until they start looking for them. Linux has them both beat as far as how configurable the OS is, but it has problems in terms of making those switches transparent enough that regular non-techies don't have to cope with them until they're ready.

Old-school Linux geeks actually have the gall to be proud of how obtuse their OS is, leading to even more issues of non-intuitive layouts and silly design issues. Most of those issues are front-end problems, but until the old-school geeks are sufficiently drowned out by the masses of people who want Linux to take the Market Share it deserves, these problems are going to keep rearing their ugly heads. It amazes me Linux is the only OS (that I know of) who has die-hard unpaid fans who generate bad publicity, and seem to see that bad press as a good thing.

Linux is actually getting better. The front end is improving, and more things are being made dependably automated. There are fewer and fewer things to automate and simplify with every version. It won't be long until Linux actually surpasses Windows and eventually Macintosh. Linux is almost as pretty as Windows now, and a damn sight more stable.

I personally don't care about which year is The Year Of Linux. When it comes, it will be self-evident.

SWBgHz
July 7th, 2007, 07:11 PM
Skeith, linux itself is fine, it's just a lack of applications, and the social stigma. I promise you, if we had even a quarter of the REAL PC games market, Linux would shoot off like a rocket.


See - this is the backwards logic that keeps Linux down. If, If, If - ever consider the reality that IF isn't the case, and pondering 'what if' instead of confronting reality is why Linux fails. It is a Windows world - PERIOD. Argue that and you are arguing reality and nothing you have to say is of much value. To break out of the Linux world and into the greater PC market you MUST beat Windows at its game. And despite what Linux folks say Windows excels at its game - that game being creating a fairly unified computing environment with little entry expertise required that is fairly cheap even if it is just good enough overall. Apple suffered the same fate - never acknowledging the reality that people where happy with good enough if it saved them a couple grand - now look at Apple, pretty much irrelevant in the PC world and mostly a gadget and music content company. Linux has alot to offer but for it to grow beyond its current penetration it is going to have to concede to what the other 955 expects and is used to 9and for the record, Windows is where it is not because OEMs pre load it but because it won in the marketplace based on consumer choice and that is why OEMs install it). It is a similar dilema facing society in terms of a desire to get off oil and with something else. Consumers have certain expectations and any alternative HAS to meet those expectations, anything else and it will get rejected. So any alternative fuel must meet these constraints to have a chance at acceptance and growth.



I've never seen Vista lower than $190

I've never seen Vista lower than $146

A) Vista Ultimate is not the price of all Vista for crying out loud.
B) Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium (OEM), $111.99 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116202)

Look, I like where Linux is going and in comparison to where it was it is worlds better; it just has more to go. And more than anything the attitude is the biggest thing holding it back. If you cannot acknowledge MS's success in delivering what people want then you cannot hope to compete with them. In fact, that is why I have come to be very frustrated with MS and lessen my partnership with them - they have lost touch with what people want in Vista. Sure, it has potential, but it is so unrealized it is not even funny - but they are so detached now in their size and committee reviewing committee structure that they cannot see the forest through the trees. It is a bit like what happened to IBM back in the day, they go t so big and so successful they began (no kidding, my father was with IBM for 30 years) and pushing them to market without first having identified a demand. In the end, the market rules all and choses winners and losers. MS has gotten sidetracked, lost, and bloated - Vista is confusing and poorly marketed, and questionably beneficial - so an opening exists for a Linux distro to tackle Windows at its game. But it is still Windows game and not acknowledging that is a recipe for failure.

I went ahead and manually got X back up and going, even got it going with SLi - and I will probably consider keeping it installed to play with here and there. But it is only by choice because the fact of the matter is that the ONLY way I could use Ubuntu as my OS is if I gave up allot to do it and for most people, the vast majority of people, that is true as well. And pleae don't tell me about yoru grandmother who has an icon for mail and internet on her Ubuntu desktop and does just fine - is your claim to fame that Linux is a browser on par with cheesy PDAs and Blackberrys? A PC is much more than a browser, word processor, and email client - it is an environment in which just about anything can be done, it is a platform for new technologies as well as sharing and collaborating and learning. Linux does some of things well, some far better than it ever has before - but administration in Linux is still archaically unaccessible for all but the most technical of user and the insistance on keeping with that model shuts of so much of the market that Linux fails to get the support it needs from other parties (OEMs, hardware manufacturers, etc).

If you want to beet MS you have to build a better Windows, trying to convince people that they don't need Windows in the first place is just not going to work.


The trouble is, the young aren't going to apply pressure to Market Share for another 20 years. The people you need to win over are the Old Men in their 40s and beyond who aren't tech savvy, who run the businesses right now, and the Office Ladies who support them.

...

Old-school Linux geeks actually have the gall to be proud of how obtuse their OS is, leading to even more issues of non-intuitive layouts and silly design issues. Most of those issues are front-end problems, but until the old-school geeks are sufficiently drowned out by the masses of people who want Linux to take the Market Share it deserves, these problems are going to keep rearing their ugly heads. It amazes me Linux is the only OS (that I know of) who has die-hard unpaid fans who generate bad publicity, and seem to see that bad press as a good thing.


So very true. This is the heart of my point. I would add though that another strong point of Windows, one often ignored, is that is is discoverable. Despites its issues (all O/Ss have issues) it does allow a user to learn his way through issues (and I don't mean posting on a forum for a detailed listed of instructions about what commands to type in). I mean the GUI administration system (even though a few things require command line or hybrid GUI/CL stuff like the registry if you will) allows you to see options before being aware of them in detail, to seek solutions within the OS itself, and to muddle through issues yourself. Not sure I am wording that correctly but I think we can all agree that it is alot easier to 'figure something out' in a GUI based system than an CL especially if you are not familiar with the technical aspects of either. Windows administration is simpler and the infrastructure and expertise in personnel required to support a Windows network is significantly less skilled than would be a Linux counterpart. I may get arguments on this but it is undeniable. A somewhat computer literate person can get a few Windows PC, install commercial software and get them all collaborating in a small office - it happens all the time. But it is unlikely that person can do much of anything with Linux meaning the same network (if the software they desire is available for Linux) would require a technical professional not because it is that hard but because the "obtuse" elements he references above relegate such things to those few who ever bother with it.

No doubt, Linux is getting better and Ubunutu seems to be the more Windows competitive version I have yet seen. But alot remains to be done to really compete in any way meaningful to anyone outside the Linux world.

I will tell you one thing - a little mentioned but very important part of MS's success is big time in trouble with vista - gaming. Gaming (and enthusiast computing in general) has long been a BIG driver of the success of Windows. But Vista is a nightmare for gamers at this point, or close to it. If MS doesn't do something big (and with SP1 now seeming to get pushed back to 2008 it is not looking like MS has a clue) then Vista is in danger of being the second coming of Millennium. IN fact, without the promise of DX10 I don't see how Vista can honestly claim any real (meaningful) improvement over XP. Sure, lots of little nice tweaks and such but real improvement - only DX10 has that potential at this point and without it Vista, and MS, are in big trouble.

fyllekajan
July 7th, 2007, 07:40 PM
Linux is almost as pretty as Windows now,
Does that mean you think Windows is pretty?

SWBgHz
July 7th, 2007, 08:09 PM
Something just occurs to me that makes my point well. Consider Internet Explorer and Firefox. IE had its issues and MS for whatever reason never bothered to improve it so along comes Firefox who, over time, makes a better IE than IE itself. AS a result they gain market share significantly. They didn't try to do things differant jut to do them different they made a differing version and made it better.

Too often Linux is different for no good reason, or because of its Unix roots. I think we can all agree that Unix has NO place as a desktop so it stands to rason that change is necessary to work well for the desktop. Is it smarter to change to something new entirely or to make a better version of the current market dominating products? I think the latter - and just like Firefox didn't copy IE but took what was established and made it better I think Linux needs to do the same. Much of the core of Linux, much of the administration, is steeply rooted (no pun intended) in its Unix beginnings and while that serves it well for its heavier purposes it often fails it for the desktop.

The expression is "build a better mousetrap" not "convince people mice are OK".

fyllekajan
July 7th, 2007, 08:15 PM
The expression is "build a better mousetrap" not "convince people mice are OK".
What about computer viruses? :p

vexorian
July 7th, 2007, 09:19 PM
Too often Linux is different for no good reason, or because of its Unix roots. I think we can all agree that Unix has NO place as a desktop so it stands to rason that change is necessary to work well for the desktop. Is it smarter to change to something new entirely or to make a better version of the current market dominating products? I think the latter - and just like Firefox didn't copy IE but took what was established and made it better I think Linux needs to do the same. Much of the core of Linux, much of the administration, is steeply rooted (no pun intended) in its Unix beginnings and while that serves it well for its heavier purposes it often fails it for the desktop.

I find rather disturbing that you sound as if you really think what you write in this paragraph is true.


Linux is not "different for no good reason"
Unix of course has a place as desktop, 4% of home computers are currently Mac OS/X which is based on Unix... And people do use Linux desktops, else myself would be a myth.
I see absolutly no reason to think that Unix is what is causing Linux "not to be good for the desktop" It is just that the kernel is a Unix clone, the rest, gnome,KDE, xcfe , whatever are what make the desktop.



Regarding mousetrap analogies, we already got a better mousetrap, the issue right now is that people want to use an specific kind of chesse that is incompatible with the mousetrap we made. Until someone forces the cheese producers to standarize their chesse people will still use the low quality mouse trap that seems to be actually generating mice instead of killing them.

---

And I decided to replace my signature to my old one, just so more people read that.



A) Vista Ultimate is not the price of all Vista for crying out loud.
B) Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium (OEM), $111.99


Let's see 119.99 / 0 = [math error] , my calc can't calculate the cost proportion.


So very true. This is the heart of my point. I would add though that another strong point of Windows, one often ignored, is that is is discoverable. Despites its issues (all O/Ss have issues) it does allow a user to learn his way through issues (and I don't mean posting on a forum for a detailed listed of instructions about what commands to type in)
Ubuntu seems better at that than windows.


but I think we can all agree that it is alot easier to 'figure something out' in a GUI based system than an CL especially if you are not familiar with the technical aspects of either Right now command line is only required for recovery and hardware configuration when things go wrong, things in which windows is equally unintuitive (I hope you do not try to argue this, since I have been using windows XP for 4 years and I think I have to use recovery console (which is command line) 1 time a month in average.


I will tell you one thing - a little mentioned but very important part of MS's success is big time in trouble with vista - gaming. Gaming (and enthusiast computing in general) has long been a BIG driver of the success of Windows. But Vista is a nightmare for gamers at this point, or close to it. If MS doesn't do something big (and with SP1 now seeming to get pushed back to 2008 it is not looking like MS has a clue) then Vista is in danger of being the second coming of Millennium. IN fact, without the promise of DX10 I don't see how Vista can honestly claim any real (meaningful) improvement over XP. Sure, lots of little nice tweaks and such but real improvement - only DX10 has that potential at this point and without it Vista, and MS, are in big trouble.
From what I saw, Vista is placing everything windows has relied these years in peril. But even though I love PC games, I don't think they are necessary, I have also seen they fall downside lately towards consoles, in fact the only PC games left that do correctly market-wise are MMORPGs which I hate.

The issue I find, is that if MS fails we would have to deal with Apple, which is all in one a much worse dictator. Luckily enough that won't happen and MS will not fall simply become smaller market wise.

If MS kept the leader ship in market share but with lower figures, like 55% it would be enough for everybody else to be able to live well. Hardware and software companies won't be allowed to focus in a single platform, and people will simply use the OS they like, I will use Ubuntu, you will use windows, those guys will use Mac OS/X , that would be awesome.

I believe that to win, we don't need to get the majority market share, we don't even need 10% of the market share, if Linux desktops had just 5% it would be excellent for everybody, including windows users, MS would be forced not to add un-features like what happened with vista but to actually improve their products.

That's the reason, Linux distros should really not focus in killing microsoft but in becoming good enough, getting 5 in 100 is easy just by focusing on the things that make Linux awesome already. And there are plenty of them that I have no time to mention right now.

Linux is not for everyone and should never be.

m.musashi
July 7th, 2007, 10:19 PM
How does Vista suck to use for more than ten minutes? If it were the pain-in-the-*** everyone here seems to claim, then my parents (who are using Vista) would be ringing my phone off the hook everyday asking for help. They have absolutely no problems.

Walk into any fortune 500 accounting firm, law firm, advertising firm, and take a look at what they're running on their desktops. It's all MS platform software. That's what I'm talking about.

It sucks for me. I hate it. Therefore everyone else must too. At least that's the general tone of a lot of people toward Ubuntu. Beside, most people are used to windows being a pain - they just accept it. And ones lack of knowledge of alternatives or being locked into a vendor doesn't mean something is better. It just means they are unwilling to change. It's actually pretty sad that these people (lawyers and such) are basically just using Office. Imagine a $1000+ typewriter.

KIAaze
July 7th, 2007, 10:35 PM
Walk into any fortune 500 accounting firm, law firm, advertising firm, and take a look at what they're running on their desktops. It's all MS platform software.

Walk into any big research center, university or web server and take a look at what they're running on their desktops. It's all GNU/Linux platform software.

:P

Ok, well, maybe I'm extrapolating a bit... ^^

freebird54
July 7th, 2007, 10:38 PM
I doubt that you'll find too many lawyer's offices using the PC only as a WordPro. Many of them have expensive 'template' generators for creating legal documents, and as far as I can tell, many also have software support for billing 5 different customers for the same 1/2 hour... :)

Most of this kind of specialized stuff has migrated to Windows over the years - for better or worse. The days when I could write custom apps for customers running C64 has definitely gone :)

We will see these kinds of things ported over to Linux a we go, though, especially from Europe. None of them use any particular features unique to Windows -and many would actually benfit from MySQL etc...

cobrn1
July 8th, 2007, 12:53 AM
It's UBER- POST time!:

1) someone mentioned the need to get older people involved with linux as the younger generation wouldn't have an effect for a while. While there is some sense in what you're saying, that's already happening to a degree. The younger generation (say teens/student types) install linux on their parents pc and windows goes bye-bye. When I said younger generation, I really meant teens and students who are having an impact now and will be having a major impact in the next 0-10 years. 20 years is a bit extreme, but for children it is true enough...

2) Vista, though incredibly pretty, can be a major pain to work with if you don't have good enough hardware - you really do need a beast to run it properly, and without it it makes the whole experience very painful...

3) Someone said that if their life depended on it they would code for windows. This says little about the readiness on linux and more about market share...

4) 'its a windows world'. a year or two ago this was outright true (for desktops), and while its still quite applicable, there are other offering in the OS market that are erroding the monopoly (slightly).

5) You (somebody) said that apple's downfall was their inability to accept point 4. Erm, have you looked at apple any time recently? They've never been more succesful, and macs are becoming a valid option for many people as a replacement to windows (I must admit, I find this slightly dismaying as apple are really no better than microsoft - they're (IMO) wannabes with a (questionable sense of style) - I know that is probably unpopular to say, but its true, they try to look cool and gain acceptance, but really they are just another corporation. Oh, and whethere you think macs are stylish is a personal thing I guess...)

6) for people who are incapable /refuse to use a CLI, linux is getting better at doing everything with a GUI - sure, you'll miss out on the added benefits of using the CLI, but if you want to play it like that then it's _your choice_, something missing from windows.

7) As many have pointed out, huge swathes of IT infrastructure are based on linux, the web is mostly based on linux. Linux is moving to everything with a chip in it.

8) Eye-candy/prettyness (love inventing new words... ;-)) _is_ important! Maybe not to you, but to many people - why do you think microsoft and apple have spent so long developing their GUI's - because it is so important to most people...

9) As someone pointed out, functionality is more important that eye-candy. True, and linux has the functionality. Lack of professional software is a marketshare issue, but with many businesses switching or trialling linux (for cost saving and freedom) more professional software will be developed - once the market is their the gap will be filled. simple supply and demand - the hard part is the bit inbetween...

10) in line with what vexorian was saying, linux is (usually) different for a damn good reason. Why should it change to look (I assume you mean) more like windows, and 'therefore more friendly'. I find the Windows file system to be a bit of a mess at times (personally), although the 98 file system was OK (but wasn't really oriented to multiple users). Point is that the linux/unix file system actually makes a whole lot of sense if you really look at it and find out about it... and there are many other examples of linux being different for damned good reasons. I don't see anything wrong with being different - if anything it's corporations like apple and microsoft that try to be different to differentiate their products on the market...

11) Hasn't linux improved on unix sufficiently for your liking? (and is continuing to improve it). Isn't the multitude of free and open source software (which is getting better and better every day) enough for you? What is good enough for you?

12) Ubuntu is very discoverable. But to properly reply, I would have to admit to searching multiple windows forums and websites to try and get things working in XP, just like I had to do with linux (to get my ethernet->usb adaptor working) , so linux and windows are fairly evenly matched in the discoverability category. The one improvement I would like to see is a sort of start up guide when you install linux. I know the help icon is there, but I mean more like a manual with some of the more basic things, like setting things up, etc. It would be nice to have been told, for example, that putting a dot infront of a file or folder makes it hidden, or have file permissions explained. Something like the 'Welcome to windows' program you get when XP is installed. Might be nice, that's all...

13) If you want to get all the features of vista, then you need to get ultimate. Example is bitlocker for encryption, as a home user if you want this functionality (which is readily available and reasonably easy to install in linux) you have to pay full price. also, $119.99 is for the OEM version - most people would be force to buy the retail version which is extortionate! I think that the OEM version also has crappy licence restrictions. At the very least with the OEM version you are forced to choose between 32 or 64 bit, and pony up twice if you change you mibd/upgrade. In addition, the prices outside of USA (for the retail version) are higher and horiffic. But if you aren't bothered by the OEM restrictions, and don't need the power features then you can get an OEM ver of vista home premium for about £60/70 in the UK, which is only about £10 higher than XP.

14) As mentioned, in recovery modes both linux and windows are equally unappealing. BUT, both modes do what you need, so I have no complaint there

15) Generally, very little if any tweaking is needed to get the ubuntu box working, and this gets better with every release - can't wait for the next ver of Xorg!

sorry to keep saying 'someone', but there are too many people to quote you all. Hope the block of text above makes sense... :-)

vexorian
July 8th, 2007, 01:25 AM
he one improvement I would like to see is a sort of start up guide when you install linux. I know the help icon is there, but I mean more like a manual with some of the more basic things, like setting things up, etc. It would be nice to have been told, for example, that putting a dot infront of a file or folder makes it hidden, or have file permissions explained. Something like the 'Welcome to windows' program you get when XP is installed. Might be nice, that's all...

Must say it is true, something must be done, as a matter of fact it has already been done, but these guides have to get recopilated and made available to even the user that is going to install the OS before he installs it. And not necesarily in the web.

--
I think, Linux (ok , I am not talking about Linux but about the DEs) is already proficient in Looks, I got myself convinced on this after looking at thousands of screenshots, it is indeed easy to make it look nice. I think, however that there is a lot of lack of good default themes. Although Ididn't find the theme in feisty as bad as the one in breezy it is still not good enough, and there are way too much people who don't like the brown. I wish this matter could be taken more seriously.

m.musashi
July 8th, 2007, 01:34 AM
Regarding mousetrap analogies, we already got a better mousetrap, the issue right now is that people want to use an specific kind of chesse that is incompatible with the mousetrap we made. Until someone forces the cheese producers to standarize their chesse people will still use the low quality mouse trap that seems to be actually generating mice instead of killing them.

Lol. Excellent.


I doubt that you'll find too many lawyer's offices using the PC only as a WordPro. Many of them have expensive 'template' generators for creating legal documents, and as far as I can tell, many also have software support for billing 5 different customers for the same 1/2 hour... :)
Point taken, but the last thing the world needs is to be emulating lawyers.

vexorian
July 8th, 2007, 02:15 AM
Sorry but I felt the urge to go off topic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ8kraRzE7A

Frak
July 8th, 2007, 02:22 AM
Sorry but I felt the urge to go off topic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ8kraRzE7A
I must also go off topic and say,
its funny because its true.

SWBgHz
July 8th, 2007, 02:24 AM
Regarding mousetrap analogies, we already got a better mousetrap, the issue right now is that people want to use an specific kind of chesse that is incompatible with the mousetrap we made. Until someone forces the cheese producers to standarize their chesse people will still use the low quality mouse trap that seems to be actually generating mice instead of killing them.

First, how smart is someone designing a product incapable of working with teh cheese you point out people WANT to use?

OK, let me accept your re-framing of my analogy for the moment. Did you really say 'until someone forces producers to standardize thier cheese"? You sound intelligent and quite reasonable, is your solution for PCs to have governments (presumably) legislate who makes what software and hardware and how? Please, that is just idiotic. As for hte rest of you rewrite of the anology it is quite inaccurate. The users chose their current mousetrap and cheese because it was FAR SUPERIOR to the alternatives in terms of value, choice, and flexibility. THIS IS UNDENIABLE. Even just a few years ago there was no valid alternative to Windows and Windows was the best choice for the desktop, it is only recently becoming challenged in that arena. Sure, for 3 grand Apple offers you thier prescription for a PC that is so proprietary it is not even funny. Quality, I suppose - but does anyone believe computers and the Internet would be the household item they are if Steve jobs had control of the market? Not a frigging chance. Computers would still be geeky and uncommon even though they would all have pretty acrylic trim and glossy while cases. Windows go to where it is by being the better alternative and the edge of an explosion of growth. Back when there was a choice, or better said there where equal alternatives - Linux was unusable by desktop people just as UNIX was, Windows was not perfect but it was inexpensive and fairly freely configurable in contrast to expensive and restrictive Macs. So lets stop the Windows only is where it is because all PCs come with it crap - that is the result of the early fights that others lost by not offering what the public wanted.

Now, Linux has done alot of catching up and in a way it is today what Windows used to be, the more open and certainly cheaper alternative and this appeals to allot of people. But for it to overcome its niche placement in the desktop market it needs the OEMs and hardware people and this is the catch 22 because without making a dent on the relevance front it is not worth the OEMs and hardware peoples attention. this is why, I believe, Linux has to move more towards the Windows type expectations people have otherwise it is stuck on the fringe.

Feba
July 8th, 2007, 02:34 AM
It's not our fault. We can't fit the cheese because it uses a proprietary shape. If they'd let us use those shapes, or if they'd make it fit our (free as in speech) shapes, we would be fine.

m.musashi
July 8th, 2007, 03:02 AM
Now, Linux has done alot of catching up and in a way it is today what Windows used to be, the more open and certainly cheaper alternative and this appeals to allot of people.

Linux is not what windows used to be, is or ever will be. Linux is free as in freedom - something that microsoft finds anathema to it's existence. You ignore this fact and only look at how Linux looks, feels or how good its windows replacement apps are. You think success is gauged by how many people run an OS and because most everyone runs windows you consider it the OS to emulate. Why is it that everyone who seems to think Ubuntu/Linux lack in some way insist on saying so based on the fact that it's a "windows world"? Sure, many of us would love to see windows taken down a notch, but that is not a goal. It's a byproduct. If you are incapable of understanding that a free (as in freedom) operating system is its own goal then you will never understand the appeal of Ubuntu/Linux and will continue to gripe about how it's "just not as good as windows." I don't care how much "better" windows is. It is not a free (as in freedom) operating system so it is, by definition, inferior.

In truth, many of us just don't care if Ubuntu/Linux is not "as good as" windows. It's irrelevant. Yes, we all want to see Ubuntu/Linux get better and better but it's not because we are chasing windows. Windows is irrelevant (for us). If windows is your ideal or what you think should be our ideal then you are in the wrong forum. We are here because we love what Ubuntu is and what it stands for, not because we are anxious to see it "beat" windows (which would be a nice outcome but still not the focus). Everyone needs to quit trying to compare Ubuntu to windows. WE DON'T CARE. The day windows becomes free (as in freedom) then we will regain interest.

Btw, WE in my rant doesn't mean everyone here - just a good percentage.

SWBgHz
July 8th, 2007, 03:20 AM
Linux is no more free than anything is - choose to use a cassette and you cannot get listen to things on CD. Linux is, notably so, free of charge - but it is far from this bastion of freedom, in fact, most people have to give up things they use regularly to use Linux, or at the least use inferior or questionably comparable versions.




In truth, many of us just don't care if Ubuntu/Linux is not "as good as" windows. It's irrelevant. Yes, we all want to see Ubuntu/Linux get better and better but it's not because we are chasing windows. Windows is irrelevant (for us). If windows is your ideal or what you think should be our ideal then you are in the wrong forum. We are here because we love what Ubuntu is and what it stands for, not because we are anxious to see it "beat" windows (which would be a nice outcome but still not the focus). Everyone needs to quit trying to compare Ubuntu to windows. WE DON'T CARE. The day windows becomes free (as in freedom) then we will regain interest.

So ridiculous and so untrue. I cannot visit a tech website without it being full of whining Linux people. OEMs won't support us, hardware vendors won't code for us, wah, wah, wah. Linux users, as a whole, do want to be where windows is (at least in part) but they cannot accept th changes necessary to do it. So the muddle in limbo between being relevant enough to get the attention they want and being good enough to bother with.

Windows is as free as commercial things get these days. You sit there on this high horse but who is your cell phone provider? How free are you to use whatever phone you want or choose term lengths and such? WHat about the other mistreated PC users, the Mac people - how free are they to say, get a new video card? Upgrade a component? Choose the color and style of their case? Windows is one of the most open platforms on the modern age (as far as commercial ventures go). It is reasonably price, $90 or $110 bucks for an OS is perfectly fair when games, movies, and various software suites for single purposes cost in the $50 to $90 range. With Windows you can build your own PC, buy from any of dozens of companies - but retail, resell, etc, etc, etc - things that NO other rival of MS other than Linux allows people to do. Unix and the other commercial software packages license their OS and software for monthly and yearly fees while large enterprise products Like Exchange and such are single cost, and competitive at that. Come on, MS is not perfect but as far as being open and free and about letting their users have choices they are pretty damn good compared to other companies and entities of their type. If you cannot see th then you are truly blind to reality.

KIAaze
July 8th, 2007, 03:22 AM
or at the least use inferior or questionably comparable versions.
Or sometimes greatly superior versions. :D
Depends on what you use of course.

vexorian
July 8th, 2007, 04:05 AM
or at the least use inferior or questionably comparable versions.
Or sometimes greatly superior versions. :D
Depends on what you use of course.

Linux is no more free than anything is - choose to use a cassette and you cannot get listen to things on CD. Linux is, notably so, free of charge - but it is far from this bastion of freedom, in fact, most people have to give up things they use regularly to use Linux, or at the least use inferior or questionably comparable versions.

That was a pretty missinformed paragraph. I didn't give up on anything to use Linux....


So ridiculous and so untrue. I cannot visit a tech website without it being full of whining Linux people. OEMs won't support us, hardware vendors won't code for us, wah, wah, wah. Linux users, as a whole,
yes.


as a whole, do want to be where windows is (at least in part) And where does that conclussion come from?


but they cannot accept th changes necessary to do it. If you want a windows clone, please wait for reactOs.



So the muddle in limbo between being relevant enough to get the attention they want and being good enough to bother with.

You keep posting the same non-sense over and over again. I refuse to discuss anymore why "cloning windows" is not necessary for Linux, and why the windows ways are actually wrong, and how the average user (not the average windows geek that can't accept change) does not really care.


Windows is as free as commercial things get these days
Just like Red is as yellow as red colors can get.


MS is not perfect but as far as being open and free and about letting their users have choices they are pretty damn good compared to other companies and entities of their type. If you cannot see th then you are truly blind to reality.
I am blind then . Microsoft does not support any hardware, they just wait till somebody releases hardware and makes a driver for it. Thus it is not Microsoft what's being open here, it is just that things happen automatically.

However, MS constantly lock up their operating and features they have made, so users are unable to use them. And I am talking about the whole theme engine which was intentionally locked. Or how about MS' position about what format should you use for office?

Get real MS has been locking everyone for 20 years, and you dare call them open and free?
--



First, how smart is someone designing a product incapable of working with teh cheese you point out people WANT to use?

It is the chesse, and the problem here is not that we intentionally made the mousetrap incapable of using the cheese it is more about cheese makers not standarizing themselves, and releasing multiple types of cheese every day, for ages and ages . Instead of getting along , aka working and being smart, they just do whatever random thing they do with the cheese and instead of making sure there is a way to make their cheese work on every possible mouse trap simply by making a set of usable specifications of the cheese, what they do is quite lame, they design cheese for a single mouse trap. And include spoons that help people force the cheese into that mouse trap and only that mouse trap.

Of course, we have solved the issue by slowly making spoons for our mouse trap ourselves, but the cheese makers aren't helping. They could simply (listen to how easy it is) release a set of specs for cheese that everyone can implement in any mouse trap, so that whenever they make new cheese they simply have to make sure to follow those specs (and thus they save themselves the work (and cost) of making and including any spoon) and let all the mice trap makers simply follow the convention as well...



OK, let me accept your re-framing of my analogy for the moment. Did you really say 'until someone forces producers to standardize thier cheese"? You sound intelligent and quite reasonable, is your solution for PCs to have governments (presumably) legislate who makes what software and hardware and how?

No, customers. (I am talking about customers and not consumers, btw) In a rationally driven world customers would be able to make those people fix their idiocy.


Please, that is just idiotic. As for hte rest of you rewrite of the anology it is quite inaccurate. The users chose their current mousetrap and cheese because it was FAR SUPERIOR
No, they DIDN'T choose that mouse trap.




to the alternatives in terms of value, choice, and flexibility. THIS IS UNDENIABLE.

I highlighted the point that gives me the complete right to deny your statement.


Even just a few years ago there was no valid alternative to Windows Just a few years ago, windows WAS the alternative.


it is only recently becoming challenged in that arena. Sure, for 3 grand Apple offers you thier prescription for a PC that is so proprietary it is not even funny. Quality, I suppose - but does anyone believe computers and the Internet would be the household item they are if Steve jobs had control of the market? Not a frigging chance.

Yes it would actually be a worse world, that's the reason the most convenient case would be that each big player, MS and apple had equal amounts of market share, thus allowing the rest to gain momentum


Computers would still be geeky and uncommon even though they would all have pretty acrylic trim and glossy while cases. Computers have stopped being geeky ages ago. People use them for more stuff than work and technical stuff, people use them to communicate and rant in the web and be creative and stuff.



Windows go to where it is by being the better alternative and the edge of an explosion of growth. Back when there was a choice, or better said there where equal alternatives - Linux was unusable by desktop people just as UNIX was, Windows was not perfect but it was inexpensive and fairly freely configurable in contrast to expensive and restrictive Macs. So lets stop the Windows only is where it is because all PCs come with it crap - that is the result of the early fights that others lost by not offering what the public wanted.

Granted old windows was great, but that shouldn't really allow MS to lock everybody in their stuff, and they did. A generation is eventually going to pay for the mistakes of the 1990 in which they let MS lock the world into their monopoly, perhaps you are right and it isn't this generation which will pay for that, but we'll eventually have to change the ways, and that involves being brave enough not to accept the locks anymore.

Yes windows is a good desktop and back then it was a great alternative, but we should be able to decide what OS to use, I absolutely can't buy today's nonsense in which windows dominates because it dominates the market.




Now, Linux has done alot of catching up and in a way it is today what Windows used to be, the more open and certainly cheaper alternative and this appeals to allot of people. But for it to overcome its niche placement in the desktop market it needs the OEMs and hardware people and this is the catch 22
You mean what's already happening?


because without making a dent on the relevance front it is not worth the OEMs and hardware peoples attention. this is why, I believe, Linux has to move more towards the Windows type expectations people have otherwise it is stuck on the fringe.

But what you want is pretty meaningless, you are saying that Linux needs to be windows in order to beat windows, but in that case, why not simply stick to windows? You are also asking for Linux to move on from its Unix roots, which is kind of impossible and unnecessary anyways. For the end user the difference is simply "use a random location of /home/yourname/ to do your stuff instead of taking any random location in C:"


..
Regarding getting easy to use, nice looking, supporting hardware and getting good software. I must say, that I am sure everybody in the FLOSS world already knows this, and they are working hard on fixing it. It is not necessary to state that CL is evil and there should always be GUI alternative, people are already doing so, in fact I did not need a terminal to set my computer, although I use the terminal anyways, I use the terminal because it is useful not because I have to.

I am sure that Desktops, like gnome and KDE will keep innovating and do well, check out compiz,etc and see how much we can improve, I think we got to stop imitating others already! It is naive to think MS and Apple got the final answer to user interface, I am sure that if we keep trying to copy either Mac OS/X or windows in functionality we will never win therace since we will always be behind.

What makes me hopeful is that we got into an state in which apple is copying ideas from Linux, which is awesome and means that we possibly are already heading to that fantasy of mine.

SWBgHz
July 8th, 2007, 04:23 AM
I am blind then . Microsoft does not support any hardware, they just wait till somebody releases hardware and makes a driver for it. Thus it is not Microsoft what's being open here, it is just that things happen automatically.

However, MS constantly lock up their operating and features they have made, so users are unable to use them. And I am talking about the whole theme engine which was intentionally locked. Or how about MS' position about what format should you use for office?

Get real MS has been locking everyone for 20 years, and you dare call them open and free? I am starting to think you are a troll and thus I will refrain from posting any more replies...

Show me a commercial product that isn't as you describe - in that context Windows is pretty damn open. Compare it to Apple who lets users have little to no choice in use and hardware configuration. Compare it to your cell phone which dictate what phones you can use and how long you have to commit to using it and makes you buy use in volume before you use it. I am not saying MS is free and open and lets anyone do anything they want but they have done more to bring a more free and more open computing environment to the average user than anyone else, including Linux when you consider the viable options of the past years. I have NEVER found anything I wanted to do on a Windows machine that I couldn't do - despite some of MS default configurations and settings - but i find such limitations in most all other similar commercial ventures I deal with. And what exactly is MS locking people into or out of? Is it the mindlessly stupid arguments about WMP and IE and such? I wonder - is Ford locking people into Firestone by not offering all models of cars with all possible tires? Are they being an evil monopoly by installing a sterao knowing damn well that thier customers what a car with a stereo in it? Again, not trying to say MS is all touchy feely nice but come on - they add a feature to vista 9the search) and all of a sudden are getting suits - what has software and computers come ti when features are not allowed to be installed. Is MS goign to get sued now for including an imaging backup program with vista because it is unfair to Norton Ghost? It is just getting ridiculous. Seriously, what has MS locked you out of or into? Windows runs the greatest variety of software on the greatest variety of hardware with the lowest priced OEM systems of anyone - even the Linux Dell is only liek $50 cheaper so what exactly is MS doing that is so evil.

We all know that if Windows went away tomorrow and Linux, as it is today, was the only replacement that the vast majority of people with computers on theirs desks now would be SOL in terms of simply not having the expertise or ability to work with Linux. Yes, it gets better each year but it is not there - that makes Windows the only thing capable of the mass computing we all enjoy today.Apple certainly wouldn't be leaving as much open as MS does, jesus - look at the iPhone or itunes BS they put thier customers through.

Look, i am not saying MS is some altruistic benefactor - but they are not the end all be all antichrist alot of Linux people make them out to be. Windows deserves alot of credit for the penetration of computers into the common everyday lives of people and because of that alot of us have careers and alot of you have a thriving Linux evolution to enjoy.

Linux doesn't and probably shouldn't clone Windows - but it should accept the reality of the desktop market and the expectations people in that market have if it expects to penetrate beyond the low single digits of market share.

m.musashi
July 8th, 2007, 04:24 AM
Linux is no more free than anything is - choose to use a cassette and you cannot get listen to things on CD. Linux is, notably so, free of charge - but it is far from this bastion of freedom, in fact, most people have to give up things they use regularly to use Linux, or at the least use inferior or questionably comparable versions.



So ridiculous and so untrue. I cannot visit a tech website without it being full of whining Linux people. OEMs won't support us, hardware vendors won't code for us, wah, wah, wah. Linux users, as a whole, do want to be where windows is (at least in part) but they cannot accept th changes necessary to do it. So the muddle in limbo between being relevant enough to get the attention they want and being good enough to bother with.

Windows is as free as commercial things get these days. You sit there on this high horse but who is your cell phone provider? How free are you to use whatever phone you want or choose term lengths and such? WHat about the other mistreated PC users, the Mac people - how free are they to say, get a new video card? Upgrade a component? Choose the color and style of their case? Windows is one of the most open platforms on the modern age (as far as commercial ventures go). It is reasonably price, $90 or $110 bucks for an OS is perfectly fair when games, movies, and various software suites for single purposes cost in the $50 to $90 range. With Windows you can build your own PC, buy from any of dozens of companies - but retail, resell, etc, etc, etc - things that NO other rival of MS other than Linux allows people to do. Unix and the other commercial software packages license their OS and software for monthly and yearly fees while large enterprise products Like Exchange and such are single cost, and competitive at that. Come on, MS is not perfect but as far as being open and free and about letting their users have choices they are pretty damn good compared to other companies and entities of their type. If you cannot see th then you are truly blind to reality.

What? Come on man. It's clear you don't understand the concept of freedom as it relates to GNU. Most of the examples you give miss the point. You are not free to do as you please with them, you are only free to choose or not choose to use them. You can't change them. With GNU/Linux you can both choose to use or not use but you are also free to modify in any way you wish (assuming you have the skill). Windows is not free (as in freedom) by any measure. You don't have a clue what you are talking about. Free? Open? Letting users have choice? Wrong, wrong and wrong. Sure you can choose what programs you want to run but that is not the kind of freedom the GPL is about. Read the EULA and you'll see that. Compare it the GPL and you'll see even better.

Look, if windows works for you then you are free to use it. If you think Ubuntu/Linux lacks, fine. You are free to your opinion. And I am free to mine. However, you cannot dispute the facts of the two licenses. Go and read them. GPL gives you freedoms that microsoft would choke on. That's what I'm talking about.

KIAaze
July 8th, 2007, 04:40 AM
Let's face it SWBgHz is right on one point at least: Windows offers the freedom to run FOSS on it. ^^
All Windows users should use this freedom as much as possible.
Transition to GNU/Linux will then be easier. :)

Making FOSS cross-platform in order to "embrace, extend and extinguish". :P
(Yes, I know, not everybody might agree with this. It doesn't feel good to let MS have powerful software too sometimes...)

Joke of the day:

Windows is as free as commercial things get these days
:lolflag:

prizrak
July 8th, 2007, 04:40 AM
Apple suffered the same fate - never acknowledging the reality that people where happy with good enough if it saved them a couple grand - now look at Apple, pretty much irrelevant in the PC world and mostly a gadget and music content company.
Really? Well consider that Apple has just about doubled their computer sales? The site with the statistics is down right now, which is weird it's not normally down, as soon as it's up I'll put the link up, it's in Russian but numbers are numbers.

and for the record, Windows is where it is not because OEMs pre load it but because it won in the marketplace based on consumer choice and that is why OEMs install it).
Complete and utter BS. You might want to take some time to read up on history of computing. Back in the day there was only one desktop and it was the Mac, after it ruffled some feathers at IBM they decided to put up their own version. Their desktop was inferior in many ways but had an open architecture unlike the Mac. What that did was spawn lots of clones that were very cheap compared to the Mac. These machines were running DOS because that was the ONLY OS available for them at the time. They didn't sell so well, until Lotus 1-2-3 came out. It was the ultimate BUSINESS tool for the desktop, the business didn't give a damn about the pretty colors or sounds they needed a tool to get stuff done. So the BUSINESSES picked PC's that were cheaper than the Mac.

Then an add-on for DOS came up in the form of Windows. The PC finally had something that provided an alternative to the Mac interface. Now mind you there was no Linux back then, the first version didn't even get released till 1991.

You might not remember but at some point MS and IBM entered into a joint venture to create an OS. That OS was to be called OS/2, MS's version of it was to be called Windows 95. By that time MS has been giving away FREE development tools to the programmers to get them to work on their platform for a couple of years. In addition to that OS/2 had to be purchased and installed separately it was not installed on the machine like Windows 95 was. As a result OS/2 ended up with very few developers and a very limited number of users since most users DON"T INSTALL THE MOFING OS.

This is how MS gained dominance, it wasn't the consumer who had any choice, it was a huge corporation that had the ability to put pressure on the OEMs. Then vendor lock-in started with deliberately incompatible closed formats and an OS that refused to work in any mixed environment.

SWBgHz
July 8th, 2007, 04:43 AM
What? Come on man. It's clear you don't understand the concept of freedom as it relates to GNU. Most of the examples you give miss the point. You are not free to do as you please with them, you are only free to choose or not choose to use them.

Does Motorola allow you to crack open their phones and replicate and alter and sell them as you want? Does Ford let you repackage their proprietary technology as your own and sell it? Does any company offer you any choice other than to use or not use their product/service. You are not talking products - you are talking politics, and pretty pie in the sky politics as well. I live and work and exist in the real world and in that real world the choices I have with Windows are pretty grand net to the choices I have with their competitors and to not recognize that is just stupidity. I mean by your definition private ownership is what you really seem hate - anyone owning anything.

I get the GNU model and respect it for the incredible sharing it represents - and I hope it continues to grow. But to condem the whole of commercial business for doing what we all do - offering a service or product for a price (that is what you do when you go to work, if you work) is ludicrous. And to not recognize the relatively open and empoering technologies that Windows has brought to the masses is equally ridiculous.

kamaboko
July 8th, 2007, 04:52 AM
SW...

Screamin' rig ya got there.

m.musashi
July 8th, 2007, 04:53 AM
Does Motorola allow you to crack open their phones and replicate and alter and sell them as you want? Does Ford let you repackage their proprietary technology as your own and sell it? Does any company offer you any choice other than to use or not use their product/service.
Nope, they absolutely do not. But Linux does. Thanks for making my point even more clearly than I could have.

KIAaze
July 8th, 2007, 04:56 AM
Agree with SWBgHz, I do (partially at least).

"Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, and hate leads to the Dark Side."

Do not hate Microsoft. Love GNU/Linux. :biggrin:

Will this thread reach 1000 pages? Will we finally find out if GNU/Linux is desktop ready or not?

05:55 in the morning. I should have slept, but, oh well...

SWBgHz
July 8th, 2007, 04:57 AM
Nope, they absolutely do not. But Linux does. Thanks for making my point even more clearly than I could have.

Good - then we can find some agreement. All companies that do not develop technologies, products, and/or ideas and products that others are not free to use and redistribute as they see fit are evil? A valid point of view I suppose but a pretty unrealistic one if you ask me. And if you believe this you should have no problem acknowledging that of these evil companies the world is full of MS is more open than most, particularly in commercial software/computers (say compared to UNIX, Apple, and all those other than the Linux folk)?


Will we finally find out if GNU/Linux is desktop ready or not?

I would bet we all have a similar answer to this question we were to set aside our prejudices. That answer being something like, 'yes and no'. Yes, it is ready for the role of the desktop but no it is not ready for many (I would say most) desktops in terms of a replacement to Windows. Clearly, Linux (Ubuntu included of course) is getting far better - but I think it is also clear that it has a ways to go to be capable of filling the role, in capability and practicality, of the 90% to 95% of desktops out there with the evil Windows on them.

I guess I will try another analogy at least to show how the quality of the thing is a bit irrelevant to the idea of readiness (give me a bit of a break on the detail of this one and focus on the idea I am getting at): A Toyota Corolla is capable of being a car for everyone but a Lamborghini is not.

m.musashi
July 8th, 2007, 05:01 AM
I'm no mac fanboy or anything. I don't own one and haven't used one since the early 90s. Still, this is interesting.

http://www.macworld.com/2007/06/features/techtrends/index.php

I think it's interesting that mac users only account for between 5 and 10% of the market yet they account for 20% of online content creators. Web 2.0 is the future and it seems that are doing more than their fair share. Now, granted that Dell is just one of many PC makers (number 2 I think I read somewhere) but it's also interesting that 54% of Dell users don't even participate online and 30% just spectate. Now I'm sure some will say that these PC users must be doing real work and that's why they are not online. Well, the future of real work is online (not counting lawyers). This would suggest that windows users are falling behind. The future belongs to the web 2.0 generation. This would suggest that windows will not be a big player in this future.

m.musashi
July 8th, 2007, 05:12 AM
Good - then we can find some agreement. All companies that do not develop technologies, products, and/or ideas and products that others are not free to use and redistribute as they see fit are evil? A valid point of view I suppose but a pretty unrealistic one if you ask me. And if you believe this you should have no problem acknowledging that of these evil companies the world is full of MS is more open than most, particularly in commercial software/computers (say compared to UNIX, Apple, and all those other than the Linux folk)?

I never said that they were evil. Some certainly are while others are quite benevolent. The fact that GNU/Linux is free (as in freedom) is what I find so intriguing. So much so, in fact, that I begin to wonder why it is that I can't crack open my phone and improve upon it in a way that works better for me. Why must I always be forced by companies to use things the way they think I should. I am not the same as you and have different needs. Why do I have to fit in some pigeon hole? I'm not talking about illegal use, but the way it is now, everything is illegal use unless I agree to use exactly as intended. I'm sorry, but when I buy it, it should become mine. The idea of licensing it for a while is contrary to the concept of ownership which you seem to place a lot of stock in. Truth is you don't own windows. You are renting it. Read the license.

I'm sorry, but this is going no where. You have your opinion and I have mine. I think I'm right; you think you're right. It's pointless to discuss this any further and a waste of my time. I'm out of here. Peace.

freebird54
July 8th, 2007, 05:18 AM
The users chose their current mousetrap and cheese because it was FAR SUPERIOR to the alternatives in terms of value, choice, and flexibility. THIS IS UNDENIABLE. Even just a few years ago there was no valid alternative to Windows and Windows was the best choice for the desktop, it is only recently becoming challenged in that arena

Another non-student of history. There have been a number of superior alternatives to MS operating systems over the years - most of which have been killed off by MS's monopolistic actions. (some of them for other reasons, or only assisted by MS decisions) Among these are GEM, BeOS and AmigaDOS. To take one example, Amiga - the sytem was so far ahead of MS at the time that they STILL have not caught up in many ways - and that was the late 80's!

Consider if you will, that at the time before Win95, Windows was a teetering, single-tasking, barely colour capable, low resolution window manager on top of a limited OS that could barely handle a 32 Meg drive - not too reliably. At this same time, Amiga was a fully (user prioritizable) multi-tasking system, capable of handling lots of colours (including TV and video editing), and fully GUI driven from a ROM (no root kits possible). Programming it was trivially easy (Motorola flat address space to thank for most of that) - 32-bit (Win was 16, sort of), and it could display multiple different resolutions on the same screen AT THE SAME TIME. Not to mention that its default file system was fault tolerant, handled long filenames (and preserved case) and handled partitions of 2Gb with ease. You would have a REAL hard time convincing me that was not a SUPERIOR alternative at that time. (BTW - Mac was in exsitence, but still single colour, and used a task switcher that depended on programs being 'well-behaved' and allowing control to pass to others often)

So what happened? Well - BeOS and GEM were mostly killed by MS's illegal OEM tactics (BeOS systems were forced to be shipped with MS on it as well, and default booting to MS!) and GEM systems, if detected, caused error messages to appear in MS systems. The Amiga, all they did was refuse to deploy their 'Office' software on it (although they did for Mac) despite the fact that Mac ran the same chip family, and the Amiga had a much larger market share at the time....

MS has never been about choice, OR superiority of anything other than marketing.... or perhaps tactics.

Consider this a denial!

SWBgHz
July 8th, 2007, 05:18 AM
I'm no mac fanboy or anything. I don't own one and haven't used one since the early 90s. Still, this is interesting.

http://www.macworld.com/2007/06/features/techtrends/index.php

I think it's interesting that mac users only account for between 5 and 10% of the market yet they account for 20% of online content creators. Web 2.0 is the future and it seems that are doing more than their fair share. Now, granted that Dell is just one of many PC makers (number 2 I think I read somewhere) but it's also interesting that 54% of Dell users don't even participate online and 30% just spectate. Now I'm sure some will say that these PC users must be doing real work and that's why they are not online. Well, the future of real work is online (not counting lawyers). This would suggest that windows users are falling behind. The future belongs to the web 2.0 generation. This would suggest that windows will not be a big player in this future.

It is an interesting thought, but I think the answer is more simple than you might think. In the beginning... no, not going there, but in the begging of the whole computer things Macs where far superior in software and hardware for media type work - those people have remained loyal and even as Windows has caught up, even exceeded Mac in that regard in some ways - the creative media types largely remain Mac users.

On a side note, not trying to disagree gain but 5% - 10% Mac market share is not accurate by a long shot - they are consistently 2% to 4% even as it spikeshere and there.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2072141,00.asp

http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=4878

Most independent and valid research places Apple historically at the 2 to 3 percentage mark with a rise over the last year to 4%/5%. Irrelevant to be sure but worth noting anyone citing 10% to 155 is full of it (talking about Macworld not you).

prizrak
July 8th, 2007, 05:19 AM
I would bet we all have a similar answer to this question we were to set aside our prejudices. That answer being something like, 'yes and no'. Yes, it is ready for the role of the desktop but no it is not ready for many (I would say most) desktops in terms of a replacement to Windows. Clearly, Linux (Ubuntu included of course) is getting far better - but I think it is also clear that it has a ways to go to be capable of filling the role, in capability and practicality, of the 90% to 95% of desktops out there with the evil Windows on them.

I guess I will try another analogy at least to show how the quality of the thing is a bit irrelevant to the idea of readiness (give me a bit of a break on the detail of this one and focus on the idea I am getting at): A Toyota Corolla is capable of being a car for everyone but a Lamborghini is not.
Ewww FWD..... I'm confused by what you are trying to say. If we are talking in technical terms then Linux (used as a collective name for all Linux based OS's) is as ready for the desktop as Windows is. It can run on the hardware, it allows for development of drivers for it, it allows for development of software for it, it includes a discovereable and easy to use GUI.

If we are talking marketing terms then the answer is "depends". A huge number of people who don't use a computer for anything other than a Web terminal wouldn't have a problem with using Linux, OS X, or Windows (though this one is quite a bit less safe). To them it would just not make a difference.

If you happen to need a specialized piece of software that only runs on Windows and it cannot run in Wine or VMWare (there is an interesting article on how to make any Windows program run on the desktop without having to boot into a full VM somewhere on the forum) then yes Linux is not ready.

It all depends on the kind of work you do, your hardware, and the tools necessary. Ubuntu was up and running in about 40 minutes on my tablet without any CLI tweaking (I did have to install a driver outside of repos but it was a .deb so I just double clicked it, then put it in a start up file that was admittedly text). Same with my desktop and the other (now deceased) laptop (cept they didn't even need stuff outside of repos). I don't depend on any proprietary software to get my work done so I have no problem using Ubuntu.